Practices of Good Governance

These three questions are divided into six sub-questions:

• What interpretations of good governance exist in the member states and what are the underlying values (suitability, integrity, and transparency)? This sub-question is strongly related to the following sub-question: • How are the principles of good governance applied in the member states? The findings are linked to the different nature of institutions involved in different activities. • How are conflicting values balanced? It can often be the case that two principles of good governance conflict with each other. We expect that, when it comes to conflicts, member states will not always follow the same approach, because countries place different emphasis on different values. • What is the influence of interpretations and applications of good governance in member states on their attitudes on the European level? This sub-question is discussed and will also connect to the following two sub-questions: • What are the main differences between the various methods of interpretation and application of the principles of good governance? • How could these be explained and what are the benefits and problems with regard to

European politics?

The research questions have been approached from an interdisciplinary perspective.4 Elaborating upon the sub-questions allows us to give sufficient account of the diverse aspects of good governance from the outset, as well as its meaning and underlying values and the multiple perspectives on good governance.

The research was divided into three steps. In September to November 2014 the twenty-eight country reports—based on individual desk studies—were written and sometimes with help from experts from these countries. The country reports all have the same structure. In December 2014 to February 2015, we asked the contact persons of the European Ombudsman in each of the twenty-eight countries—experts in these countries—to make comments on the written draft versions of the country reports. We received comments and suggestions from twenty contact persons. In February to March 2015, we finalized the country reports and made some general provisional conclusions based on these revised country reports. In April to May 2015, the report was written and finalized in September 2015.

4. Five Regions in Europe and Three Countries in Three Regions outside Europe: Africa (South Africa), America (Canada), and Oceania (Australia)—Three Groups of Values and Practices of Good Governance

The countries within and outside Europe have been investigated individually and, for cultural, social, and internal comparative reasons, were grouped differently.

In Europe we distinguished five regions:

Northern Europe (NE): Denmark, Finland, and Sweden; Western Europe (WE): Belgium, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Austria, and Luxembourg; Southern Europe (SE): Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain, Cyprus, and Malta; Central Europe (CE): Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, and Romania; The United Kingdom and Ireland.

4 Van Kersbergen and Van Waarden 2004, 143–71; Addink 2013.

Outside Europe we have especially studied the following three countries: Australia; Canada; and South Africa. These countries were chosen for practical reason but also because these countries are part of three different continents.

Relevant are the functions and structure of the state in relation to shifts in development of good governance. Good governance is a general concept consisting of three groups of values. The first group is that of rule of law values, the second group is that of democracy values; and the third group is that of modern institutional and constitutional values. These values can be seen as sources for the further development of the concept of good governance. The development of the concept of good governance has taken place along the same three distinct groups shown in Figure 13.1.

The three groups of values were further developed into six principles. The rule of law principles are properness and human rights, the democracy principles are transparency and participation, and the modern value principles are effectiveness and accountability. These principles are interlinked as shown in Figure 13.2.

Rule of law dimension

Institutional dimension

Figure 13.1 Good governance values

Democracy dimension

Effectiveness

Participation Properness

Principles of Good Governance

Human Rights

Figure 13.2 The principles of good governance

Accountability

Transparency

The principles of good governance have been developed in states by several institutions from different perspectives and each of them developing good governance norms. This development is strongly related to the function and structure of these institutions. The legislator mostly works on the development of generally binding regulations containing norms with an instrumental character and norms protecting citizens. The administration develops instrumental norms in regulations, including policy rules or internal directives which sometimes take the form of regulations or codes. The administration also develops norms in individual cases, for instance by requesting public participation in the decision-making process. The judiciary applies the principles of good governance in concrete cases by using them as norms for review. That is similar to how the Ombudsman works, producing informal solutions or reports. The Court of Audit applies these principles as review norms in relation to more general budget questions.

In a more instrumental way these principles are normative for the administration, but good governance principles are also developed by the controlling institutions as norms for review. The legislation and the administrative regulation (including the policy rules in which principles have been implemented) are more related to the instrumental dimension of good governance; the controlling function of the judiciary and the Ombudsman, and in a certain way also the Court of Audit, use good governance principles as review norms. Put more simply, the first and the second powers are more focused on the instrumental dimension of good governance and the third and the fourth powers are more focused on the controlling dimension of good governance.

These principles of good governance are partly unwritten, but we increasingly find them in a written form. This is done by institutions belonging to all four powers of the state. The legislator and the administration have a more instrumental character, while the judiciary and fourth powers are closer to the position of citizens. But they all produce good governance norms and they interact with each other. The good governance developments on the decentralized level are also very relevant in this context, as well as developments at the level of the European Union and international organizations.

(a) Practices and principles of good governance on a national level We must look at what means are employed to pursue good governance and how these means are understood against the background of the whole national legal system. It is exactly at this point that underlying domestic values come into play. This is why each country should be studied separately first.

In the country reports based on individual study, each country was the subject of research. In the introduction of the report, attention was given to the geographical and historical development of the country, and the structure and the powers of the state. This information was relevant to finding out if the concept of good governance and its specification can be found in each country’s system—and if so, where. The results of the government policies and actions were studied to find out how the principles of good governance are specified and how the instrumental and reviewing approaches of good governance interact. Not only these more general lines of specification of principles, but also concrete cases were described to understand more clearly how these principles were put into practice. These cases pertained to each of the following combination of policy fields: (1) health and/or social policy; (2) economic and/or financial policy; (3) environmental and infrastructure policy; (4) education policy and/or policy on justice. An indication of good governance is formulated based on this information.

A substantial relation is that between the application and the practical effect of good governance, understanding the concept of good governance is in the end the