Good Governance and the Sustainable Development Goals in Southeast Asia

Rasyikah Md Khalid, Ainul Jaria Maidin, Rasyikah Md Khalid, Ainul Jaria Maidin

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2022
• ISBN:
  9781000596649
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Economics
• Subtopic: Development Economics
• Index: Economics

This book discusses management and governance initiatives undertaken by agencies and stakeholders towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGS) in the Southeast Asian region, specifically Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand and Singapore. It highlights the theories, methodologies and action plans involved in implementing the goals in these countries and the importance of developing a positive relationship between the public and government agencies.

With contributors coming from a range of disciplines and backgrounds across the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) region, this edited collection provides a holistic quantitative and qualitative approach to achieving the SDGs. In order to realise these development objectives, it argues that a strong understanding of the basic principles of governance across all levels is required, supported by effective citizen participation and conflict resolution. It provides a detailed overview of the importance of governance at the country level, addressing the key elements of an integrated framework to support sustainable transitions. Regional case studies highlight processes and recommendations for improving governance and risk management and elevating citizen awareness and participation.

Good Governance and the Sustainable Development Goals in Southeast Asia is a comprehensive and valuable companion for researchers, government agencies, and professionals with an interest in the SDGs in Southeast Asia and beyond.

1 University participatory governance towards ‘a world of three zeros’ (Goals 1, 8 & 11)

Hasri Mustafa

DOI: 10.4324/9781003230724-2

Introduction

In developing countries, social work education at higher learning institutions is under-theorized. Most of their social work education is commonly aimed at students’ professional development and producing attitude changes (Lyons, 2019). As such, conceptualizations of social work have been subject to public questions, especially on the integration of theory and practice. This concerns whether the theory is captured and institutionalized to enable universities to reduce specific social problems in deprived population groups or to end poverty and unemployment of marginalized communities. Recent literature has questioned the role conflicts of higher learning institutions in reducing the social problems and has suggested a need to integrate the entrepreneurial communities and the higher learning institutions (Ratten, 2017; Siegel and Wright, 2015). Thus, there is a growing interest in understanding the role of accounting in social work education models (Bebbington et al., 2007a). This partly stems from the emphasis across higher learning institution academics to link accounting knowledge with the objective “to live in a world which has an ecological balance capable of sustaining the lives of all its inhabitants at reasonable levels of comfort” (Unerman et al., 2010, p. 20). While it is challenging to see how accounting knowledge meets the claim experimentally, many consider the statement increasingly equated with a considerable increase in concern for the issues of ecology and sustainability in accounting literature.

The following section informs the scope of ecological balance and sustainability. It deals with what constitutes accounting knowledge to that of the ecological balance and sustainability. It employs a dialogical approach (Thomson and Bebbington, 2005; Unerman et al., 2010) to promote the notions of participation, inclusion and engagement at different levels of accounting knowledge that inform ecological balance and sustainability. Through dialogue, the higher learning institutions–marginalized groups’ relationship, which is the focus of the study, is established. The following section details the case study by the author, who is a coordinator for the UPM (Universiti Putra Malaysia)-YSBC (Yunus Social Business Centre). The UPM-YSBC was registered in 2017 under the Social Business Centre initiated by Nobel Peace Laureate Muhammad Yunus in 2011 to help marginalized groups identified as having poverty, unemployment and carbon emission intensity (Yunus, 2017). The discussed three projects are scheduled for the 2018–2021 academic years. The following section details the analyses of the projects and concludes with a proposal for a new platform for accounting and social work education engagement in the UPM-YSBC projects which are in line with the poverty (SDG1), decent work and economic growth (SDG8) and sustainable cities (SDG11) goals. University involvement in SDG (Sustainable Development Goal) initiatives enhances SDG17 and becomes part of participatory governance and effective stakeholder engagement.

University participatory governance

In Malaysia, universities are reforming to make sense of the longer-term purposes of universities with identity, integrity and innovation. In addition, the reform is to enhance the marketability, preparation and skills of university students for the working world. The stimulus for reforming the universities came when the university participatory governance model called “Two University Two Industry” (2U2I) was announced in 2017 by the Ministry of Higher Education (Mei Lin, 2017).

With this 2U2I governance model, the Malaysian government seeks to explore the potential for a more “intelligent” and compassionate form of students grounded in the conscious acknowledgement of the Industrial Revolution 4.0 (Bernama, 2018). Industrial Revolution 4.0 is used for more active oversight and greater accountability from the university and industry and more efficient university participatory governance model processes. The direction of Industrial Revolution 4.0 has been fairly consistent with ecology and sustainability roles. According to Prime Minister, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, “a total of RM15 billion will be invested for ten years for the implementation of 5G nationwide” (Theedgemarkets, 2021) The 5G technology, added the Prime Minister, promises not only better and faster internet access, “but more importantly, also enables various important applications to be in the hands of end-users, including health monitoring applications for chronic patients, smart emergency assistance, and special applications for senior citizens who are living alone” (ibid). Such a perspective is particularly relevant within the participatory settings that ecology and sustainable development proponents seek to foster.

University and industry might reasonably have hoped that the Industrial Revolution 4.0 would provide a developed and coherent framework into which their 2U2I governance model could be easily integrated. For a while, the 2U2I model has caused the university and the industry to move away from technocratic decision-making towards more dialogical approaches to decision-modelling and analysis. Of equal concern is the extent to which a discipline taught at university could be used to capture the values of resources used with a better ecological orientation but no negative sustainability effects.

To date, accounting knowledge is seen as a discipline that receives a quite substantial recognition for its contributions in sustainable development decision-making and evaluations (see for example, Bebbington and Larrinaga, 2014). According to Bebbington et al. (2007b), accounting encourages debate and helps participants in a perfunctory level to engage in various tools and techniques of disclosures such as full cost and triple bottom line reporting. Of the various accounting techniques that have attempted to better expose social, environmental and economic externalities, it is argued that a distinction in conception of accounting in a dialogical form to capture “who”, “why” and “how” questions is primarily important. This is especially relevant for the 2U2I university participatory governance model that this chapter refers.

Social work education and dialogical accounting

The efficacy of social work education as an advocate of strategic policy relies upon how it is used and the systems it supports or challenges. Thus, we can only be convinced that social work education is effective if, as a result, social problems are successfully reduced. Accounting has long been viewed as an enabling vehicle for organizational change. According to Grint (1994), organizational change is always associated with “closing the distance”, “the development of the reward system”, “the overturning of employee focus” and “a move from simple tasks to multidimensional work”. By enabling these changes, accounting has the revolutionary potential to mitigate various social problems in organizations.

Some of the theoretical issues that have dominated social problems are ecological balance and sustainability attention. Gray (2006) views ecological balance, as defined through the practice of accounting, as typically committed to stand against capitalism which is viewed as the source of poverty, unemployment, exploitation of the marginalized and imbalanced distribution of resources (Yunus, 2005; 2017). Ecological balance in the practice of accounting can be realized when all corporations fully and enthusiastically embrace the sustainability of the planet (cf. Gray, 2006; Unerman et al., 2010).

Table 1.1 illustrates the relationship between accounting knowledge, ecological balance and the anticipation of future sustainability. The first column contains a dialogic accounting approach in the form of questions to provide a basis from which ecological balance can be inspired and an evaluation of sustainability may be undertaken. The second and the third columns contain the direction of accounting because of the dialogical engagements queried in the first column. It focuses on ecological balance and sustainability characteristics beyond traditional agency or contractual relationships.

Table 1.1 Accounting knowledge, ecological balance and sustainability

Levels of accounting knowledge	Ecological balance	Sustainability
Who?	to bridge the “social problem” gap of marginalized groups	to equip marginalized groups with social businesses
Why?	to nudge public and third sector organizations towards helping marginalized groups meet ecological balance	to link ecological balance with the objective of generating economic growth, through increasing competitiveness and improving the population’s quality of life
How?	to encourage the ecological balance values that underpin the organization and their activities, to be in tune with the anxieties of marginalized groups	to understand how far the community is from a sustainable state by increasing project visibility to proactively manage resources

As seen in Table 1.1, accounting knowledge is conceived in the first place to generate awareness about social responsibility towards marginalized groups. It is a “who” concern to which critically orientated accounting knowledge can be directed. Accounting in this stage is used to recognize the people whose current conditions are largely ignored by the community who remain under-educated about their state. Secondly, accounting knowledge may pressurize public and third sector organizations into helping marginalized groups. The “why” approach is critical to justify the use of the types of accounting knowledge that can produce the sort of economic growth and quality of life the marginalized groups currently seek out. Finally, the relationship between public and third sector organizations and marginalized groups can be facilitated by...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half-Title
• Series
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• List of figures
• List of tables
• List of contributors
• Preface
• Introduction: Governance issues towards achieving SDGs in Southeast Asia
• 1 University participatory governance towards ‘a world of three zeros’ (Goals 1, 8 & 11)
• 2 Effective monitoring of asnaf entrepreneurship through good governance to reduce poverty and hunger (Goals 1 & 2)
• 3 Prioritising the Right to Health amid COVID-19 through the principle of autonomy (Goal 3)
• 4 Good governance and sustainable development as the future paradigm of legal education: A perspective on developing countries (Goal 4)
• 5 Managing gender equality using the dimensions of Hofstede’s National Culture and Denison’s Organisational Culture (Goals 5 & 10)
• 6 Strengthening river basin governance through Green Courts towards ensuring water security (Goal 6)
• 7 Governance interventions in providing affordable, reliable, sustainable, and modern energy in the ASEAN region (Goal 7)
• 8 Inclusivity of people with disabilities in employment: Review on the policy and regulatory framework (Goals 8 & 10)
• 9 The role of cybersecurity law for sustainability of innovative smart homes (Goal 9)
• 10 Inclusive development and equitable society: Multidimensional vulnerability of B40 households and intervention (Goal 10)
• 11 Protecting purchasers’ rights in abandoned housing projects (Goal 11)
• 12 Economic growth of halal industry: Enhancing governance and halal legal framework in the ASEAN (Goal 12)
• 13 Strategies for a low carbon island towards climate change adaptation and mitigation (Goal 13)
• 14 Saving the Ramsar sites: Tackling marine pollution in the Straits of Malacca (Goal 14)
• 15 Security of indigenous peoples’ land amidst development (Goal 15)
• 16 Peace in ASEAN: Counter-narrative strategies against the ideologies of radicalism and extremism (Goal 16)
• 17 Partnership towards mainstreaming SDGS: The need for cooperative and adaptive federalism (GOAL 17)
• 18 Governance of SDGs: Solving the wicked problem
• 19 Good governance in advancing SDGs: Way forward for the ASEAN countries
• Index