We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This chapter offers a theoretical account of socially embedded good governance. It connects the two major principles discussed in the book so far – accountability as accessibility and transparency in people – to the idea of a public–private divide and debates around good governance and corruption in Africa more broadly. Specifically, the public–private divide is written into principal–agent models of democratic accountability and forms the crux of liberal definitions of corruption. Popular conceptions of socially embedded good governance hold that the connections that make powerful people knowable and accessible in ordinary life should not be severed as they enter the public office. This requires expanding the scope of good governance beyond the formal realm of the state. The chapter repurposes Peter Ekeh’s idea of the ‘two publics’ to suggest that popular demands for transparency in people and accountability as accessibility could be understood as a demand to re-connect the social with the political and thus unite the ‘two publics’. It concludes that not only is “personal politics without clientelism” (Mueller 2018) possible but also the porousness of the state to social relations – for so long seen as the Achilles heel of governance in Nigeria - may in fact be its strength.
Drawing on original fieldwork in Nigeria, Portia Roelofs argues for an innovative re-conceptualisation of good governance. Contributing to debates around technocracy, populism and the survival of democracy amidst conditions of inequality and mistrust, Roelofs offers a new account of what it means for leaders to be accountable and transparent. Centred on the rise of the 'Lagos Model' in the Yoruba south-west, this book places the voices of roadside traders and small-time market leaders alongside those of local government officials, political godfathers and technocrats. In doing so, it theorises 'socially-embedded' good governance. Roelofs demonstrates the value of fieldwork for political theory and the associated possibilities for decolonising the study of politics. Challenging the long-held assumptions of the World Bank and other international institutions that African political systems are pathologically dysfunctional, Roelofs demonstrates that politics in Nigeria has much to teach us about good governance.
Markets are taken as the norm in economics and in much of political and media discourse. But if markets are superior why does the public sector remain so large? Avner Offer provides a distinctive new account of the effective temporal limits on private, public, and social activity. Understanding the Private–Public Divide accounts for the division of labour between business and the public sector, how it changes over time, where the boundaries ought to run, and the harm that follows if they are violated. He explains how finance forces markets to focus on short-term objectives and why business requires special privileges in return for long-term commitment. He shows how a private sector policy bias leads to inequality, insecurity, and corruption. Integrity used to be the norm and it can be achieved again. Only governments can manage uncertainty in the long-term interests of society, as shown by the challenge of climate change.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.