Complex Power, Cultural Values, and Governance
  • Kent SchroederEmail author


This chapter synthesizes the main themes from Bhutan’s experience implementing four policies using the Gross National Happiness (GNH) governance framework. It further explores the broader insights from Bhutan’s experience for governance and human development. It argues that the fractured and contested nature of governance in the policy implementation process should undermine the achievement of GNH outcomes. Nonetheless, socially constructed cultural values often shape the governance process in a manner that successfully achieves GNH outcomes. At the same time, these values themselves are subject to change. This chapter concludes by drawing out two broader insights for governance and human development related to the complex nature of power and the potential role of cultural values in shaping complex power.


Bhutan Complex power Cultural values Gross national happiness Human development 


  1. Acemiglior, D., & Robinson, J. (2012). Why nations fail: The origins of power, prosperity, and poverty. New York: Crown Business.Google Scholar
  2. Brandsen, T., & Kim, S. (2010). Contextualizing the meaning of public management reforms: A comparison of Netherlands and South Korea. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 76(2), 367–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brinkerhoff, D., & Brinkerhoff, J. (2015). Public sector management reform in developing countries: Perspectives beyond NPM orthodoxy. Public Administration and Development, 35, 222–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Diamond, J. (1997). Guns, germs, and steel: The fates of human societies. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
  5. Easterly, W. (2006). The white man’s burden: Why the West’s efforts to aid the rest have done so much ill and so little good. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
  6. GNH Commission. (2016). Twelfth five year Plan guideline. GNH Commission. Accessed Apr 2 2017.
  7. GNH Commission/UNDP. (2011). Bhutan national human development report 2011. Thimphu: GNH Commission.Google Scholar
  8. Grindle, M. (2007). Good enough governance revisited. Development Policy Review, 25(5), 553–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Lichbach, M. I. (2009). Thinking and working in the midst of things: Discovery, explanation, and evidence in comparative politics. In M. Lichbach & A. Zuvkerman (Eds.), Comparative politics: Rationality, culture, and structure (pp. 18–71). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Peters, B. G., & Pierre, J. (2016). Comparative governance: Rediscovering the functional dimension of governing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ross, M. H. (2009). Culture in comparative political analysis. In M. Lichbach & A. Zuvkerman (Eds.), Comparative politics: Rationality, culture, and structure (pp. 134–161). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Sachs, J. (2005). The end of poverty: Economic possibilities for our time. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
  13. Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. New York: Knopf Press.Google Scholar
  14. Sen, A. (2007). Violence and identity: The illusion of destiny. New York: W.W. Norton and Company.Google Scholar
  15. Smoke, P. (2015). Managing public sector decentralization in developing countries: Moving beyond conventional recipes. Public Administration and Development, 35, 250–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ugyel, L. (2016). Paradigms and public sector reform: Public administration of Bhutan. Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  17. Ura, K. (2015). The experience of gross national happiness as development framework. (ADB South Asia Working Paper Series No. 42). Manilla: Asian Development Bank.Google Scholar
  18. Wedeen, L. (2002). Conceptualizing culture: Possibilities for political science. American Political Science Review, 96(40), 713–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Humber CollegeTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations