What is governance? Governance simply means the process of decision-making and the process by which de cisions are implemented.

It entails, as described by the Human Development Repor t, the exercise of power or authority political, economic, administration or othe rwise to manage a country s resources and affairs . Governance determines who has po wer, which makes decisions, how other players make their voice heard and how acc ount is rendered. From this perspective, it encompasses the mechanisms, processes and situations th rough which citizens and groups articulate their interests, exercise their legal rights, meeting their obligations and mediate their differences . As a necessary corollary to the above, the act of governance involves the interface through whic h citizens mediate and interact with the State . This indicates that quality of go vernance depends largely upon the indulgence shown by the subjects As a process, governance may operate in an organization of any size: from a sing le human being to all of humanity; and it may function for any purpose, good or evil, for profit or not. A reasonable or rational purpose of governance might ai m to assure, (sometimes on behalf of others) that an organization produces a wor thwhile pattern of good results while avoiding an undesirable pattern of bad cir cumstances. The concept of "governance" is not new. It is as old as human civilization. Simp ly put "governance" means: the process of decision-making and the process by whi ch decisions are implemented (or not implemented). Governance can be used in sev eral contexts such as corporate governance, international governance, national g overnance and local governance. Since governance is the process of decision-making and the process by which deci sions are implemented, an analysis of governance focuses on the formal and infor mal actors involved in decision-making and implementing the decisions made and t he formal and informal structures that have been set in place to arrive at and i mplement the decision. One of the most important principles of just democratic governance is the presen ce of constitutional limits on the extent of government power. Such limits inclu de periodic elections ,guarantees of civil rights, and an independent judiciary, which allows citizens to seek protection of their rights, and redress against g overnment actions. Theselimits help render branches of government accountable to each other and to the people. An independent judiciary is important for preserv ing the rule of law and is, therefore, most important facet of good governance. Difference between Government and Governance Governance is normally described as involving government, civil society and the private sector in managing the affairs of a nation, which means that the respons ibility for managing the affairs of a nation is not limited to government alone, but includes a wide variety of stakeholders including: state government, local governments; the private sector; non-governmental and community-based organizati ons (NGOs/CBOs), the media, professional associations and other members of civil society. And each actor has a specific role to play based on its source of legi timacy and comparative advantage. In a general sense, government involves representation which is inevitable in larg e societies and which is more often than not inevitably imperfect too. In its re presentational capacity, government therefore plays a central role in public issue s and is responsible for setting the overall policies and laws for developing an d managing resources and in providing basic services to society. Representatives rather than citizens direct the activities of governments. In this regard, one of the main tasks of governments is to establish both regulatory and management

frameworks and institutions which will correctly implement these policies which will accommodate all the stakeholders. Governance , on the hand, is a more inclusive term which goes beyond the functions of government: it embraces the relationship between society and its government and concerns itself with how governments and other societal organizations interact, how they relate to citizens, and how decisions are made in an increasingly comp lex world. Governance includes: decision makers, managers and users of the resou rce, who share an interest and sometimes a role in addressing public issues in a socially acceptable manner. One definition of governance that captures the difference between government and go vernance is one proposed by Louise Frchette, Deputy Secretary General of the Unite d Nations: Governance is the process through which institutions; businesses and citizens groups articulate their interests, exercise their rights and obligations and mediate their differences. In this framework, government is thought of as an i nstitution, while governance is seen as the process, and this is perhaps where the fundamental difference between the two terms lies. In deciding who should be involved and in what capacity, governance operates in different areas/levels: 1. Global governance: This deals with deals with issues outside the direct purview of individual governments. 2. Government governance: This is governance in national space i.e. within a country. 3. Community governance - governance is how other actors, such as civil soc iety organizations, play a role in taking decisions on matters of public concern . The idea of governance makes it easier to have discussions about how communiti es or other social actors can take action in collaboration with, or perhaps inde pendently of, established government structures to address issues of concern to citizens. 4. Corporate governance: This comprises the activities of incorporated and non-incorporated organizations that are usually accountable to a board of direct ors. Some such organizations will be privately owned and operated, e.g. business corporations. Others may be publicly owned, e.g. hospitals, schools, and govern ment corporations. Governance issues here tend to be concerned with the role of the board of directors, its relationship to top management (the CEO or executive director), and accountability to shareholders or stakeholders. Government is more than a legal structure, more than a arrangement of offices; i t is a matter of life, a moral spirit. For public servants the wisdom of Aristot le strikes at the heart and soul of who they are and what they have chosen to do . It also reflects the concept and spirit of public services in significant ways , for it suggests that working of the government really does mean something abov e and beyond the oblivious fact of gainful employment. Theory of Social Contract Throughout the middle ages people believed that Kings were placed on the throne by the Will of God. And therefore to disobey the law was equivalent to disobeyi ng the Will of God which in those days was not an option for decent people. If a child were to ask a parent, why do we pay taxes and follow all the rest of the Ki ng s law? The obvious and persuasive answer was, because it is the Will of God. People and culture and the times became more modern, more secular, more question ing. The appeal to God s Will and the Divine Right of King s did not work so well, and for some it did not work at all. This created a serious crisis, because the

foundation of civil society is to have some sense of the Legitimacy of Governme nt and our Obligation to Obey the Law. To provide the philosophical basis to th e government and governance the notion of Social Contract came to the rescue. The Social Contract states that society forms a basic compact with a government or an established power and both operate in conjunction with that established co mpact of governance. Government rests upon a Contract that was once made and th ose we tacitly all agree to which established the government, gives it legitimac y, and obligates us by virtue of our prior consent to obey the law. Hobbes and L ocke are both social contract theorists, but with major differences. The next s ection captures the philosophies of these two theorists. Hobbes on Social Contract All human (and other animals) movement traces to Desire and Aversion. All our emotions and evaluations of people are thus based on Desire and Aver sion In the State of Nature everyone has virtually unlimited Rights. Hence, I have just as much right to the apples you picked as you do. This obviously can lead to confrontation. To war. To his famous phrase tha t life in the State of Nature is nasty, brutish and short. People get desperate, they will to ANY thing to have peace, and so: To create a Civil Society and achieve peace, everyone agrees to give up ALL their rights to the Sovereign, who will then give back whatever rights he choose s but who can recall any of those rights at any time (and for any reason, or no re ason?) Locke on Social Contract In the State of Nature people do Not have unlimited rights. If I pick some apples, they belong to ME and no one else, because I mixed my labor with them. Similarly, the soil I plow and the harvest that results is Mine, because I mi xed my labor with the soil. Nonetheless, in the State of Nature some nasty people are likely to try to t ake away things that are justly mine, and this can lead to conflict. To create a Civil Society and achieve peace, everyone agrees to create a gov ernment and live under majority rule. The purpose of the government is to obey the Rule of Law and to promote the Common Good However, if the government/King fails to do these things, the people have a right to put a new government in place (as happened in the Glorious Revolution). Hegal on State and Government In Hegel's political theory many important and difficult functions were assigned to government. Because of its recruitment on merit and complex structures it is the bureaucracy outlined in Hegel's theory that must assume the functions of go vernment. Commitment to that moral mission, according to Hegel, can be attained only through the continual development of ethical character as recommended by Ar istotle and Kant. To meet Hegel's standard of bureaucracy, a government must be organized in a certain way to be functionally effective and efficient, but must also be profoundly committed to the common good. In the Philosophy of Right, Hegel suggested that the bureaucratic state was the ultimate moral system, which allowed for recognition of groups and individuals t o flourish. Within this system administrators had a special place: The highest ci vil servants necessarily have a deeper and more comprehensive insight into the n ature of the State s institutions and requirements and, moreover, a greater skill in the habituation of government, so that they can achieve what is best Kautilya on Governance

In Arthashastra Kautilya envisaged Yogakshema as the ultimate goal of the ruler. The concept of Yogakshema was very much closer to the concept of present day we lfare state. Yogakshema demanded higher moral consciousness both at the elites an d common peoples levels. While contemplating for good governance, Arthashastra em phasizes that a king should surrender his individuality in the interest of his d uties. The king is expected to behave in a most righteous manner; Arthashastra s tates: In the happiness of his subject lies his happiness; in their welfare his w elfare; whatever pleases himself he shall not consider as good, but whatever mak es his subjects happy, he shall consider good. Here the king becomes synonymous t o constitutional slave . The king is like the servant of the people subsisting by their contribution. It is the inculcated complete merger of the interests of the king in those of his subjects. This indicates that ruler will not be all absolu te, arbitrary or authoritarian. Good governance demands for limits and restrains on government. Arthashastra, thus, calls for king s acts to be regulated by seven different organs (saptang). According to Kautilya, sovereignty can be practiced only with the cooperation of others, and all administrative measures are to be taken after proper deliberation. It is the duty of the state to provide the common good . The term is the symbol for the total governmental actions. In ancient India, king became an embodiment of the common good for his people. King is an instrument to achieve ends related to promoting general human well being, such as peace, order, prosperity, justice a nd human dignity. A king is bound to ensure that the common good (dharma) is pre served. Arthashastra gives to the welfare of the citizens, the first place in al l considerations of policy; the common good of the people and their sustained ha ppiness are considered as main ends for the service of which Kautilya called out an elaborate administrative system. Accountability is the obligation, of those holding power, to take responsibility for their behavior and actions. It becomes even more important an issue when ma nagement of public funds is involved. The government spends a huge amount of mon ey in creating infrastructure, providing services and running various schemes fo r the welfare of its people. A large chunk of the government s money comes from ta x which is compulsorily collected from its citizens. The government is, therefor e, obligated to work in the interest of its citizens and deliver accountable gov ernance. It is answerable to public for its policies, decisions and performance. The action of the Government has to be fair, equitable, transparent and account able.