The Problem with “Good Governance”: The Local Roots to National Power in Decentralized Southeast Asia

• In Event: 128. Agents of Innovation or Clientelism? Understanding Local-Level Governance in Southeast Asia

Abstract

This paper explores the relationship between local and national politics in decentralized Southeast Asia. Comparing electoral results in Thailand, Philippines, and Indonesia, I argue that elections in these countries cannot be reduced simply to patronage politics. Instead, leaders in these countries cultivated notions of performance legitimacy at the local level as a way to pave or strengthen their path to the national level.

In Indonesia, the path from national to local was the clearest with what we might call a conventional good governance path. Joko Widodo came to power via new decentralization laws and based on his local polices, he garnered national fame. As a result, he climbed to the governorship of Jakarta and then to presidency.

In the Philippines, Duterte too appears to have risen to power through performance legitimacy, but of a different kind. He too is seen as a reformer who brought stability and economic growth to his region. However, his emphasis on law and order and extra-judicial ways of dealing with crime raised questions about how to think about “good governance.”

Finally in Thailand, the Thai rak Thai party consolidated power through policies that were popular in the Northeast region. Few, however, have pointed to this as an example of “good governance” and if anything, the 2006 coup in Thailand was justified as the need to restore good governance in Thailand.

Author

• Ehito Kimura, University of Hawaii at Manoa