Topic: Governance and Development: Knowns, Known Unknowns, and Unknown Unknowns
Abstract:
We know that measures of the quality of a nation’s governance are closely correlated with measures of a nation’s development. Beyond that, we have much speculation and assumption, but little hard evidence about how the two are causally related. Thus we have little hard evidence on which to base development policy around this nexus. Is “good governance” the cause or the effect of economic and social development? If causality runs from governance to development, how can “bad governance” be improved? What is the relative payoff to policies that attempt to foster sustainable development indirectly through governance improvements, as opposed to directly through infrastructure, education, health, etc.? Can some investments, such as small-scale, community-based infrastructure address both the quality of governance and the quality of life directly?
Our past and current research merely scratches the surface of these important questions. Research for the UNDP a decade ago surveyed theoretical links between small-scale, community-based infrastructure and income, education, health, and community governance, as well as providing a synthesis of the outcomes of selected UNDP projects in Sub-Saharan Africa (Senegal and Zambia), South Asia (Bangladesh), and Southeast Asia (Thailand). We then worked with directed study students to examine the link between various aid flows and income growth at the national level, finding no clear link, even for types of aid we felt were most likely to directly (infrastructure) or indirectly (technical assistance) boost growth or improve governance. Our current research attempts to identify factors that contribute to measures of good governance, ideally policy factors (those that can be impacted by national/regional governments and/or international organizations/donors) that can be adjusted to improve those measures. That list turns out to be distressingly short.
We would be delighted to discuss, debate, and listen to suggestions on how to proceed with this project. Insights from other disciplines and perspectives can be invaluable aids, especially when confronting apparent dead-ends in a research agenda.
Biography:
Robert K. McCleery was trained as an international and development economist, receiving his PhD from Stanford University in 1988. His world view and regional focus on the Asia Pacific stems from growing up, though college, in the ethnically and linguistically diverse Hawaiian Islands. His research and publications span a broad range of topics, from US-Mexico economic relations (migration and trade), Asian development, trade policy and economic integration in Asia and the Americas, and international political economy issues. His writing has appeared in several of the flagship economic journals, as well as journals with a regional focus on Asia and Latin America and outlets that cater to practitioners. Theory-based empirical research informs his teaching of trade and development topics, as he seeks to train a new generation of trade and development analysts and practitioners.
He has held full-time positions at the East-West Center, Kobe University, and Claremont McKenna College before finding a home at MIIS. His work has taken him to more than 15 countries, building a network of personal and organizational contacts around the globe. His experience with these organizations allows him to teach what they do, how they approach problems, and how best to effectively present data and recommendations.