Irony of Development Agendas: Perspectives on APRM under Presidents Thabo Mbeki and Olusegun Obasanjo

IF 0.9 4区 社会学 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Ikemefuna Taire Paul Okudolo, V. Ojakorotu
{"title":"Irony of Development Agendas: Perspectives on APRM under Presidents Thabo Mbeki and Olusegun Obasanjo","authors":"Ikemefuna Taire Paul Okudolo, V. Ojakorotu","doi":"10.1080/02589346.2021.1877453","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The attainment of development is largely consequent upon the throes of political governance as a fragment of public administration. In truth, the nexus between political governance and development is crucial to the advancement of social justice. The quest to reverse Africa’s underdevelopment and de-democratisation instigated its political leaders to initiate, formalise, and adopt the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM). The APRM is expected to promote good governance, transparency, democracy, political accountability, and other indicators of development, thereby entrenching developmentalism. Based on Gerry Stoker’s new governance theory, the paper examines the Country Self-Assessment Report (CSAR) of South Africa and Nigeria under the administrations of Thabo Mbeki and Olusegun Obasanjo based on the four theoretical pillars of the APRM. It finds that successive regimes after Mbeki and Obasanjo exhibited poor commitment to implement the ideals of the APRM to further the gains made by the understudied regimes and thereby weakened the developmentalism push of the countries.","PeriodicalId":45047,"journal":{"name":"Politikon","volume":"48 1","pages":"135 - 152"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02589346.2021.1877453","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Politikon","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02589346.2021.1877453","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT The attainment of development is largely consequent upon the throes of political governance as a fragment of public administration. In truth, the nexus between political governance and development is crucial to the advancement of social justice. The quest to reverse Africa’s underdevelopment and de-democratisation instigated its political leaders to initiate, formalise, and adopt the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM). The APRM is expected to promote good governance, transparency, democracy, political accountability, and other indicators of development, thereby entrenching developmentalism. Based on Gerry Stoker’s new governance theory, the paper examines the Country Self-Assessment Report (CSAR) of South Africa and Nigeria under the administrations of Thabo Mbeki and Olusegun Obasanjo based on the four theoretical pillars of the APRM. It finds that successive regimes after Mbeki and Obasanjo exhibited poor commitment to implement the ideals of the APRM to further the gains made by the understudied regimes and thereby weakened the developmentalism push of the countries.
发展议程的讽刺:姆贝基总统和奥巴桑乔总统领导下的APRM观点
摘要发展的实现很大程度上是政治治理作为公共行政的一部分所经历的痛苦。事实上,政治治理与发展之间的关系对于促进社会正义至关重要。扭转非洲欠发达和民主化的努力促使其政治领导人启动、正式化并通过非洲同行审议机制。澳大利亚审慎监管机制有望促进善政、透明度、民主、政治问责制和其他发展指标,从而巩固发展主义。本文以格里·斯托克的新治理理论为基础,从四个理论支柱出发,考察了塔博·姆贝基和奥卢塞贡·奥巴桑乔执政时期南非和尼日利亚的国家自我评估报告。研究发现,在姆贝基和奥巴桑乔之后的历届政权都表现出了执行澳大利亚审慎审查机制理想的糟糕承诺,以进一步推动研究不足的政权所取得的成果,从而削弱了这些国家的发展主义推动力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Politikon
Politikon POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
审稿时长
32 weeks
期刊介绍: Politikon focuses primarily on South African politics, but not exclusively so. Over the years the journal has published articles by some of the world" leading political scientists, including Arend Lijphart, Samuel Huntingdon, and Philippe Schmitter. It has also featured important contributions from South Africa"s leading political philosophers, political scientists and international relations experts. It has proved an influential journal, particularly in debates over the merits of South Africa"s constitutional reforms (in 1983 and 1994). In the last few years special issues have focused on women and politics in South Africa, and the South African election of 1999.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信