ABSTRACT
Global political development is becoming increasingly influenced by ideas of ‘good governance’. Multilateral development institutions, international aid donors, domestic political parties and local constituencies within and without Southeast Asia all express support for the concept. However despite, or perhaps because of, the popularity of good governance its actual meanings are elusive and seem to shift according to place and context. The term originated from Africa in the late 1980s where scholars called for better state-society relations based upon development, democracy and socially inclusiveness or participation. Since then the term has been used in many different ways, most significantly by neo-liberal theorists who often blame ‘poor governance’ for the lack of economic development in a country after it has undergone neo-liberal economic reform. For these theorists good governance refers to accountability and transparency within government processes, thereby securing more favourable investment conditions for foreign companies (see Mkandawire 2007). Postdevelopment theorists are sceptical of such claims and are more likely to see the concept of good governance as a new discursive tool by which the development industry is attempting to manipulate and reshape developing countries. Good governance reforms were imposed on Indonesia during the economic crisis, for example, which forced the country to rearrange its governance structures in ways dictated by IMF, rather than local, guidelines.