Globalisering og styresett i sør

Kristian Stokkekristian.stokke@sgeo.uio.no

Multi-scale and Diffuse Governance

Market Hierarchy Community

Global

National State

Local

Verdensorden og utvikling i sør

1945-1989 Nasjonale politisk-

økonomiske systemer, geopolitisk rivalisering i sentrum (kald krig), uformell imperialisme i sør

Post-1989 Hegemonisk liberal

verdensorden, transnasjonale økonomiske nettverk, integrasjon og eksklusjon av steder, sektorer og grupper, spredning av og krav om økonomisk liberalisering og liberalt demokrati

Agnew & Corbridge: Mastering Space

Washington Consensus

Earlier interventionist states Market failure interventionist states

Market liberalisation through ”structural adjustment” Problems of bureaucratisation, state monopoly, state

intervention creating inefficiencies and undermining markets State failure economic liberalisation ”Rolling back the state” through privatisation

Denationalisation, sub-contracting, reduced welfare programs, self-management etc.

Political conditionalities by donors/IFIs in regard to loans and aid

NICs: State-led or market-led development?

Parasitic states: controlled by and used for self-interest og state elites (corruption and clientelism). Inefficient bureaucracy with limited administrative capacity. Weak states with limited capacity and accountability.

Developmental states: weak states that have become strong through governance arrangements

Such states are characterised by ”Embedded autonomy” (Peter Evans) Autonomy: strong bureaucracy with substantive autonomy in Autonomy: strong bureaucracy with substantive autonomy in

regard to specific interestsregard to specific interests Embedded: governance through networks with important Embedded: governance through networks with important

market actorsmarket actors Division of labor between market and enabling state Division of labor between market and enabling state

institutionsinstitutions

Post-Washington Consensus

From ”Less Government” to ”Good Governance”

Role of state Division of labor between state, market and

civil society State enabling market-led development Accountable and efficient state institutions

Not how much but what kind of state

Good governance

Legal framework for development providing a basis of stable rules, enforcement and dispute resolution

Efficiency in public sector management through appropriate budgeting, accounting and reporting systems

Transparency in public sector management through access to information about handling of resources

Accountability of both political and official side of government, mechanisms for holding individuals and institutions to account

Forms of Decentralisation

PrivatisationPrivatisation Transfer of functions from state to marketTransfer of functions from state to market

Deconcentration (administrative decentralisation)Deconcentration (administrative decentralisation) Transfer of functions from national to local Transfer of functions from national to local

institutions for public administrationinstitutions for public administration

Devolution (democratic decentralisation)Devolution (democratic decentralisation) Transfer of functions and authority (decision-Transfer of functions and authority (decision-

making) to local governmentmaking) to local government

Periods of Decentralisation

Golden Age of Local Government (1945 - early 60s)Golden Age of Local Government (1945 - early 60s)

Indirect rule (Mamdani: decentralised despotism)Indirect rule (Mamdani: decentralised despotism)

Decolonisation & state building (early 60s - late 70s)Decolonisation & state building (early 60s - late 70s)

State, party and nation-building. Centralised development State, party and nation-building. Centralised development planningplanning

Liberalisation & decentralisation (late 70s - late 80s)Liberalisation & decentralisation (late 70s - late 80s)

Privatisation and administrative decentralisation in Privatisation and administrative decentralisation in context of structural adjustmentcontext of structural adjustment

Democratisation & good governance (1990s - present)Democratisation & good governance (1990s - present)

Discourse and attempts at democratic decentralisation Discourse and attempts at democratic decentralisation (participation in ’good governance’)(participation in ’good governance’)

(in Africa)(in Africa)

Local Elite Capture (Local Bossism)

Decentralization may lead to local substantial democracy, but Decentralization may lead to local substantial democracy, but also decentralized despotism also decentralized despotism

Local strongmen, bossess, patrons, mafias, warlords, chiefs are Local strongmen, bossess, patrons, mafias, warlords, chiefs are not traditions that will disappear with modernisation, liberal not traditions that will disappear with modernisation, liberal democracy, western bureaucracy (against Migdal)democracy, western bureaucracy (against Migdal)

Rather, they are created as much by the nature of the state as Rather, they are created as much by the nature of the state as by that of society by that of society

Bossism reflects the subordination of the state apparatus to Bossism reflects the subordination of the state apparatus to electedelected officials in the context of officials in the context of primitive accumulationprimitive accumulation

Primitive accumulation; loss of control over means of production Primitive accumulation; loss of control over means of production / subsistence, prevalence of economic insecurity (scarcity of / subsistence, prevalence of economic insecurity (scarcity of wage work), considerable economic resources remain within the wage work), considerable economic resources remain within the ”public domain””public domain”

Thus, many voters are susceptible to clientelism in a situation Thus, many voters are susceptible to clientelism in a situation where state offices are crucial for capital accumulationwhere state offices are crucial for capital accumulation

Democratic Decentralisation

Experiments in institutionalized local popular democracy: decentralized planning in Kerala (India) and participatory budgeting in Porto Alegre (Brazil)

Common characteristics Extensive popular participation, enabled through

devolution of policy-making and institutionalization of new arenas for democratic participation.

Policy-making within these new local arenas is based on deliberative processes.

A strong ‘practical orientation’ with an emphasis on concrete socio-economic development needs.

Politics of Democratic Decentralisation

How do such institutional arrangements for local deliberative democracy come about?

Existing literature tends to focus on institutional design and ignore the political interests, strategies and relative strengths of state, elite and popular forces involved in the making of local popular democracy

Participatory budgeting has functioned as a successful political strategy for PT in Porto Alegre: (i) by responding to demands from neighborhood leaders who

would otherwise rely on clientelistic networks within the opposition party

(ii) by politically mobilizing and integrating activists from popular movements

(iii) by delivering accountable and efficient local government that especially appeals to the middle classes

(iv) by strengthening local state capacity and coordination in the interest of the bureaucracy

(v) by addressing the prioritized needs of poor people.

The Role of Local Civil Society

Civil society increasingly seen as a key arena for Civil society increasingly seen as a key arena for developmentdevelopment

Economic development through local participation Economic development through local participation and resource mobilisationand resource mobilisation

Political development (good government) through Political development (good government) through civic engagement civic engagement

Civil society conceptualised as a Civil society conceptualised as a third sectorthird sector

Diversity of the ’Third Sector’

General points

Development administration are not simply technical Development administration are not simply technical solutions: ”There are no universal principles of solutions: ”There are no universal principles of management and no universal management tool kits” management and no universal management tool kits” (Turner & Hulme, p. 3)(Turner & Hulme, p. 3)

Institutions are not simply acted upon but can also Institutions are not simply acted upon but can also influence their environment.influence their environment.

Development administration takes place in political Development administration takes place in political contexts and reflect political forces and dynamicscontexts and reflect political forces and dynamics