ASSESSING PROGRESS TOWARD DEMOCRACY AND GOOD GOVERNANCE
INTRODUCTION
Daniel Druckman welcomed the participants on behalf of the National Research Council’s Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education and its Panel on Issues in Democratization, noting that this is the second panel workshop on issues of indicators of democracy and governance.
Richard Bissell, Assistant Administrator of the Bureau of Research and Development of the Agency for International Development (A.I.D.) anchored the workshop in the context of A.I.D.’s role in promoting democracy issues within the government and in the donor community. He emphasized the importance of moving the discussions from seeking consensual definitions of democracy to the more programmatic concerns of assessing progress toward democracy in developing countries. The discussions within the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) have evolved in the direction of drawing out the connection between democracy and economic development. Less clarification has been obtained on the role of governance in either progress toward democracy or development. On the basis of success of the first workshop (see National Research Council, 1991a), it now seemed propitious to broaden the agenda to consider these issues.
Workshop chair Robert Dahl then introduced Richard Carey from the DAC secretariat, who provided an overview of the DAC’s interest in issues of democratization and governance. The DAC was founded in 1960 at the instigation of the United States. Headquartered in Paris, it serves as a forum for representatives of 20 countries to consider aid decisions, review programs, and discuss conceptual and political issues. As an increasing number of developing countries in the world move toward democracy and pressures increase from citizens in the donor communities for accountability from governments in developing countries who are recipients of aid, DAC members are becoming increasingly sensitive to the need to gauge the effectiveness of aid in promoting democratic values and institutions. The donor community is asking itself such technical and political questions as: How should progress toward democracy be measured? Which programs should be pursued and how should they be implemented? When is it appropriate to assist countries? When is it appropriate to apply sanctions for lack of progress?
It is generally agreed that development on a broad scale requires the empowerment of individuals and the development of human capital on a universal basis. Such a pattern of development involves—and brings about—the evolution of a democratic political culture by producing many centers of interest, influence, and mass competency. A market economy functioning in the context of a democratic political system is thus increasingly seen as a condition for development. An earlier assumption-that development could be fostered under any type of economic or political system and perhaps better under a mildly authoritarian regime with an important degree of central planning or economic intervention-is now largely discredited. Notwithstanding several exceptions (e.g., Singapore, Taiwan, and Hong
