1.

0 INTRODUCTION TO GOVERNANCE
Recently the terms "governance" and "good governance" are being increasingly used in
development literature. Bad governance is being increasingly regarded as one of the root
causes of all evil within our societies. Major donors and international financial institutions
are increasingly basing their aid and loans on the condition that reforms that ensure
"good governance" are undertaken. This article tries to explain, as simply as possible,
what "governance" and "good governance" means. The concept of "governance" is not
new. It is as old as human civilization. Simply put "governance" means the process of
decision-making and the process by which decisions are implemented (or not
implemented). Governance can be used in several contexts such as corporate
governance, international governance, national governance and local governance. Since
governance is the process of decision making and the process by which decisions are
implemented, an analysis of governance focuses on the formal and informal actors
involved in decision-making and implementing the decisions made and the formal and
informal structures that have been set in place to arrive at and implement the decision.
Government is one of the actors in governance. Other actors involved in governance
vary depending on the level of government that is under discussion. In rural areas, for
example, other actors may include influential land lords, associations of peasant farmers,
cooperatives, NGOs, research institutes, religious leaders, finance institutions political
parties, the military etc. The situation in urban areas is much more complex. Figure 1
provides the interconnections between actors involved in urban governance. At the
national level, in addition to the above actors, media, lobbyists, international donors,
multi-national corporations, etc. may play a role in decision making or in influencing the
decision-making process. All actors other than government and the military are grouped
together as part of the "civil society." In some countries in addition to the civil society,
organized crime syndicates also influence decision-making, particularly in urban areas
and at the national level. Similarly formal government structures are one means by which
decisions are arrived at and implemented. At the national level, informal decision-making

structures, such as "kitchen cabinets" or informal advisors may exist. In urban areas,
organized crime syndicates such as the "land Mafia" may influence decision-making. In
some rural areas locally powerful families may make or influence decision-making. Such,
informal decision-making is often the result of corrupt practices or leads to corrupt
practices. Good governance has 8 major characteristics. It is participatory, consensus
oriented, accountable, transparent, responsive, effective and efficient, equitable and
inclusive and follows the rule of law. It assures that corruption is minimized, the views of
minorities are taken into account and that the voices of the most vulnerable in society are
heard in decision-making. It is also responsive to the present and future needs of society.
Very few countries and societies have come close to achieving good governance in its
totality. However, to ensure sustainable human development, actions must be taken to
work towards this ideal with the aim of making it a reality.

2.0 DEFINITION OF GOVERNANCE

Governance can be defined as the process of decision making and the process by which
decisions are implemented (or not implemented). It donates the administrative and
process-oriented elements of governing. It consists of formal and informal actors
involved in decisions making and implementing the decisions made, and the formal and
informal structures that have been set in place to arrive at and implemented the decision.
The term governance can apply to corporate, international, national and local
governance or to the interactions between other sectors of society. According to the
United Nations, governance had been defined as the rules of the political system to solve
conflicts between actors and adopt decision (legality). It has also been used to describe
the proper functioning of institutions and their acceptance by the public (legitimacy). It
also has been used to describe the effectiveness of government and the achievement of
consensus by democratic means (participation).Governance is the activity of governing
which is the act, process, or power of governing itself. The continuous exercise of
authority over a political unit. The manner of governing (not solely by government) is
collaborative

relationship

between

government,

business,

NGO,

and

citizens.

Governance as a process whereby formal governing structures are no longer focused

primarily on the political realms of public sector government but are increasingly
incorporating a range of interests drawn also from the private sector and civil society.
In general terms governance occurs in three broad ways:
2.1 Through network involving public-private partnerships (ppp) or with the collaboration
of community organizations.
2.2 Through the use of market mechanisms whereby market principles of competition
serve to allocate resources while operating under government regulation.
2.3 Through top down methods that primarily involve governments and the state
bureaucracy

3.0 DEFINITION OF LOCAL GOVERNANCE

Local governance, simply stated, that governance units are divided into a smaller units
that are closer to the local communities. There are two main components of a local
government system. First is discretion allowed to the local government to perform
fundamental that allow them to represent the preferences of the decision making
process. Second is mechanisms that hold the local government accountable for
appropriate use of this discretion. Local governance is a broader concept and is defined
as formulation and execution of collective action at the local level. Thus it compasses the
direct and indirect roles of formal institutions of local government and government
hierarchies, as well as the roles of inform norms, network, community organizations and
neighbourhood associations in pursuing collective acting by defining the framework for
citizen-citizen and citizen-state interactions, collective decision making and delivery of
local public services. Local governance therefore includes the diverse objectives of
vibrant, living, working, and environmentally preserved self-governing communities.
Good local governance is not just about providing a rage of local services but also
preserving the life and liberty of residents, creating space for democratic participation
and civil dialogue, supporting market-led and environmentally sustainable local
development, and facilitating outcomes that enrich the quality of life of residents.
Although the concept of local governance is as old as the history of humanity, only
recently has it entered the broad discourse in the academic and practice literature.
Globalization and the information revolution are forcing a re-examination of citizen-state
relations and roles and the relationships of various orders of government with entities
beyond government and thereby an enhanced focus on local governance. The concept
however has yet to be embraced fully by the literature on development economics
because of the longstanding tradition in the development assistance community of
focusing on either local governments or community organizations while neglecting the
overall institutional environment that facilities or retards interconnectivity, cooperation, or

competition among organizations, groups, norms, ant networks, that serve public
interests at the local level.
According to several writers, has recently argued that the presence of the vast of
network of entities beyond government that are engaged in local services delivery or
quality of life issues make it unrealistic to treat local government as a single entity.
Analytical recognition of this broader concept of local governance is critical to developing
a frame for local governance that is responsive (doing the rights thing- delivery services
that are consistent with citizens preferences or are citizens focused); responsible (doing
the right thing the right way-working better but costing less and bench marking with the
best); and accountable (to citizens, through a rights-based approach) such analysis is
important because the role of local government in such a setting contrasts sharply with
its traditional role.

4.0 MAIN PRINCIPLES OF GOOD GOVERNANCE

4.1 Accountability and Rule of Law
Ensuring that all members of the scheme, including the office holder, staff members
and members of any governing body, are seen to be responsible and accountable
for their decisions and actions, including the stewardship of funds (with due regard
to the independence of the office holder). Participation hinges on effective
accountability and rule of law. With regards to the current crisis, it has been
recognized that, [as] governments assume a broader, more significant role in
response to the crisis, it becomes even more important that they are effective and
accountable otherwise, they would compound the severity of the problems
(Peters et al., n/d). Empirical research has substantiated this more and more. For
example, research shows that, when opposition parties draw attention to the effects
of a crisis, governments will have greater incentive to prevent crises such as
famines (Sen 1999 and UNDP 2000). Thus, greater accountability on the part of
leaders and the ability of the system to advance popular demands and negotiate
distributive pressures can lead to more concerted and effective policy responses to
a crisis such as an economic downturn and thus provide a source of resilience
(IDEA 2010). Where the rule of law exists, it is easier to manage potential conflicts
during crisis. In the Republic of Korea and Thailand, for example, democratic
processes facilitated a smooth transfer of power from a discredited set of politicians
to a new government through institutionalized mechanisms of voice; consequently,
the Korean and Thai institutions obviated the need for riots, protests, and other
kinds of disruptive actions by affected groups (Rodrik 2000). An effective rule of law
can also support reforms or adaptation processes within state functions and overall
government performance. Some countries, such as Kenya and the Sudan, have
specific institutional arrangements to ensure communication and consultation
between key government departments

4.2 Openness &Transparency

Ensuring openness and transparency in order that stakeholders can have
confidence in the decision-making and management processes of the scheme.
4.3 Participation and Inclusion
Participation and inclusion include empowerment through representation in
government and through other mechanisms facilitating free, active and
meaningful participation in decision-making processes. In economic crises, the
participation of civil society in the formulation and adoption of crisis responses
has been recognized as being particularly useful in providing alternative sources
of information and thus in framing policy debates (IDEA 2010) as well as in
increasing citizens ownership of results (RCPAR and UNDP 2011). Some argue
that democratic mechanisms such as civic participation in political processes lead
to political instability, but the evidence shows that the reverse is often true: even
though socio-political unrest and handovers of power do occur more often in
democracies than in dictatorships, they do not disrupt the overall development
process as they do in dictatorships (UNDP 2000). Further, participatory political
regimes generally deliver better growth because they produce superior
institutions better-suited to local conditions for a number of reasons: participatory
political regimes yield more predictable long-term growth rates and have more
stability, since the wider range of decision makers results in greater diversification
and lower risk in an environment rife with imperfect information (Rodrik 2000).
Participatory political regimes also deliver better distributional outcomes by
producing greater equality (Rodrik 2000). Better development outcomes,
especially in times of crisis, can be explained through the core characteristics of
representative government: shared power, openness, and adaptability. Shared
power fosters a climate of innovation and entrepreneurship, reflective policymaking, and thus steady growth; openness promotes the exchange of information
and ideas, and greater efficiency (e.g., in the allocation and use of resources);
7

and adaptability (i.e., the flow of ideas among public, private and civic sectors)
promotes greater versatility, timeliness and flexibility in the adoption and
implementation of policies, while the legitimate regular renewal of political
leadership avoids conflict and allows for innovation (Halperin et al. 2010).
Meaningful and free participation of citizens and stakeholders in decision-making
processes during times of crises contributes to the overall adaptability and
stability of institutions and promotes innovative policy dialogues. In the Asian
financial crisis of the 1990s, mechanisms of participation, consultation, and
bargaining in Thailand and the Republic of Korea enabled policy makers to
fashion the consensus needed to undertake the necessary policy adjustments
decisively and thus to handle the crisis significantly better than Indonesia (Rodrik
2000). Generally, the hardest hit countries in an economic crisis tended to be
those with few political liberties, such as Syrian Arab Republic, Algeria, Panama,
and Gabon, while countries with open political regimes, such as Costa Rica,
Botswana, Barbados, and India, fared much better (Rodrik 2000).

4.4 Effectiveness
Next is effectiveness and efficiency. Good governance means that processes and
institutions produce results that meet the needs of society while making the best
use of resources at their disposal. The concept of efficiency in the context of good
governance also covers the sustainable use of natural resources and the
protection of the environment.

4.5 Responsive
Good governance requires that institutions and processes try to serve all
stakeholders within reasonable timeframe institutional stakeholders. Who is
accountable to who varies depending on whether decisions or actions taken are

internal or external to an organization or institution. In general an organization or

an institution is accountable to those who will be affected by its decisions or
actions.
4.6 Consensus Oriented
There are several actors and as many viewpoints in a given society. Good
governance requires mediation of the different interests in society to reach a
broad consensus in society on what is in the best interest of the whole
community and how this can be achieved. It also requires a broad and long-term
perspective on what is needed for sustainable human development and how to
achieve the goals of such development. This can only result from an
understanding of the historical, cultural and social contexts of a given society or
community.
4.7 Equity and Inclusiveness
A societys wellbeing depends on ensuring that all its members feel that they
have a stake in it and do not feel excluded from the mainstream of society. This
requires all groups, but particularly the most vulnerable, have opportunities to
improve or maintain their wellbeing.

5.0 PARTICIPATION IMPLEMENTATION IN KUALA LUMPUR CITY COUNCIL

The implementation of Local Agenda 21 in the Kuala Lumpur City Council embarks the
readiness of becoming a more sustainable metropolitan in the future. Agenda 21 is a Global
Action Plan towards Sustainable Development for the 21st century. It is produced through a
declaration Earth Summit in Rio Janeiro, Brazil in 1992, which was attended by 178
countries, including Malaysia. This global action plan contains 40 chapters that describe the
steps that need to be taken towards sustainable development. Under chapter 8 of the Local
Agenda 21 had been stated about the important of participation and decision making involve
with many parties to ensure the sustainability of the environment and development of the
local government.

Prevailing systems for decision-making in many countries tend to

separate economic, social and environmental factors at the policy, planning and
management levels. This influences the actions of all groups in society, including
Governments, industry and individuals, and has important implications for the efficiency and
sustainability of development. An adjustment or even a fundamental reshaping of decisionmaking, in the light of country-specific conditions, may be necessary if environment and
development is to be put at the centre of economic and political decision-making, in effect
achieving a full integration of these factors. In recent years, some Governments have also
begun to make significant changes in the institutional structures of government in order to
enable more systematic consideration of the environment when decisions are made on
economic, social, fiscal, energy, agricultural, transportation, trade and other policies, as well
as the implications of policies in these areas for the environment. New forms of dialogue are
also being developed for achieving better integration among national and local government,
industry, science, environmental groups and the public in the process of developing effective
approaches to environment and development. The responsibility for bringing about changes
lies with Governments in partnership with the private sector and local authorities, and in
collaboration with national, regional and international organizations. National plans, goals
and objectives, national rules, regulations and law, and the specific situation in which
different countries are placed are the overall framework in which such integration takes

10

place. In this context, it must be borne in mind that environmental standards may pose
severe economic and social costs if they are uniformly applied in developing countries. The
overall objective is to improve or restructure the decision-making process so that
consideration of socio-economic and environmental issues is fully integrated and a broader
range of public participation assured. Therefore, several steps have been taken by the Kuala
Lumpur City Council under the LA21 KL in order to allow participation from various groups of
people in the development of sustainable metropolitan. As touted LA 21 KL, an approach
that the concept of a joint venture partnership among urban residents will be an important
instrument in fostering the spirit of friendship, mutual help , mutual respect among our
multiracial society in accordance with the concept of a caring society .

5.1 Safe Township (Bandar Raya Selamat)

One of the initiatives is to create a safe and secure township with the involvement
from various groups of people. This new and final theme under the LA 21 KL was
launched on 14th of April 2011 by the mayor of Kuala Lumpur, Tan Sri Ahmad Fuad
bin Ismail at Prince Hotel, Kuala Lumpur. This new theme will illustrate a city
community that free from physical, social and mental threats that become the spark
toward insecure local harmony. This new initiatives has attract participation from 23
partners that include non-governmental organisations (NGOs), private enterprises,
community bodies as well as the local community associations. The objective of this
agenda is to allow feedback of people on places to implement this scheme. At the
same time the authorities want to identify the issues of security and together with all
the parties involve will try to solve them.

11

5.1.1 Some of the parties that participate in this new agenda are as follow:

DBKL & KPW

NKRA on Town Security

Rakan Cop

Yayasan Pencegahan Jenayah Malaysia

Persatuan Penduduk TTDI

Persatuan Penduduk Bangsar Baru

Persatuan Pengakap WPKL

Jabatan Penjara

Low Yat & Sons Realty Sdn Bhd

Prince Hotel Residence

Yayasan Muamalat

Pertubuhan Perancang Bandar

PEMADAM Wilayah Persekutuan

Smart Idea Services & Marketing

PM Care Sdn Bhd

5.1.2 Committee involve in the implementation of Bandar Raya Selamat :

5.1.1.1 Committee of Public Works and Infrastructure
To develop world class infrastructures that meet with the need of KL
residents
5.1.1.2 Committee of Security and Enforcement
To ensure that by the year 2020 every person in the community will
become an observer and joint enforcer with the authority.
5.1.1.3 Committee of Education
To instill adequate education on Safe Township for all level of
community that can breed an educated community.
5.1.1.4 Committee of Promotion and Publicity
To promote and publicised the community with the programs under LA
21 to encourage them participate in it.
12

5.2 Clean and Serene Township (Bandar Raya Bersih dan Indah)
Initiated on 15th January 2011 by Dato Haji Bakarudin bin Othman, Vice Secretary
of Ministry of Federal Territories and Urban Wellbeing, this agenda of participation
is to increase the awareness toward maintaining the environment wellbeing and the
need for developing green world initiatives in todays environment and also for the
future. It is also an effort to collect the fund for Yayasan Anak Warisan Alam
(YAWA) or the Environmental Heritage Foundation Children as well as to support
the activities related to environment for schools students and youths. Further than
that there are several programmes that had been carry out under the theme of
Bandar Raya Bersih dan Indah

5.2.1 Yearly Gotong Royong

Along with the theme " Kebersihan Menjamin Bandar Raya Gemilang " , Bukit
Bintang Environment Committee as one of LA 21 KL partner once again
together City Hall and NGOs have organized " Bukit Bintang Central Gotong
Royong " which was held on January 22, 2011 located at Plaza Low Yat , The
program was attended by 1000 people, mostly from the public and business
entities nearby . Direct participation consists of Federal Hotel, Capital Hotel,
Plaza Low Yat , Bintang Warisan Hotel , Swiss Garden Hotel , Bukit Bintang
Plaza , UDA Mall Sdn . Bhd . , Tenaga Nasional and 60 students from SMK
Setapak.

5.2.2 Waste Management Reduction Programs LA 21 KL

Waste Management Reduction Program for 2 days 1 night on 28 and 29 May
2012 have been successfully implemented in Training and Development Unit
of Sungai Buloh Forest Department. A total of 52 participants and 9 of the
facilitators of Vocational footpaths have been involved in this camp. 52
participants were representatives from 9 schools chosen by CIMB. The
schools involved are the buyers SK , SK Desa Tun Hussein Onn , SK St.
13

Teresa ( 2 ) , SK Jalan Gurney 1 , SK Jalan Gurney 2 , SMK Padang Shoot ,

SMK Sri Pantai, SMK Wangsa Maju R1 Zone and SMK Sinar Bintang. The
goal of this project is to inculcate the principles of love for nature and their
actions in the waste management and lead a healthy life practices towards
sustainable development.
5.2.3 Some of the parties that participate in this new agenda are as follow:

DBKL

Kementerian Wilayah Persekutuan

Jabatan Kerajaan Tempatan, KPKT

Fakuti Sains Kesihatan, Universiti Institut Teknologi Mara

Pollution Engineerings (M) Sdn. Bhd

Persatuan Penjaja & Pekedai Bumiputera Wilayah Persekutuan

Maju Junction

Jawatankuasa Persekitaran Bukit Bintang

Malaysia Association Environment Health (MAEH)

City Sewerage (M) Sdn. Bhd

Syarikat Alam Flora Sdn. Bhd.

Indah Water Konsortium

The International Association Of Lion Clubs

Persatuan Pengusaha Restoran Muslim Malaysia (PRESMA)

Jabatan Pengurusan Sisa Pepejal Negara, Kementerian Perumahan &

Kerajaan Tempatan

Shangri-La Hotel Kuala Lumpur

14

Federal Hotels Sdn. Bhd.

Capitol Hotel Kuala Lumpur

The Royale Bintang Kuala Lumpur

Swiss Inn Kuala Lumpur

AEON Co. (M) Bhd. (Formerly Known As "Jaya Jusco Stores Bhd.")

Jabatan Pengairan Dan Saliran Malaysia, Kementerian

Sumber Asli Dan Alam Sekitar

Jabatan Alam Sekitar Malaysia, Kementerian Sumber Asli dan Alam

Sekitar

MMC Corporation

Yayasan Taiwan Buddhist Tzu-Chi Foundation Malaysia

Yayasan Anak Warisan Alam (YAWA)

Global Environment Centre (GEC)

Recycling And Organics Sdn. Bhd.

C.S Oil And Fats Sdn. Bhd.

Cs Import And Export Trading Sdn. Bhd.

Malaysian Plastics Manufacturers Association (MPMA)

Persatuan Penduduk Raya Permai

Pertubuhan Belia Bandar Bukit Jalil

Hotel Melia, Kuala Lumpur

Jabatan Pengurusan Sisa Pepejal Negara

Perbadanan Pengurusan Sisa Pepejal & Pembersihan Awam

15

Alam Flora Sdn Bhd

Indah Water Konsortium Sdn Bhd

Federal Hotels Sdn. Bhd.

Capitol Hotel Sdn. Bhd

Low Yat & Sons Realty Sdn Bhd

The Royale Bintang Kuala Lumpur

Hotel Melia, Kuala Lumpur

Hotel Bintang Warisan, Kuala Lumpur

Berjaya Times Square Joint Management Body

Sungei Wang Plaza Management Corporation

Malaysia Association Environment Health (MAEH)

Persatuan Penjaja Dan Peniaga Jalan Alor Kuala Lumpur

5.3 E-Township (E-Bandar Raya)

As all the government agencies had already gone through innovation of service
toward paperless or e-government system, the Kuala Lumpur City Council wish to
increase the participation and accessibility of network to all society in Kuala
Lumpur. The launching of E-Bandar Raya agenda had been carried out on 12 th
June 2010 at Federal Hotel, Kuala Lumpur. A memorandum of understanding
(MOU) had been signed by business partners and community. Later the workshop
of E-Bandar Raya had been established to familiarise the community with the e16

government system. The Vision Society had been chosen as the theme for the E
Bandar Raya agenda
To kick off the project as planned and agreed together, a ceremony was
successfully held on 14 and 15 April 2011 located at PPR Jelatek . A total of 900
people made up of residents' associations, government agencies, private sector,
NGOs and partner LA 21 KL to attend the show in order to support this project. This
program targets the 420 students who sat for the UPSR and PMR in 2011 who had
the opportunity to engage with ICT based A-Score learning software .120 e -book
unit allocated to the residents' association with the distribution of17 e -book units to
6 residents associations, the Residents Association PPR Sri Perak , Community
Welfare Association Desa Tun Razak , the Association of Sri Johor 4A , Sri Plateau
Residents Association , Bandar Bukit Jalil Youth Organisation and 18 units of e
-book to the Residents' Welfare Association Kg. Malaysia Tambahan.

5.3.1 Some of the parties that participate in this new agenda are as follow:

DBKL

Kementerian Wilayah Persekutuan Dan Kesejahteraan Bandar

Packet One Networks (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd.

Neem Resources

Mahirzon Resources Sdn. Bhd.

Pollution Engineerings (M) Sdn. Bhd.

Vasseti Datatech Berhad

Mesiniaga Berhad

Persatuan Penduduk PPR Jelatek

Persatuan Penduduk PPR Sri Perak

17

Persatuan Kebajikan Penduduk Desa Tun Razak

Persatuan Penduduk Sri Penara Cheras (PPSP)

Persatuan Kebajikan Penduduk Kg Malaysia Tambahan

Persatuan Penduduk Sri Johor

Pertubuhan Belia Apartment Sri Rakyat Bandar Bukit Jalil

6.0 CONCLUSION

18

Governance opens new intellectual space. It provides a concept that allows us to discuss
the role of government in coping with public issues and the contribution that other
players may make. It opens ones mind to the possibility that groups in society other than
government like the communities or the voluntary sector may have to play a stronger
role in addressing problems. The central conclusion is that a universal set of principles
for defining good governance can be fashioned and that the strength of their universality
rests to a large extent on the body of international human rights and laws. In addition,
these principles can be usefully applied to help deal with current governance challenges.
When they are applied it becomes apparent that there are no absolutes; that principles
often conflict; that the devil is in the detail that context matters. Finally, the nature of
governance both the means and the ends needs to be understood. Only then does it
make sense to elaborate the principles in order to create a meaningful analytical tool.
One of the tools that had been established in Rio de Janeiro was the Local Agenda 21.
This approach toward development of sustainable development is a way to create a
sustainable local government into a more robust environment in the future. In Malaysia,
the call up to the Local Agenda 21 had been answer through several local governments
and one of them is the Kuala Lumpur City Council. Many elements of the LA 21 had
been tried to be implement and participation is one of them. Till this date, a lot of positive
feedback from the community in term of their participation in the Local Agenda 21 Kuala
Lumpur. It it hope that in the near future, all local governments can be innovated to
become a more flexible local government that will imply all the principles of the good
governance into their administration. At the same time the local governments need to
answer to the Local Agenda 21 as being done by DBKL to create a sustainable local
government by the year 2020.

19