The World Bank - Working for a world free of poverty

Syndicate content
A blog about Governance and Development for All

About us

Welcome

This is the World Bank's blog on governance and anti-corruption. It aims at providing a space for debate and knowledge sharing on this critical field of development. | Learn more...

Singapore

Towards Better Governance by the G-20: Learning from the 'Missing' ggg-8 Countries

Consider a very different “group-of-8” countries: Botswana, Chile, Mauritius, Uruguay, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore and Switzerland.  Do they have any relevance for the G-20?  Hardly, at first.  None of them are invited to the London G-20 Summit next week.  They are not G-20 members, since neither their economic size nor their population are large enough, and they lack the global “systemic significance” of most G-20 members.  None of them belongs to the EU.  This particular "group-of-8" in fact does not really exist as a formal body.

But there is a neglected rationale for the leaders of the G-20 to pay attention to this particular set of uninvited countries.  Like the G-20, they comprise a rather diverse group of developing and developed countries from different regions of the world.  But, unlike most of the G-20, this group of eight countries have exhibited high quality of national governance.

No country is perfect, obviously.  Each one in this group of 8 industrialized and emerging economies has its own challenges. But overall their quality of governance (and recent trends) exceed those of the Group-of-20, and to an extent even those of the powerful, formal, and elite Group-of-8.

This does matter.  Not just because failures of governance (among key nations in  the G-20) played a major role in today's financial crisis.  It also matters because lessons can be drawn for short and longer term initiatives from the good governance experiences from this group of 8 small countries (in short 'ggg-8' ifor this 'good governance group'-- and not in caps, since they are small, and not a formal group...).

Putting Governance before the “E” in E-Government

Taking e-government beyond the same tired e-government applications require innovations such as social networking, web 2.0/3.0 and mobile technology, all of which are democratizing the web in different ways.  The basics of e-government are in the process of moving from a top-down model (e-government strategy, vision, principles, down to agencies, businesses and citizens) to a bottom-up paradigm (citizen-level application managed and developed at the lowest level) with the citizen being the engine of the new e-government. 

When did e-government become stagnant?  Well, not so long ago it wasn’t stagnant.  The anticipation and optimism behind e-government when it first entered the international consciousness was immense, a prodigious vision of sorts.  Led in the US by the Clinton-Gore administration and pursued by other administrations in developed and developing countries alike, e-government became a mantra, a fix-all for the various problems in the public sector.  As e-government implementation matured, the potential for significant failure became clearer. Yet, when successful, e-government projects could make a real difference.  For instance, e-government -a significant part of Singapore’s “Vision of an Intelligent Island” with respect to public services-, helped to improve public sector performance and governance in a manner that positively impacted the daily lives of its citizens.