societies, and states."' Recent empirical studies of governance range from analyses of Norway's wage policy and Britain's management of its health service (Rose 1980), to East Africa's rural development prograrns (Hyden 1983).

Work in the area of governance is often interdisciplinary, cutting across the boundaries of economics, political science, philosophy, sociology, and management. Governance has been analyzed both normatively (how should governments behave?) and positively (how do governments behave?). This distinction has ancient roots, as philosophers have long debated the moral versus the utilitarian foundations of the nation-state and its system of governance.2 As long ago as 495 B.C., Confucius, an experienced bureaucrat forced into exile by Chinese political intrigue, argued that a well-ordered society required government based on superior morality rather than on superior power. Later Chinese philosophers countered that "good" governance above all required centralized, absolute authority.<sup>3</sup> Plato (advisor to the ruler Dionysius II of Syracuse) and his pupil Aristotle grappled with questions of political reform, the rule of law, the nature of authority, and the principles which ought to determine the shape of the ideal state, and its relation to production and other economic questions.

Modem analyses of governance date from the 17th century Germanic tradition of _politikwissenschaft_ (political science) and the 18th century innovations of the European Age of _'Random House College Dictionary,_ rev. ed. New York: Ranidom House, 1984, p. 571.

2In Asia, theories of governance can be traced to Confucious' philosophy of the moral institutions underlying social order, in particular, the "rectification of names". A well-ordered society, he argued, depended on the fulfillment of duties and responsibilities inherent in social roles: ruler, minister, father, and son, for example. If the ruler fulfilled the "way of the ruler," he would have legitimacy; for society to prosper, all must fulfill their roles. Thus a son must be filial, a fathe; aternal, and a ruler must offer moral leadership to the nation. Social order depended on everyone fufilling his or her social role, on the "rectification of names." The heaviest responsibility fell on the leader: if he fulfilled his duty, then the chain of rectification and social order would be in place; if not, social chaos would result.

'Mo Tzu's (c. 470-c.381 B.C.) influential critique of Confucius used a utilitarian argument: states are established to end disorder, and thus the eentralized authority of the ruler must be absolute. "According to the Mohists, the state exists because it is useful. But according to the Confucianists, it exists because it ought to exist." Mencius later elaborated the idea of two kinds of govermmental authority: _wang,_ or the sage-king, and _pa,_ or the warrior-king. One bases its power in morality, the other in force. Contemporary Chinese thought continues this distinction. "a democratic government is a rang government, because it represents a free association of people, while a Fascist govermment is that of a p because it reigns through terror and physical force. (Fung 1948: 73-75).

4