Good Governance analysing performance of economic community of West African States and Southern African development community members on Mo Ibrahim Index of African Governance

Abstract

Governance and good governance are ubiquitous phenomena. Good governance features almost exclusively in discourses relating to developing countries in the South, but not to those in the North where it originated. This article analyses the topical issue of good governance in Africa. It is divided into two main parts. The first is theoretical and focuses on understandings of governance and good governance. Attention is drawn to a number of governance definitions and a plethora of good governance attributes not only to underline the diversity of opinion and socio-cultural basis around which definitions of governance revolves, but also to highlight broad features of what is thought to constitute good governance. The practical second part of the article focuses on good governance in Africa. It briefly discusses the roots of bad governance, origin of good governance agenda, Africa’s reaction to it and the essence of good governance for Africa. The continent is saddled with governance challenges. Central to this article is the definition of governance in the African context and how it is assessed. In the light of the growing mantra of good governance for development, the article analyses performance of 15-member states of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and their 15-member Southern African Development Community (SADC) counterparts based on 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 Mo Ibrahim Index of African Governance reports. The Index is important, significant and appropriate because it outlines criteria and conditions deemed essential for Africans to live meaningful lives. Comparing ECOWAS and SADC blocs’ performance provides insight into the state of governance in 30 of Africa’s 53 states. Findings indicate that there are consistently excellent, very good, good, average and mediocre performers in both blocs across the criteria. Generally, however, SADC bloc shows better performance than ECOWAS, whose members’ scores tend to be concentrated in the ‘low’, ‘average’ and ‘good’ categories, whereas SADC members’ scores tend to more widely spread, including the ‘very good’ and ‘excellent’ categories. Overall, Safety and Rule of Law/Safety and Security, and Participation and Human Rights are areas of relative strength, while Human Development and Sustainable Economic Opportunity are problematic.