Difference between revisions of "Governance"

From Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "The most recent and complete governance model documentation is available on Pardee's [http://pardee.du.edu/ifs-governance-and-socio-cultural-model-documentation website]. Alth...")
 
Line 1: Line 1:
The most recent and complete governance model documentation is available on Pardee's [http://pardee.du.edu/ifs-governance-and-socio-cultural-model-documentation website]. Although the text in this interactive system is, for some IFs models, often significantly out of date, you may still find the basic description useful to you.  
+
The most recent and complete governance model documentation is available on Pardee's [http://pardee.du.edu/ifs-governance-and-socio-cultural-model-documentation website]. Although the text in this interactive system is, for some IFs models, often significantly out of date, you may still find the basic description useful to you.
  
Governance is the two-way interaction between government and the broader socio-political or, even more broadly, socio-cultural system. Although our documentation and the IFs model itself focuses primarily on three dimensions of that governance interaction, we will need also to direct some attention specifically to that broader socio-cultural system and how it might change over time.  
+
Governance is the two-way interaction between government and the broader socio-political or, even more broadly, socio-cultural system. Although our documentation and the IFs model itself focuses primarily on three dimensions of that governance interaction, we will need also to direct some attention specifically to that broader socio-cultural system and how it might change over time.
  
 
=== Overview ===
 
=== Overview ===
Line 7: Line 7:
 
The conceptual foundation for the representation of governance in IFs owes much to an analysis of the evolution of governance in countries around the world over several centuries. That analysis (see Chapter 1 of the Strengthening Governance Globally volume by Hughes et al. 2014) identified three dimensions of governance: security, capacity, and inclusion. It traced them over time and noted their largely sequential unfolding for currently developed countries and their currently simultaneous progression in many lower-income countries.
 
The conceptual foundation for the representation of governance in IFs owes much to an analysis of the evolution of governance in countries around the world over several centuries. That analysis (see Chapter 1 of the Strengthening Governance Globally volume by Hughes et al. 2014) identified three dimensions of governance: security, capacity, and inclusion. It traced them over time and noted their largely sequential unfolding for currently developed countries and their currently simultaneous progression in many lower-income countries.
  
The three dimensions interact closely and bi-directionally with each other. They also interact bi-directionally with broader human development systems. The level of well-being, often captured quantitatively by GDP per capita or the more inclusive human development index, may be especially important, but is hardly alone in helping drive forward advance in governance; for instance, the age structures of populations and economic structures also interact with governance patterns both indirectly through well-being and directly.
+
The three dimensions interact closely and bi-directionally with each other. They also interact bi-directionally with broader human development systems. The level of well-being, often captured quantitatively by GDP per capita or the more inclusive human development index, may be especially important, but is hardly alone in helping drive forward advance in governance; for instance, the age structures of populations and economic structures also interact with governance patterns both indirectly through well-being and directly.[[File:Gov1.jpg|border|right]]
 +
 
 +
The conceptualization of governance further divides each of the three primary dimensions into two sub-dimensions partly based on the desire to quantify them historically and to facilitate forecasting. For security those are the probability of intrastate conflict and the general level of country performance and risk. The two sub-dimensions of capacity are the ability to raise revenue and the effective use of it and the other tools of government—that is, the competence or quality of governance. We use corruption (that is, control of it) as a proxy for such competence. The first sub-dimension of inclusion is the level of formal democratization, typically assessed in terms of competitive elections. More broadly democratization involves inclusion of population groupings across lines such as ethnicity, religion, sex, and age; we use gender equity as a proxy for the second dimension.
 +
 
 +
See Hughes et al. (2014), especially Chapter 4, for more background on the development of the governance representations of IFs than this documentation provides. See also Hughes (2002) for earlier and/or complementary work in IFs on socio-political representations (domestic and international); for example, here we do not discuss the formulations for power, interstate threat, and conflict, but that is available in documentation on the International Political model of the IFs system. Finally, we not provide here the important information about the forward linkages of governance to other elements of IFs, including to the production function of the economic model and to the broader financial flows of the social accounting matrix representation. See documentation on the economic model for that information.
 +
<header><hgroup>
 +
== Structure and Agent System: Governance ==
 +
</hgroup></header>
 +
{| class="tableGrid" style="width: 100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" border="0"
 +
|-
 +
| style="width: 30%" | <div>'''System/Subsystem'''</div>
 +
| style="text-align: left;  padding-left: 10px" align="center" | <div>Governance</div>
 +
|-
 +
| style="text-align: left" | <div>'''Organizing Structure'''</div>
 +
| style="text-align: left;  padding-left: 10px" align="center" | <div>Three dimensions with two sub-dimensions each; highly interactive, bi-directional relationships among dimensions and with socio-economic development, demographics, and economics</div>
 +
|-
 +
| style="text-align: left" | <div>'''Stocks'''</div>
 +
| style="text-align: left;  padding-left: 10px" align="center" | <div>Socio-economic development levels (e.g. level of education, gender relationships, size of the economy); past patterns of governance; also cultural patterns are a stock</div>
 +
|-
 +
| style="text-align: left" valign="center" | <div>'''Flows'''</div>
 +
| style="text-align: left;  padding-left: 10px" align="center" | <div>Government spending on human capital, infrastructure, development generally; accretion of changes in governance over time</div>
 +
|-
 +
| style="text-align: left" | <div>'''Key Aggregate&nbsp;''' '''Relationships&nbsp;'''</div><div>(illustrative, not comprehensive)</div>
 +
| style="text-align: left;  padding-left: 10px" align="center" | <div>Probability of intrastate conflict is a function of past conflict, neighborhood effects, economic growth rate (inverse), trade openness (inverse), youth bulge, infant mortality, democracy (inverted-U), state repression (inverse), and external intervention.</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>Vulnerability to intrastate conflict is a function of past intrastate conflict, energy trade dependence (as a proxy for broader natural resource dependence), economic growth rate (inverse), youth bulge, urbanization rate, poverty level, infant mortality, life expectancy (inverse) undernutrition, HIV prevalence, primary net enrollment (inverse), adult education levels (inverse), corruption, democracy (inverse), gender empowerment (inverse), governance effectiveness (inverse), freedom (inverse), inequality, and water stress</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>Government revenues are a function of past revenue as percentage of GDP, GDP per capita, and social expenditures (that is, inversely to fiscal balance).</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>Corruption is a function of past corruption level, GDP per capita (inverse), energy trade dependence, democracy (inverse), gender empowerment (inverse), and probability of intrastate conflict.</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>Democracy is a function of past democracy level, youth bulge (inverse), and gender empowerment.</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>Gender empowerment is a function of past gender empowerment level, GDP per capita, youth bulge (inverse), and primary net enrollment.</div>
 +
|-
 +
| style="text-align: left" valign="center" | <div style="text-align: left">'''Key Agent-Class Behavior&nbsp;''' '''Relationships'''</div><div style="text-align: left">(illustrative, not comprehensive)</div>
 +
| style="text-align: left;  padding-left: 10px" align="center" | <div>Social sub-group relationships, especially historical conflict patterns and gender relationships; government revenue and expenditure</div>
 +
|}
 +
<header><hgroup>
 +
== Dominant Relations: Governance ==
 +
</hgroup></header>
 +
The drivers of change on each dimension and sub-dimension of governance range widely.&nbsp; A quick summary (see also the table below) is that:
 +
 
 +
*Probability of intrastate conflict is a function of past conflict, neighborhood effects, economic growth rate (inverse), trade openness (inverse), youth bulge, infant mortality, democracy (inverted-U), state repression (inverse), and external intervention (inverse).
 +
*Vulnerability to intrastate conflict is a function of energy trade dependence, economic growth rate (inverse), urbanization rate, poverty level, infant mortality, undernutrition, HIV prevalence, primary net enrollment (inverse), intrastate conflict probability, corruption, democracy (inverse), governance effectiveness (inverse), freedom (inverse), and water stress.
 +
*Government revenues are a function of past revenue as percentage of GDP, GDP per capita, and fiscal balance (inverse).
 +
*Corruption is a function of past corruption level, GDP per capita (inverse), energy trade dependence, democracy (inverse), gender empowerment (inverse), and probability of intrastate conflict.
 +
*Democracy is a function of past democracy level, economic growth rate (inverse), youth bulge (inverse), and gender empowerment.
 +
*Gender empowerment is a function of past gender empowerment level, GDP per capita, youth bulge (inverse), and primary net enrollment.

Revision as of 23:45, 15 January 2017

The most recent and complete governance model documentation is available on Pardee's website. Although the text in this interactive system is, for some IFs models, often significantly out of date, you may still find the basic description useful to you.

Governance is the two-way interaction between government and the broader socio-political or, even more broadly, socio-cultural system. Although our documentation and the IFs model itself focuses primarily on three dimensions of that governance interaction, we will need also to direct some attention specifically to that broader socio-cultural system and how it might change over time.

Overview

The conceptual foundation for the representation of governance in IFs owes much to an analysis of the evolution of governance in countries around the world over several centuries. That analysis (see Chapter 1 of the Strengthening Governance Globally volume by Hughes et al. 2014) identified three dimensions of governance: security, capacity, and inclusion. It traced them over time and noted their largely sequential unfolding for currently developed countries and their currently simultaneous progression in many lower-income countries.

The three dimensions interact closely and bi-directionally with each other. They also interact bi-directionally with broader human development systems. The level of well-being, often captured quantitatively by GDP per capita or the more inclusive human development index, may be especially important, but is hardly alone in helping drive forward advance in governance; for instance, the age structures of populations and economic structures also interact with governance patterns both indirectly through well-being and directly.
Gov1.jpg

The conceptualization of governance further divides each of the three primary dimensions into two sub-dimensions partly based on the desire to quantify them historically and to facilitate forecasting. For security those are the probability of intrastate conflict and the general level of country performance and risk. The two sub-dimensions of capacity are the ability to raise revenue and the effective use of it and the other tools of government—that is, the competence or quality of governance. We use corruption (that is, control of it) as a proxy for such competence. The first sub-dimension of inclusion is the level of formal democratization, typically assessed in terms of competitive elections. More broadly democratization involves inclusion of population groupings across lines such as ethnicity, religion, sex, and age; we use gender equity as a proxy for the second dimension.

See Hughes et al. (2014), especially Chapter 4, for more background on the development of the governance representations of IFs than this documentation provides. See also Hughes (2002) for earlier and/or complementary work in IFs on socio-political representations (domestic and international); for example, here we do not discuss the formulations for power, interstate threat, and conflict, but that is available in documentation on the International Political model of the IFs system. Finally, we not provide here the important information about the forward linkages of governance to other elements of IFs, including to the production function of the economic model and to the broader financial flows of the social accounting matrix representation. See documentation on the economic model for that information. <header><hgroup>

Structure and Agent System: Governance

</hgroup></header>

System/Subsystem
Governance
Organizing Structure
Three dimensions with two sub-dimensions each; highly interactive, bi-directional relationships among dimensions and with socio-economic development, demographics, and economics
Stocks
Socio-economic development levels (e.g. level of education, gender relationships, size of the economy); past patterns of governance; also cultural patterns are a stock
Flows
Government spending on human capital, infrastructure, development generally; accretion of changes in governance over time
Key Aggregate  Relationships 
(illustrative, not comprehensive)
Probability of intrastate conflict is a function of past conflict, neighborhood effects, economic growth rate (inverse), trade openness (inverse), youth bulge, infant mortality, democracy (inverted-U), state repression (inverse), and external intervention.
 
Vulnerability to intrastate conflict is a function of past intrastate conflict, energy trade dependence (as a proxy for broader natural resource dependence), economic growth rate (inverse), youth bulge, urbanization rate, poverty level, infant mortality, life expectancy (inverse) undernutrition, HIV prevalence, primary net enrollment (inverse), adult education levels (inverse), corruption, democracy (inverse), gender empowerment (inverse), governance effectiveness (inverse), freedom (inverse), inequality, and water stress
 
Government revenues are a function of past revenue as percentage of GDP, GDP per capita, and social expenditures (that is, inversely to fiscal balance).
 
Corruption is a function of past corruption level, GDP per capita (inverse), energy trade dependence, democracy (inverse), gender empowerment (inverse), and probability of intrastate conflict.
 
Democracy is a function of past democracy level, youth bulge (inverse), and gender empowerment.
 
Gender empowerment is a function of past gender empowerment level, GDP per capita, youth bulge (inverse), and primary net enrollment.
Key Agent-Class Behavior  Relationships
(illustrative, not comprehensive)
Social sub-group relationships, especially historical conflict patterns and gender relationships; government revenue and expenditure

<header><hgroup>

Dominant Relations: Governance

</hgroup></header> The drivers of change on each dimension and sub-dimension of governance range widely.  A quick summary (see also the table below) is that:

  • Probability of intrastate conflict is a function of past conflict, neighborhood effects, economic growth rate (inverse), trade openness (inverse), youth bulge, infant mortality, democracy (inverted-U), state repression (inverse), and external intervention (inverse).
  • Vulnerability to intrastate conflict is a function of energy trade dependence, economic growth rate (inverse), urbanization rate, poverty level, infant mortality, undernutrition, HIV prevalence, primary net enrollment (inverse), intrastate conflict probability, corruption, democracy (inverse), governance effectiveness (inverse), freedom (inverse), and water stress.
  • Government revenues are a function of past revenue as percentage of GDP, GDP per capita, and fiscal balance (inverse).
  • Corruption is a function of past corruption level, GDP per capita (inverse), energy trade dependence, democracy (inverse), gender empowerment (inverse), and probability of intrastate conflict.
  • Democracy is a function of past democracy level, economic growth rate (inverse), youth bulge (inverse), and gender empowerment.
  • Gender empowerment is a function of past gender empowerment level, GDP per capita, youth bulge (inverse), and primary net enrollment.