Governance Indicators : Where Are We, Where Should We Be Going?
Scholars, policymakers, aid donors, and aid recipients acknowledge the importance of good governance for development. This understanding has spurred an intense interest in more refined, nuanced, and policy-relevant indicators of governance. In th...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Policy Research Working Paper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
World Bank, Washington, DC
2012
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2007/10/8607039/governance-indicators-going http://hdl.handle.net/10986/7588 |
| Summary: | Scholars, policymakers, aid donors, and
aid recipients acknowledge the importance of good governance
for development. This understanding has spurred an intense
interest in more refined, nuanced, and policy-relevant
indicators of governance. In this paper we review progress
to date in the area of measuring governance, using a simple
framework of analysis focusing on two key questions: (i)
what do we measure? and, (ii) whose views do we rely on?
For the former question, we distinguish between indicators
measuring formal laws or rules 'on the books', and
indicators that measure the practical application or
outcomes of these rules 'on the ground', calling
attention to the strengths and weaknesses of both types of
indicators as well as the complementarities between them.
For the latter question, we distinguish between experts and
survey respondents on whose views governance assessments are
based, again highlighting their advantages, disadvantages,
and complementarities. We also review the merits of
aggregate as opposed to individual governance indicators.
We conclude with some simple principles to guide the
refinement of existing governance indicators and the
development of future indicators. We emphasize the need to:
transparently disclose and account for the margins of error
in all indicators; draw from a diversity of indicators and
exploit complementarities among them; submit all indicators
to rigorous public and academic scrutiny; and, in light of
the lessons of over a decade of existing indicators, to be
realistic in the expectations of future indicators. |
|---|