The Good Society: Lessons for Integrated Governance

Abstract

In this paper I argue that philosophies of the good society can inform theories of integrated governance in two significant ways. Firstly, they can provide a reasonable foundation for legitimating forms of authority to govern a society across the government, corporate and civil sector. Secondly, they promote value systems that can be constitutive of a normative theory of integrated governance. In developing this argument, I explore conceptions of the good society put forward by Marquis de Condorcet, Adam Smith and Karl Marx, and evaluate the modalities in which the social projects proposed by these authors involve issues of integrated governance. For this purpose, I examine the three theories in relation to three questions: (1) What goals (or objectives) should social action be directed to? (2) What should be the scope and limits of social responsibility lying behind the social authority of each sector (government, market or civil society)? (3) How is social authority to be exercised beyond legislation? What source(s) of legitimacy should one appeal to? Although Condorcet’s idea of the natural social order, Smith’s system of natural liberty and Marx’s political economy of human value have all received their fair share of criticism from empirical theories of society, I suggest that these conceptions are still useful to us today as radical normative experiments. These experiments can have guiding value in formulating models of integrated governance. However, the fundamental differences displayed by these three conceptions reveal the importance of determining whether one can develop models of integrated governance that would accommodate plural, incompatible, or unknown conceptions of the good society.