Does Good Governance Equate Improved Civilian Lives? The Rhetoric of COVID 19 Policies!

In today’s highly competitive global economy, especially amid COVID 19 challenges, the demand for a high quality of life in human and health development has forced nations to consider various new governance and management strategies. It is suggested that good governance should address constitutional reforms capable of making markers work better to enable economic developments (Liou, 2007). Although the quality of governance is important, there is no clear definition of what constitutes the quality of government. The contemporary public appearance of the notion of good governance considers the COVID 19 crisis as a ‘crisis of health, though it is a crisis of governance; measure the quality of governance.(Grindle, 2007) argues corruption, lack of democracy, state and market failures prevent human developments. However, defining good governance in terms of the absence of these indicators does not lead to human development. (Painter, 2012) concurred, arguing that there is no firm basis for any set of good governance reforms as a prerequisite for human development; development is not solely caused by good governance. Therefore, there is the need to identify key governance indicators and capacities that will help accelerate and sustain economic, human and health developments, especially in these difficult times. Even though our country has improved governance with development, good governance is not a precondition to human development. (Lemeria and Ness, 2010) argues that a country might still experience economic development even with the absence of good governance. Thus indicators to measure distinct concepts of human development, physical and mental health, quality of life, reduced poverty, improved access to resources and system navigation should be used to measure good governance.