The World Bank’s published stance presupposes what is ‘good’ and what is
‘not good’ governance.49 In working to remove ‘politics’ from the debate (its
charter supposedly precludes directly addressing political issues), the Bank’s
position on governance is preoccupied with public sector management, the
reduction of transaction costs and contract enforcement. These issues are
certainly linked to sustainable human development but are not framed as central
to a conception of and strategy for governance that as a priority seeks to
maximise local participation in addressing the most pressing needs in a given
community. In contrast, the UNDP’s and the UN system’s evolving human
development approach to governance exhibits relatively greater support for
empowerment—that is, providing the tools of democracy and freedom that are
integral to the political and civic dimensions of governance. The Bank may not
be adverse to these issues but treats them as second order concerns, or ‘tag on’s’,
that are not valuable in and of themselves but rather desirable insofar as they
contribute to ef ciency and growth. Under the new political economy of the
1970s and 1980s, political rationality among policy makers was emphasised as
a variation on the neoclassical theme of economic rationality. This theme greatly
in uenced the crafting of the international nancial institutions’ (IFIs) governance
priorities of the 1980s and 1990s aimed at increasing economic ef ciency
and growth.