The quality of governance and socio-economic development: good governance versus humane governance

Purpose This paper aims to examine two conceptual frameworks, which address the relationship between governance and development. The first is the World Bank’s concept of “good governance,” and the second is the Mahbub ul Haq Human Development Center’s concept of “humane governance.” Design/methodology/approach This paper uses the comparative method for a systemic comparison of the two conceptual models because of their definitions of “development,” “governance” and “quality of governance.” The question of how governance quality contributes to socio-economic development is the main question for this study, and the answers of the two models to this question are examined based on a systemic comparison of the two models because of three criteria: comprehensiveness, normative coherence and measurement capability. Findings The systemic comparison shows that the model of humane governance has greater explanatory power than the good governance model because of two reasons: its wider definitions of development and governance and its usage of the idea of human development to redefine the governance quality. Therefore, the humane governance model is recommended as a new basis for designing development policy. Originality/value The parer shows that: since the conceptual model of humane governance applies the broader concept of development (the enlargement of people’s choices) and the wider concept of governance quality (the political, economic, and civic dimensions of good governance) it addresses contribution of governance quality to development better than the good governance model. This greater explanatory power opens up a new chapter of thinking about the impact of governance quality on development.