This is neither an exhaustive nor a definitive definition , and it is important to note that nowhere above is any attempt to list the necessary institutions or offices , as no such list or definition exists , which is entirely deliberate . The American , Australian , German and French systems of government , for example , would each be considered liberal democracies despite significant differences in their form , structure and priorities . That differentiation and lack of concrete parameters provides a level of flexibility wherein a set of guidelines can be set down , while still allowing nations and peoples to define good governance for themselves , such that it is never an outside imposition . Good governance should always be internally generated and appropriate to local history and desires .
Importantly , I would synthesize the definitions of good governance thus : the definition of good governance neither maps the structure of a government , nor seeks to indelibly name it . Rather it urges the identification of a collection of processes through which the lives and dignity of a population are best protected as it makes itself heard and directs its own destiny , and invites ideas and additions for evolution and improvement . Good governance is a process , not a product ; a verb rather than a noun .
However , the emphasis above on flexibility and locally generated definition does not match the imposed , pre-defined structures of recent R & S operations . Definitions of good governance articulated by Western nations are prone to assumptions based on the Fukuyama-esque perception that democracy is a fait accompli — now that we know what it should look like , the task is simply to build it . When designing a governance model , it is often mirrored after the intervener ’ s concept , and too rarely accounts for the needs of the local population . That perception all too often
42