IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/lawdev/v15y2022i1p105-120n2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Good Governance Quandary: The Elusive Search for Role Models

Author

Listed:
  • Trebilcock Michael

    (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada)

Abstract

A substantial consensus has emerged in development circles that the reason why some countries are rich and others poor is largely a reflection of the quality of their institutions – political, bureaucratic, and legal – and that countries with seriously dysfunctional institutions cannot expect to pursue a successful long-term trajectory of economic and social development. Many studies support this consensus, but institutional reform efforts for developed countries have resulted in mixed to weak results; many of these efforts have failed, for example, to establish a robust rule of law to protect the rights of citizens, publicly accountable political regimes, a meritocratic, noncorrupt, and efficient bureaucracy, and an independent media. Reportedly up to 60% of donor-assisted reforms have yielded no measurable increase in government effectiveness. It is inferred from this disappointing result that institutional transplants are often ineffective, and the path dependence, caused by accretions of the particularities of given countries’ histories, cultures, politics, ethnic and religious make-up, and geography leaves each country, for the most part, “to write its own history”.

Suggested Citation

  • Trebilcock Michael, 2022. "The Good Governance Quandary: The Elusive Search for Role Models," The Law and Development Review, De Gruyter, vol. 15(1), pages 105-120, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:bpj:lawdev:v:15:y:2022:i:1:p:105-120:n:2
    DOI: 10.1515/ldr-2021-0115
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/ldr-2021-0115
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/ldr-2021-0115?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:lawdev:v:15:y:2022:i:1:p:105-120:n:2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.