IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/spr/aaechp/978-3-031-85911-3_14.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

A Comparative Assessment of Democracy and Good Governance Dividends in Egypt, Ghana, Mauritius, and Senegal

In: Political Governance and the African Peer Review Mechanism

Author

Listed:
  • Mataywa Busieka

    (Northwest University)

Abstract

This paper provides a comprehensive assessment of a two-decade comparative study that evaluates the dividends of democracy and good governance in Egypt, Ghana, Mauritius, and Senegal, utilizing the lens of the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) indicators. The study aims to analyse the progress and maturation of democratic systems and governance practices in these four African countries, shedding light on the key factors that have contributed to their development or hindered their advancement. The theoretical framework employed in this research draws from the concepts of democracy and good governance. Democracy encompasses political systems characterized by free and fair elections, respect for human rights, rule of law, transparency, and citizen participation. Good governance emphasizes effective institutions, accountability, transparency, responsiveness, and inclusiveness. These frameworks provide the basis for evaluating the performance of Egypt, Ghana, Mauritius, and Senegal. The study utilizes the APRM indicators as a tool for comparative analysis. The APRM framework, developed by the African Union, assesses Member states’ political, economic, corporate, and socio-economic governance. By employing this framework, the research evaluates the four countries’ adherence to democratic principles, the effectiveness of governance structures, and the impact on development outcomes. The findings of the study contribute to a deeper understanding of the progress made by Egypt, Ghana, Mauritius, and Senegal in the realm of democracy and good governance over the past two decades. The study identifies commonalities and differences in the four countries’ experiences, highlighting the success stories and challenges faced in each context. This research has implications for policymaking and development strategies in Africa. By identifying the factors that have facilitated or hindered the dividends of democracy and good governance, policymakers can formulate targeted interventions to strengthen democratic institutions, enhance governance practices, and foster sustainable development.

Suggested Citation

  • Mataywa Busieka, 2025. "A Comparative Assessment of Democracy and Good Governance Dividends in Egypt, Ghana, Mauritius, and Senegal," Advances in African Economic, Social and Political Development, in: Omololu Fagbadebo & Isioma U. Ile (ed.), Political Governance and the African Peer Review Mechanism, chapter 0, pages 263-283, Springer.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:aaechp:978-3-031-85911-3_14
    DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-85911-3_14
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:aaechp:978-3-031-85911-3_14. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.