Institute to Become Leading Center for Study of Democratic Governance
By Kate Hoagland - February 5, 2009
“This is one of the defining moments of the school,” Dean David Ellwood announced at Wednesday’s (Feb. 5, 2009) Ash Institute inaugural panel “Democracy in the 21st Century: Global Challenges and Opportunities”. Calling the event “a celebration of the next generation of the Ash Institute in which we are exposing you to the best thinking going on at Harvard Kennedy School,” Ellwood introduced Director Anthony Saich, who will spearhead the Institute’s initiative to become the world’s leading center for the study of democratic governance. HKS scholars and practitioners concentrating on the study of democratic institutions and politics Stephen Goldsmith, Alex Keyssar, Archon Fung, and Jane Mansbridge served as panelists.
Setting the context for the discussion to follow, Director Saich elaborated on the Institute’s plans to study the reciprocal relationships between democratic governance and the persistence of urgent social problems. According to Saich, we lack new models and frameworks for understanding democratic governance and its relevance to the challenges the world currently faces. He explained that the Institute would undergo a deep exploration of the very nature of democracy itself, studying why this form of government can work so well in some countries and adapt less well in others. How can democracy work for ordinary people in both the developed and developing world? The potential tradeoff between human rights and economic development and the types of institutions that can succeed in protecting and growing both capital areas will be reviewed.
Saich noted that research will go beyond current theory on the empirical evidence of democracy’s value, to look at the structural relationships in democratic practices that sustain its principles. Other areas of focus include democratic experimentations in illiberal or pseudo-democracies. Do such experiments amount to true democratic learning and can populist information remain suppressed despite a flourishing open market economy? He concluded by noting that the challenge for democrats is to find those structural relationships that will sustain democratic principles and internalize them in appropriate conduct, the self-discipline and restraint necessary to make choice work instead of producing plunder.
In keeping with Saich’s discussion of citizen interests, Stephen Goldsmith, director of the Innovations in American Government Program and Daniel Paul professor of government, discussed networked government as a model for government to improve delivery of goods and services to citizens through the use of private and public partners. Which areas should government retain control? He warned, however, that such networks risk obstructing democratic governance unless they safeguard accountability and value to the citizen. If there is insufficient accountability, do such networks become a cartel?
Alex Keyssar, Matthew W. Stirling, Jr. professor of history and social policy and director of Democratic Institutions and Politics, offered an historical assessment of the 2008 U.S. election. One prediction he made is that public financing as we know it is dead—after Obama’s phenomenal success in raising money, no politician of either party will ever again agree to limit themselves to public financing alone. He stressed just how important money is in U.S. politics, pointing out how Obama was able to raise significantly more funds than his opponent during the crucial final weeks of the campaign. Professor Keyssar also foresaw challenges to photo ID voter requirements and problems with implementing costly new voting technology. He was hopeful that the current plans to set up permanent voter registration will do much to correct voter class disparities.
Archon Fung, professor of public policy who will hold the initiative’s first endowed professorship, argued that democratic governance’s complex involvement with private and transnational entities encourages new ideas and theories. According to Fung, the principle of affected interest, channels for direct civic participation, and the culture of democratic governance provide a blueprint for a new area of study.
Expanding on Fung’s discussion of the culture of democratic governance, Adams professor of political leadership and democratic values Jane Mansbridge discussed the American resistance tradition in government, in which institutions that hinder, rather than help, government from acting are favored and prized. As countries around the world explore democracy, she suggested the U.S. model, founded in a spirit of resistance to government authority, might not be appropriate for post-Soviet, Islamic or Chinese populations seeped in a tradition of strong central government.
The Roy and Lila Ash Institute for Democratic Governance and Innovation was created in 2003 thanks to large grants from the Ford Foundation and Roy and Lila Ash. The Institute advances excellence in governance, strengthens democratic institutions worldwide, and serves as a catalyst of the many of the most pressing needs of the world’s citizens. Asia Programs, a school-wide initiative integrating Asia-related activities, joined the Institute in 2008.