MEASURING URBAN GOVERNANCE USING GOVERNANCE AND LEGISLATION INDEX: A CASE STUDY OF KUALA LUMPUR, MALAYSIA

Authors

  • Soo Po Xuan Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Faculty of Built Environment, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 UTM Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia
  • Gabriel Hoh Teck Ling Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Faculty of Built Environment, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 UTM Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.11113/ijbes.v6.n1-2.389

Keywords:

Governance and Legislation Index, City Prosperity Index, Objective Data, Kuala Lumpur, Sustainability

Abstract

It was recognized that good governance is important to achieve the equitable and sustainable development which secure the common future. This is because active, effective and fair governance helps promotes the business development by putting in place integrated policymaking capacity and ensuring stable and secure societies towards sustainable development. Seeing this, hundreds of governance-indicator datasets have emerged. Stakeholders have relied heavily on these data in making cross-border decisions. Nevertheless, it is argued that most of these data are perception-based indicators; therefore, the decision made is bias and incorrect. On this ground, this paper attempts to identify and explain the quality of governance for the Kuala Lumpur city using an objective data-driven index, the City Prosperity Index (CPI). This paper employed content analysis of secondary data and literature, relying on statistical data from Kuala Lumpur City Hall, Election Commission of Malaysia and The World Bank. Results have shown that governance in Kuala Lumpur is a moderate solid factor (65.0) in contributing to the city’s prosperity. Comparing to other cities, Kuala Lumpur ranked 20 out of 47 selected cities. There is still plenty of room Kuala Lumpur to improve its governance to remain competitive and sustainable. In conclusion, objective data is good as data produced will not be bias. Nevertheless, it should not be generalized to reflect the overall quality of governance. This is because there are many other governance related variables can only be obtained via perception-based data. It is recommended that the GLI measured in this paper should be use together with other subjective data to give a most complete coverage of the overall quality of governance of a city.

References

Acharia, N (2016, 14 November). Budget 2017: DBKL has nothing to hide. Free Malaysia Today. Retrieved November, 2017 from: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com

Alkire, S. & Foster, J. (2011). Counting and multidimensional poverty measurement. Journal of Public Economics. 95: 476-487.

Arndt, C. & Oman, C. (2006). Uses and abuses of governance indicators. Paris: The organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Foresti, M., Wild, L., Takeuchi, L. R. & Norton, A. (2014) Governance targets and indicators for post 2015. London: Overseas Development Institute.

Hallward-Driemeier, M. & Pritchett, L. (2015). How business in done in the developing world: Deals versus rules. Journal of economic perspectives. 29: 121-140.

Harrison, T. M. & Sayogo, D. S. (2014). Transparency, participation, and accountability practices in open government: A comparative study. Government Information Quarterly. 31: 513-525.

Herbert, S. (2013). Perception surveys in fragile and conflict-affected states. Governance and Social Development Resource Centre.

Kaufmann, D, Kraay, A. & Mastruzzi, M. (2010). The Worldwide Governance Indicators: Methodology and analytical issues. Brookings.

Langbein, L. & Knack, S. (2010). The Worldwide Governance Indicators: Six, one or none?. The Journal of Development Studies. 46: 350-370.

Moreno, E. L., Murguía, R. O. & Lavagna, G. (2015). The City Prosperity Initiative: 2015 Global City Report. UN-Habitat.

Rothstein, B. & Teorell, J. (2008). What is quality of government? A theory of impartial government institution. Governance. 21: 165-190.

Suruhanjaya Pilihan Raya (SPR). Sistem pengurusan maklumat pilihan raya umum: Keputusan pilihan raya umum. Retrieved January, 2018, from http://resultpru13.spr.gov.my/module/keputusan/paparan/paparan_Laporan.php

The World Bank. (2011). Malaysia economic monitor: Smart city. Bangkok: The World Bank.

The World Bank. (2016) Time required to start a business (days). Retrieved January, 2018, from https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IC.REG.DURS

UN-Habitat. (2016). City Prosperity Index Methodology and Metadata. UN Habitat.

United Nations (2007). Public governance indicators: A literature review. New York: United Nations.

United Nations Development Programme (2009). Planning a governance assessment: A guide to approaches, cost and benefits. Oslo: United Nations Development Programme.

Downloads

Published

2019-04-01

How to Cite

Po Xuan, S., & Hoh Teck Ling, G. (2019). MEASURING URBAN GOVERNANCE USING GOVERNANCE AND LEGISLATION INDEX: A CASE STUDY OF KUALA LUMPUR, MALAYSIA. International Journal of Built Environment and Sustainability, 6(1-2), 101–109. https://doi.org/10.11113/ijbes.v6.n1-2.389