Good governance: Blow the whistle when necessary - business analyst

'Bad governance, root cause of all evil in society':

Dr. Chandana Jayalath's latest publication 'Construction: Steering Along the Aphorism of Good Governance' will be launched on Thursday, July 14 at the OPA auditorium in Colombo.

The topicality of good governance has been accentuated with the election in January last year. Good governance is possible if a proper commitment is forthcoming from all corners of society, including politicians as well as bureaucrats, according to Dr. Jayalath, a chartered quantity surveyor, adjudicator and mediator by profession.

Excerpts of the interview:

Q: How do you perceive good governance?

A: Well, good governance is positively associated with improved oversight in contracts, government effectiveness, efficient bureaucracy, i.e. the service delivery, and rule of law, leading to better economic performance and social life. Therefore, in true good governance, we need a system where social and economic priorities are based on broad consensus in society and the voices of the people are heard in decision-making.

Q: Why is good governance so topical these days?

A: Because it is bad governance we have been experiencing and is one of the root causes of all evil within our societies. There had been no public hearings even for large scale projects where public money has been overspent. Information was not freely accessible to those who were actually affected by it.

Cost overrun also brought a lot of media attention. On the other hand, the pressure exerted on developing countries by donor agencies also contributed to this topicality.

Q: As a chartered quantity surveyor, what is your view behind the allegation of cost overruns?

A: Plenty of experienced professionals speak on this topic and there is a lot of research and enough of literature it. Obviously, there's no one-sentence answer to these questions since each project is unique and the influences that trigger overruns do vary tremendously.

In many cases, I have consistently found one major flaw that puts many of these projects into trouble. That is the 'terrible' underestimate. The way the data has been gathered is not at all impressive and as a result, cost-significant information is missing and future projections remain weak. The second reason is the scope of changes. Since the blue print to achieving good technical input to project execution are usually mapped out on the basis of project designs, a design with errors practically means wrong or insufficient representation of project deliverables. However, the most perilous is the corruption in all corners of the supply chain.

Q: Do you think that corruption can be tamed under good governance?

A: Corruption takes many forms with differing effects and its relentless force comes from its symbiotic relationship with the government and public officials; the amount of funds involved; the complexity of the projects; lack of controls; and a culture that is ingrained in the way the people get misled.

However, corruption is tameable. For example, Uganda adopted a system of decentralization to improve proper governance. To me, naming and shaming is the best way, because it is connected to the inner self of an individual, called fear and shame. Good systems do play a big role in transparency. Whistleblowers play a valuable role in exposing corrutpion. We must blow the whistle where necessary.

Q: In your book you have emphasized the idea that people must be brought into the development initiatives as far as possible.

A: Participatory development is a function of social justice as well. Specifically, participatory development is an attempt to compensate for or overcome the limitations of the usual top-down development approach.

A bottom-up development approach takes the needs and opinions of local residents into account as much as possible. It is an approach that enables people to acquire the skills needed to implement and coordinate the management of development projects themselves and thus reap more of the development's returns.

No development effort will be successful unless and until the people understand that it is for their benefit. People should feel that they are empowered. A classic example is town meetings in California where the people are the legislators.

- By a special correspondent