نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

• مجید وحید ¹
• سوسن نوربخش ²

¹ دانشیار علوم سیاسی دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.

² دانشجوی دکتری علوم سیاسی دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

در نیم ‌سده اخیر، رویکرد غالب در مطالعات حکمرانی، «رویکرد هنجاری» و به طور مشخص نظریه حکمرانی خوب بوده است. محدودیت‌هایی چون ساده‌سازی واقعیت‌های درهم‌تنیده، خوش‌بینی و جهت‌گیری غیرتاریخی حکمرانی خوب، زمینه‌ی طرح رویکرد بدیلی را ذیل عنوان «رویکرد اقتصادسیاسی» در مطالعات حکمرانی گشود که بر نقش شبکه‌های قدرت، منافع نیروهای سیاسی و اجتماعی و نوع آرایش‌ سیاسی مستقر در یک جامعه و تاثیر آن بر موفقیت یا عدم کامیابی برنامه‌های اصلاحی و توسعه‌ای تاکید دارد. این نوشته با ارائه گزارشی از وجوه تمایز رویکردهای مزبور، بر آن است نشان دهد که با وجود دستاوردها، این دو رویکرد در تبیین پویایی‌های تاریخی، گفتمانی و معنایی نظام‌های حکمرانی با محدودیت مواجهند. این محدودیت‌ها ضرورت طرح رویکردهای دیگری را در مطالعات حکمرانی ایجاد کرده است. بر این بنیان، در کار حاضر پاسخ به سه سوال دنبال می‌شود: ۱) رویکردهای قابل شناسایی‌ در ادبیات حکمرانی چیست؟ ۲) محدودیت‌های نظری و عملی رویکردهای هنجاری و اقتصادسیاسی را چگونه می‌توان صورت‌بندی کرد؟ ۳) چه ویژگی‌های مفهومی و تحلیلی، نظریات بدیل حکمرانی را به چشم‌اندازی نو و مکمل برای درک درهم‌تنیدگی‌ها و مسیرهای تحول حکمرانی تبدیل می‌کند؟ این مقاله با خوانشی انتقادی، افزودن «رویکرد‎تفسیری» و به طور مشخص نظریه حکمرانی تطوری را برای درک جامع‌تر تحول و عملکرد حکمرانی به پیشنهاد می‌گذارد. نظریه‌ای که حکمرانی را فرایندی پویا، غیرخطی و معناساز در بستر تعامل نهادها، کنش‌گران، گفتمان‌ها، روایت‌ها و تجربیات تاریخی جوامع می‌بیند و افق‌های تازه‌ای را برای تبیین و تحول الگوهای حکمرانی می‌گشاید.

 

کلیدواژه‌ها

• اقتصادسیاسی
• حکمرانی تطوری
• حکمرانی خوب
• کنش‌گر- نهاد
• گفتمان

موضوعات

• دولت

عنوان مقاله [English]

From Good Governance to Evolutionary Governance: Rethinking the Theoretical Application of Governance Approaches

نویسندگان [English]

• Madjid Vahid ¹
• Sousan Nourbakhsh ²

¹ , Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Faculty of Law and Political Science, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

² , PhD Student, Department of Political Science, Faculty of Law and Political Science, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

چکیده [English]

Introduction
Over the past half century, governance has become a central yet highly contested concept in the study of political, economic, and social orders (Levi-Faur, 2012). The increasing complexity of public problems, the proliferation of actors involved in decision-making, and the limitations of state-centered models have generated a growing demand for analytical frameworks capable of capturing the dynamic nature of governance processes (Jessop, 1997).
Building on the Food and Agriculture Organization’s (FAO) distinction between ‘normative approaches’— most notably the good governance theory— and ‘political-economy approaches’ that emphasize power relations and non-state actors, this paper argues that these approaches remain insufficient to explain the historical dynamics, interpretive meanings, and evolving configurations of governance (Bojic et al., 2022).
The authors contend that the FAO’s categorization can be further enriched by incorporating a third approach, referred to as the ‘interpretive approaches’. Accordingly, the introduction and review of the theory of Evolutionary Governance— developed within the interpretive approaches — constitute the central focus of this paper.
Research Objective
The objective of this paper is to extend this analytical landscape by introducing an interpretive approach and examining the theory of Evolutionary Governance as a complementary framework for understanding governance change. Specifically, it aims to identify the main approaches within the governance literature, to articulate the theoretical and practical limitations of normative and political-economy approaches, and to demonstrate how alternative governance frameworks can offer a more comprehensive and context-sensitive understanding of governance trajectories.
Methods
Methodologically, this paper adopts a descriptive–analytical approach based on a critical review of the governance literature.
Results and Discussion
This review identifies and evaluates three principal strands in the governance literature: the normative (good-governance) approach, the political-economy approach, and the interpretive strand exemplified by Evolutionary Governance.
The normative approach emerged in the wake of structural-adjustment failures and persistent corruption in many developing countries, with the World Bank providing an early, influential definition of governance as the manner in which power is exercised to manage a country’s economic and social resources for development. The World Bank’s subsequent formulation specified three dimensions— political regime, the processes through which authority is exercised, and state capacity to design and implement policy— and translated these into a five-fold good-governance agenda (public sector management, accountability, rule of law, transparency, and access to information) (World Bank, 1994; 1992). Proponents argued that establishing these institutional arrangements would generate a self-reinforcing cycle of economic and political development.
The global diffusion of the agenda by multilateral organizations broadened its reach but also exposed blind spots: an overemphasis on state-centered reforms, inadequate attention to equity and inclusion, and unrealistic expectations regarding implementation in contexts characterized by poverty, weak legitimacy, and political instability. Empirically, the optimistic assumption that good governance reforms would automatically yield development outcomes proved problematic, as implementation gaps and contextual mismatches substantially limited their effectiveness.
In response, the political-economy perspective foregrounded power, interests, and the distributional mechanisms that shape governance outcomes. Scholars emphasized ‘good enough’ or contextually feasible reforms (Grindle, 2007; 2004), while the theorists of limited-access orders and political settlements demonstrated how elite bargains, rent distribution, and interactive orders condition institutional trajectories (Khan, 2018; 2013; North et al., 2007). Concepts such as political topographies and center–periphery bargaining have shown that understanding a country’s governance structures depends on grasping the bidirectional interactions between elites and society. Absent such alignment, reform prescriptions often remain rhetorical or counterproductive (Boone, 2003). The interpretive approach— particularly Evolutionary Governance Theory (EGT)— provides a complementary, context-sensitive analytical lens. EGT offers an interpretive and dynamic framework for addressing the complexity of governance by conceptualizing governance as a co-evolving system of actors, institutions, and discourses. Drawing on social systems theory, post-structuralism, and institutional and development economics, EGT emphasizes that governance trajectories are shaped through interactions among actors, formal and informal institutions, historical path dependencies, and discursive practices (Beunen et al., 2015; Van Assche et al., 2014).Key concepts within this framework include actor–institution configurations, power–knowledge configurations, and processes of dependency and path creation, all of which shape trajectories of governance transformation. Governance is thus understood as a discursive process involving subjects (actors) and objects (socially constructed concepts), in which narratives, metaphors, and open concepts continuously redefine the scope of action and influence policy outcomes (Van Assche et al., 2014; Van Assche et al., 2011a).
Conclusion
Over recent decades, governance has become a central concern in political science, prompting a plurality of theoretical responses. Normative approaches— most notably the good governance agenda—have promoted broad and often universal institutional prescriptions, whereas alternative perspectives emphasize that governance outcomes are contingent upon context-specific configurations of power, elite bargains, and differential access to resources. While political-economy approaches have advanced a more context-sensitive understanding of governance, the persistent inability of many governance reforms to address emergent and complex problems underscores the need for an interpretive turn.
EGT responds to this need by offering a holistic and dynamic perspective in which governance is conceptualized as a co-evolving system of actors, institutions, discourses, narratives, and power relations. EGT highlights the significance of historical pathways, non-linear change, and the mutual reconfiguration of material conditions and meaning-making processes. Accordingly, governance transformation cannot be reduced to isolated changes in actor strategies or institutional arrangements; rather, it requires the co-evolution of actors, institutions, discourses, and power configurations over time. By embedding discursive processes within institutional and historical contexts, EGT provides a more comprehensive analytical framework for understanding long-term and intertwined governance change and for informing more realistic, adaptive, and context-sensitive policy responses.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

• Actor– institution
• Discourse
• Evolutionary governance
• Good governance
• Political– economy