Exploring the Administrative Implications of Developmental Models on Good Governance in the Philippines
Abstract
This study examined the administrative implications of various developmental models on good governance in the Philippines. Grounded in the principles of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, it analyzed how modernization, neoliberal, participatory, and sustainable development frameworks shaped administrative systems and influenced governance outcomes. The modernization model emphasized bureaucratic rationalization and centralized planning to enhance institutional efficiency. In contrast, the neoliberal model promoted market liberalization, privatization, and deregulation, which increased efficiency but often conflicted with constitutional commitments to equity and social justice. The participatory model, institutionalized through the Local Government Code of 1991, advanced decentralization, citizen engagement, and collaborative governance, reflecting constitutional values of democracy and inclusiveness. Meanwhile, the sustainable development model integrates economic, social, and environmental dimensions to ensure long-term progress and ecological accountability. Findings revealed that while each model offered distinct administrative strengths, their effectiveness depended on how well governance systems translated constitutional principles—accountability, transparency, participation, efficiency, and equity—into practice. Persistent challenges such as bureaucratic inefficiency, corruption, and uneven policy implementation hindered the realization of good governance. The study concluded that effective governance emerged from harmonizing developmental frameworks with constitutional mandates and administrative realities. Sustaining inclusive progress required a flexible, participatory, and accountable bureaucracy capable of balancing efficiency with social justice. Ultimately, developmental models functioned best as complementary strategies that upheld the Filipino people’s welfare through ethical, transparent, and inclusive governance.
References
Bernas JG. The 1987 Philippine Constitution: A Reviewer-Primer. Rex Book Store, Manila.
Cruz IS, 2015, Philippine Governance and the Constitution. Central Book Supply, Quezon City.
De Leon HD, De Leon HD Jr., 2019, Textbook on the Philippine Constitution. Rex Book Store, Manila.
Brillantes AB Jr., Fernandez MT, 2011, Theory and Practice of Public Administration in the Philippines: Concerns for an Innovative Public Administration, thesis, UP National College of Public Administration and Governance.
Reyes D, 2019, Public Administration in the Philippines: The Quest for Excellence in Governance. New Day Publishers, Quezon City.
Brillantes AB Jr., 2011, Good Governance and Institutional Reform in the Philippines. University of the Philippines Press, Manila.
Babb S, 2013, The Washington Consensus as Transnational Policy Paradigm: Its Origins, Trajectory and Likely Successor. Review of International Political Economy, 20(2): 268–297.
Bello W, 2004, The Anti-Development State: The Political Economy of Permanent Crisis in the Philippines, thesis, University of the Philippines.
Blair H. Participation and Accountability at the Periphery: Democratic Local Governance in Six Countries. World Development. 2000;28(1):21–39.
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), 2015, Human Development Report 2015: Work for Human Development. UNDP, New York.
Lopez RG, 2020, Sustainable Development Governance in the Philippines: Challenges and Prospects. Philippine Journal of Public Administration, 64(1): 45–60.
Republic of the Philippines, 1991, Local Government Code of 1991 (Republic Act No. 7160). Congress of the Philippines, Manila.
United Nations, 1996, Philippine Agenda 21: A National Agenda for Sustainable Development. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Manila.
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), 2015, Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Implementation in the Philippines: Country Report. UNDP, New York.
Brillantes AB Jr., Fernandez MT, 2011, Decentralization and Governance Reform in the Philippines. Asian Review of Public Administration. 22(2): 31–55.
