Editorial: Remembering Alexei Navalny and struggles for good governance

This year marks a high point in global governance with over 60 countries holding elections involving nearly half of the world’s population (United Nations, 2024). The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights noted that ‘Every election—even an imperfect one—constitutes an effort to at least formally acknowledge the universal aspiration to democracy’ (United Nations, 2024). The quotation recognizes the universal human right of citizens to choose their government, but also acknowledges that not all the elections in 2024 will necessarily be democratic, free and fair. The right to freely and fairly elect a government, and provide it with a political mandate and the authority to govern, constitutes a basic human right. The will of the people giving a political party and/or an electoral candidate the right to govern is the basis of democracy and good governance. It is an opportunity for citizens to make a choice about whom they wish to represent and serve them. Democratic elections represent a hope that there will be an improvement in governance and public services.

As I write this editorial, my first as Deputy Editor of Public Money & Management (PMM), I reflect on the first time I voted. Exactly 30 years ago, I voted in South Africa’s first democratic elections. In South Africa, that historic day is now called ‘Freedom Day’. The elections represented freedom from apartheid and colonialism. It was a day where every South African, irrespective of their race, gender, tribe or religion, could vote. It was a day we were recognized as citizens of our own country with the right to vote. It is a day I vividly remember, standing in a queue for hours—the queues snaked around voting stations for kilometres. It was joyous and euphoric day. My then elderly grandfather, who had never voted in his life because his race classification under apartheid was ‘mixed race’ and therefore he was never allowed any rights, was permitted as many elderly people on the day to enter the polling station ahead of the long queues. He refused. He said, ‘I am voting with my family, for my family’. This memory has always stayed with me. His words represent a sentiment that the act of voting, elections and democracy represents hope—an aspiration for a better life under a better system of governance. For many people around the world, democracy represents renewal, better governance and hope for a better life for themselves and future generations. Yet, in many democracies, younger generations in particular do not vote; and this voter apathy suggests that citizens no longer believe their vote makes a difference. It is therefore worth remembering that the right to vote, to have free and fair elections, to live in a country with democratic freedoms, was hard fought for by many around the world. Some even sacrificed their liberty, like Nelson Mandela, and others their lives as in the case of Alexei Navalny. Their sacrifice, like so many, is a struggle for good governance—a hope that their fellow citizens can live in freedom and democracy, and a hope for a better life.

The research articles in this issue of PMM at first appear eclectic, but resonate with the themes of good governance and better public services. Erica Eneqvist’s article on ‘When innovation comes to town—the institutional logics driving change in municipalities’ suggests ways in which local governments can innovatively transform services so that broader societal challenges can be addressed and local public services could be improved (Eneqvist, 2024). The next article by Ritonga (2024) explores local government finance within the context of Indonesia: Ritonga found that the clustering of local government increases the effectiveness of analysis of financial conditions and, as a result, the findings of his study will help authorities to develop local government financial management policies that are fairer.

Donatella et al. (2024) provide a further article on local government finance, specifically the voluntary adoption of a system of accrual reserves. Interestingly, the system of accrual reserves demonstrates transparency, but their article shows that there are political incentives to avoid transparency. Salato et al. (2024) follow with a bibliometric analysis of the adoption and implementation of accrual accounting in the public sector in emerging economies. Here, too, the authors show the preferences and differences among public servants and politicians. The perpetual struggle between politicians and civil or public servants, with checks and balances between these key players in systems of governance, is often at the heart of a democracy. Albuquerque et al. (2024) also examine issues of accountability and transparency. They investigate stakeholders’ responses in public discussions of the International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board (IPSASB) and suggest a new approach that considers cultural values in public sector accounting and financial reporting.

The article on the role of performance measurement and management systems in changing public organizations by Castelo and Gomes (2024) highlights the perpetual efforts by governments to reform and improve public services. They argue that, although initial reforms focused on efficiency, governments are now striving for openness to society. Castelo and Gomes (2024) highlight efforts to improve transparency and governance through performance measurement and management systems to better align public services with the needs of citizens. Improving service delivery and public services is often key to the political mandate given to governments in democracies. Caroline Krüger, Marlon Fernandes Rodrigues Alves, Clarisse Mendes Pinto Gomes Ferreira, Luiz Guilherme Dácar da Silva Scorzafave, Cláudia Souza Passador and Adriana Cristina Ferreira Caldana’s article also speaks to ways to improve public services—specifically healthcare systems in Brazil (Krüger et al., 2024). Their article shows the inadequacy of the governance model that explains the failure to improve healthcare conditions. In efforts to improve public services within an increasingly digital environment, Vinarski-Peretz and Kidron (2024) show that public managers’ efforts at innovation of public services and implementation efficacy is shaped by massive digital transformation requiring creative self-efficacy. Finally, Klijn et al. (2024) also explore performance and innovation but, in their case, within the context of infrastructure projects. They show a relationship between network management and collaboration and performance.

Thus, while all the research articles in this July 2024 edition of PMM speak to issues of improving public services, innovations in public services, better management of public services, and accountability and transparency in the delivery and financial management of public services; it is important to remember that governments ought to serve the public as a democratic goal. In democracies, it is to the public that governments are accountable, responsible, and should be responsive; and their performance should be tested, freely and fairly, through an electoral process—the nexus of good governance, public service and democracy. I live in hope that every citizen experiences democracy and good governance, has an opportunity to vote in a free and fair election, enjoy the freedoms that many take for granted, receive the public services that they deserve, and that their aspirations of a better life are realized.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Karen Johnston

Karen Johnston is Professor of Organizational Studies at the University of Portsmouth, UK. Her research interests include public administration, public management, public governance, human resource management and gender studies. Karen has published highly-regarded books, chapters and journals articles, and serves on editorial boards of highly-ranked journals. She served on the executive boards of European Group for Public Administration and the International Research Society for Public Management. She has held numerous leadership positions, most notable was leading the Research Excellence Framework (REF) Business and Management submissions for REF2014 and REF2021 and Associate Dean for Research at her respective institutions. Karen’s research has received a number of awards, including the prestigious Julia H. Henderson Award and Fellowship award by the Academy of Social Sciences.