Answer

Impact of Parliamentarism on Human Development

In the article entitled “Are Parliamentary Systems Better?” by John Gerring, Carola Moreno, and Strom Thacker, one of the major issues that the authors examine is the impact of parliamentarism on the quality of human development. One of the major findings of the author is that parliamentarism result into higher human development levels. The outcomes of the study show that, other factors held constant, longtime parliamentary systems are associated with longer life expectancy and lower infant mortality levels. The authors reinforce the authenticity of their findings by stating, “…results are robust across various specifications and highly significant (349).

Human development is measured in relation to the aspects of life expectancy and infant mortality rates. When examined within the context of human development, the parliamentary system happens to be a significant contributor to the realization of higher levels of human advancement or development. Countries with longtime employment of parliamentary system are associated with lower infant mortality rates, as well as longer life expectancy. As such, Gerring et al. (2009) conclude that parliamentary system of governance bears a positive relationship with human development.

The finding by Gerring et al. that parliamentarism results into higher humans development levels is interesting in the sense that it highlights the significance of governance in the realization of human development. Human development is accomplished partly when there are adequate health care infrastructure and amenities, as well as personnel, who can guarantee quality health care service to a nation’s population. The outcomes of such a state are often manifested in prolonged life and limited infant deaths among countries’ populations. In my view, I concur with the findings of Gerring et al concerning the positive association between human development and parliamentarism. In parliamentary system, the executive, which comprises the cabinet and prime minister collectively known as the government, is selected by and accountable to an elective body, which is the legislature. Therefore, this government system bears a single sovereignty locus at the national or nationwide level. Parliamentary system ensures a sense of accountability considering that the government is accountable to the legislature, which comprises representatives elected by the electorates. Members of the legislature present the interests and needs of their electorate including those for healthcare facilities, and educational facilities, which are covered under human development index. These needs are often presented to the national government through the legislature, and the government representatives, who are the cabinet members, in charge of various health and education sectors, departments, or ministries are made accountable to the legislature. Thus, the accountability of the government to the legislature, whose members represent the electorates at the grass-root level, ensures that social amenities such as schools and healthcare facilities are established in different parts of the nation and equipped with the necessary personnel. As a result, individuals access quality health care and education, which is essential for preventing issues associated with infant and adult morality rates. It is also vital to note that the accountability of the government to the legislature enhances transparency when it comes to budgetary allocation and spending on health and educations, which are the key sectors determining human development.

In conclusion, one of the outcomes of Gerring et al. in their article entitled, “Are Parliamentary Systems Better?” is that parliamentarism and human development bear a positive relationship. The authors’ findings reveal that parliamentarism results into higher human development levels manifested in the form of prolonged life expectancy and reduced infant mortality rates. I agree with this finding based on the reasons discussed in the paper.