GOVERNANCE

This area of my research evaluates the extent to which a substantial variation in nonstate actor behavior in the economic governance of states exist.

My research has primarily focused on assessing the overall regional differences in governance since the economic liberalization reforms of 1991; however, it also compares nonstate actor activity to annual percentages of GDP growth between 1980 and 1990.   The purpose of this analysis is to assess nonstate behavior and economic trends across time.  The focus is not on generalizing to a population but rather to assess the structure within the survey.  It is here, consideration is given to how perception of governance may be redirecting the political economy as a whole.  This assessment of the overall regional differences, first establishes that there is strong evidence for regional differences in responses.  Second, in examining the results, I looked within regions to establish what might drive regional differences, and there is very little evidence of systematic difference within regions, which may suggest subgroups have a role to play.  Third, since I have evidence of systematic regional differences, two regional options and one individual state option are examined.

Pengo Paraja. Primitive Tribal Woman photographed at Community Health Center in NabarangpurThe first regional option is to explore regional level variables in more detail.  Drawing on new evidence, this section relocates authority and provides valuable context in which social welfare and the welfare mindedness of states and redistributive powers of nonstate actors may be empirically evaluated.

The second option is to explore individual state and regional interactions to assess what is driving regional differences.  The individual state option is to conduct a more granular analysis at the individual level differences.  Of central concern, racial, religious and regionalist specifications within a political economy that is class and gender inflected, and where issues of power and social order are important.   Aspects of this discussion include a provocative new perspective on market reforms as imagery and representation of authority and governance, though steeped in values, ideologies, and taken for granted beliefs of the culture which produced them and which consumes them in civic life.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: