Page 221 - UKZN Proceedings of the Conference Report

traditional hierarchical concepts of power to a more nuanced perspective incorporating multiple governance types. Peeters (2019) states that it emphasises power that is both oppressive and constructive, influencing individual behaviour and societal norms through strategies and practices. This interpretation allows for a larger understanding of how authority functions in modern cultures, expanding beyond the state to encompass non- state actors and civil society. Peeters (2019) contends that governmentality emphasises the importance of individuals in self-government, demonstrating how people internalise norms and practices that shape their behaviour. This notion introduces the idea of self-governance, in which people deliberately shape their behaviour by societal norms and standards.
The theory of governmentality presented in Foucault’s lectures at the Collège de France, provides a comprehensive explanation of power dynamics in modern societies. Brown and Baker (2012) assert that this theory sheds light on the subtle mechanisms that urge individuals to govern themselves, potentially boosting responsible citizenship and societal cohesiveness. Ezeudu and Ezekwelu (2024) point out that governmentality is beneficial because it promotes individual empowerment, increases public engagement, and facilitates successful government. However, it has received criticism for its consequences for democracy and socio-economic fairness.
One of the advantages of governmentality is its emphasis on empowerment and self-governance (Habich-Sobiegalla and Rousseau 2020). Governmentality promotes citizens’ feeling of agency by encouraging them to accept responsibility for their actions and decisions (Brown and Baker 2012). This is especially visible in neoliberal situations when people are viewed as accountable for regulating their well-being within market-driven systems. Foucault observes that this transition enables citizens to become active participants in their government, encouraging civic engagement and responsibility (Hernando-Lloréns 2020). Furthermore, governmentality acknowledges the influence of non-state actors and civil society in affecting governance processes. Governmentality emphasises that power is not simply centralised in governmental institutions, but is spread across diverse entities that contribute to public policy and societal well-being. Furthermore, governmentality promotes openness and accountability by enabling individuals to interact with government operations, resulting in a more participatory political culture.
Despite these good contributions, critics of governmentality have raised various problems. Walters (2012) has questions regarding the theory’s application outside of Western liberal democracies, challenging its
global significance. For Olssen (2018) one major criticism is its ability to erode democratic norms. Governmentality, which prioritises knowledge and competence over universal suffrage, runs the risk of concentrating political power among knowledgeable elites. This raises ethical concerns regarding representation and inclusion in governance. Estlund (2021) states that critics of the theory contend that such an approach might lead to paternalism, where those in power believe they know what is best for the people despite inadequate input from varied perspectives. As a result, policies may not represent all residents’ needs or wishes.
Furthermore, the emphasis on self-governance may unwittingly shift responsibilities away from the state and towards people, especially in situations where social safety nets are reduced (Amos 2010). This transition may worsen existing disparities since marginalised groups may lack the means or expertise required to govern themselves successfully under neoliberal frameworks. Although governmentality encourages individual autonomy, it may also exacerbate structural imbalances if not complemented by supportive institutions that provide fair access to resources and opportunities. Despite these criticisms, governmentality remains an effective instrument for comprehending the intricate interaction of power, knowledge, and subjectivity in modern governance.
Michel Foucault’s concept of governmentality encom- passes various strategies and rationalities used by gov- ernance to influence individual and collective behaviour, transcending traditional state power concepts. Tironi and Valderrama (2021) note that the power of governmen- tality is exercised via institutions, regulations, and social norms that influence how people live. It emphasises the importance of knowledge in governance, specifically how expertise and information may be leveraged to manage people efficiently. This type of power is frequently subtle and pervasive, affecting people’s decisions and behaviours without overt compulsion.
In the view of McIlvenny et al. (2016), governmentality is frequently viewed as a potent instrument used by governments to retain social control and mould citizen behaviour. Woolley and Howard (2018) highlight that governments can sway the opinions and actions of their constituents through a variety of strategies, such as media, education, and social standards. However, governmentality can also be a tool for citizen empowerment, allowing them to exercise their rights and freedoms and take part in decision-making processes.
For Stenson (2019), governmentality transforms the concept of power from a top-down, sovereign model to a more decentralised one. It emphasises that power
Proceedings of the conference on Public innovation, develoPment and sustainability | 219