نقد مدل حکمرانی خوب با تأکید بر مفهوم نابرابری اجتماعی

One of the most important features of good governance is the reduction of social inequality. Although indicators of good governance,, may indirectly provide the conditions for reducing social inequality, there is a gap under the heading of social inequality which is felt in the theory of good governance. This research seeks to answer the question of what criticisms are made of the model of good governance theoretically and quantitatively? Methodologically, this research is a theoretical endeavor and of course from a quantitative comparative method based on structural equation modeling using data.Among the UN member states, all the data needed for this study were available for 103 countries that were selected as a sample of the study. Quantitative findings based on structural equation modeling showed that the model of good governance does not have a good fit but improves with the introduction of the social inequality variable into the model. In the theoretical dimension, there are criticisms that have been suggested the indicators of control of corruption , government efficiency and resilience, security, political stability and lack of Violence, the rule of law, the quality of regulation, responsibility, accountability and the right to comment, citizen satisfaction, pivotal consensus, the reduction of social inequality, non-domination and hegemony, transparency, commitment to interests and demands, social welfare and empowerment, meritocracy, freedom and enjoyment of rights and non-interference in the public and private are considered in the governance model and are added to the evaluation criteria of countries.

Introduction

The challenge that exists in the theory of good governance is that its indicators theoretically do not have a logical framework to achieve the goals, and in terms of implementation, they cannot guarantee the improvement of conditions in all countries due to political, social and cultural differences and effective mechanisms.. Based on this, the aim of the research is to criticize the model of good governance. Also, to theoretically examine the issue of reducing or eliminating social inequality through the implementation of good governance.
2- Theoretical framework
Some researches have dealt with political structures and their influence on governance mechanisms and inequality. Others emphasize aspects of income distribution, poverty reduction, and inequality. Researches have also been conducted in which variables such as governance quality, economic freedom index, gross domestic product and urbanization rate and inequality have been considered. The issue of public welfare has also attracted another aspect of research related to governance and social inequality. Corruption and its political and social effects and the shadow economy have become another part of social analysis and research in the field of inequality and governance. The current research will be different from past research in several ways. First, its main purpose is to criticize the model of good governance. Second, it will address social inequality, not just inequality of a particular kind. Third, in the analysis of the relationship between good governance and social inequality, in addition to the main indicators, conditions and mechanisms will also be emphasized. Despite the fact that the correct implementation of the good governance model may be able to provide the conditions to reduce social inequality, but because the score of the state of social inequality is not decisive in the average score of good governance published by the World Bank every year, it cannot be claimed that good governance is always a factor in reducing social inequality.
3- Methodology
From a methodological point of view, this research is a theoretical effort and a quantitative comparative method based on structural equation modeling using secondary data has also been used. According to the latest UN data output (2019), 193 countries are members of this organization. Among the member countries of the United Nations, all the data needed for this research were available for 103 countries that were selected as the research sample. The method and comparative analysis is used in the transition from general theories to structural theories, and this research also has a theoretical effort that leads to the criticism of structural theory.
4- Findings of research and discussion
In the theoretical and quantitative dimension, the good governance model has some shortcomings. One of the most important of them is that the issue of social inequality has not been directly addressed. The results of the good governance model fit evaluation show that the relative chi-square sizes are high and the RMSEA is also very high. The relative chi-square index in this model shows that the empirical data of the World Bank and the theoretical model of good governance do not match. The RMSEA index in this model indicates a bad fit and the amount of difference between its size and the acceptable size is very high. In addition, comparing the parameters of government effectiveness, regulatory quality (laws and regulations), rule of law and corruption control showed that there is no significant difference between them and this indicates the weakness of the model. There are serious doubts about relying on the model of good governance to measure how to govern in countries. The evaluation of the measurement model of good governance and social inequality showed that, except for income inequality, other measures of factor loadings and coefficients of determination are high and strong. The fit indices have improved to a great extent, and although the size of the RMSEA has decreased significantly compared to the previous two models, its value is still high. Therefore, it can be argued that the inclusion of the social inequality variable in the good governance model can make it more acceptable.

Conclusion

With all the positive points that exist in the theory of good governance with emphasis on the World Bank indicators, the following criticisms are included:
Good governance requires that different viewpoints come together so that the good of society occurs with the maximum possible consensus. Consensus-oriented presence as an indicator in the good governance model can increase the possibility of adapting the model to the conditions of different countries. Creating equal opportunities in society is very important. Without considering the "reduction of social inequality" index, it cannot be claimed that a country has good governance.
The model of good governance claims to be universal. Its implementation in different countries requires extensive political, cultural, security and economic changes that seem far from reach. At the same time, there are countries in the world like China that were able to make significant progress without it. Of course, it is not acceptable to ignore the general principles of good governance. Countries should have a proper understanding of their conditions in terms of good governance, and for this, it is necessary to identify the historical experience, culture and indigenous values.
The adjective "good" in the model of good governance can be challenging because good and bad are value concepts. Removing the word "good" from the governance model can solve this problem.
One of the reasons for the spread of corruption in the governance system of countries is the lack of transparency. The mechanism of all the programs and the process of activities should be obvious and the citizens can control and monitor them step by step whenever they want. By examining the level of citizens' satisfaction, we can also consider the hidden aspects of the functioning of the governance system. Efficiency and effectiveness complement each other and considering each without the other can be considered a deficiency. Measuring the effectiveness of the government is a very valuable task in the governance model, but this work will be doubled by evaluating the effectiveness of the government. A country in the world cannot be considered to have good governance while not paying attention to its commitment to non-interference in the public and private spheres of citizens.