Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Collaborative governance is a way of conducting policies whereby a government involves its citizens, social organizations, enterprises, and other stakeholders in the early stages of the policy-making process. The contrast with more traditional public policy procedures is that parties are truly involved in the development of policy proposals, while in classic opportunities of public comment, citizen and interest group involvement only occurred once the policy proposal had been developed. Interactive decision making is a policy practice in which the involved actors try to reach a cooperative solution with broad consensus about the treatment of the issue at stake. Collaborative governance can be seen as a means of achieving more acceptable, rich, and resilient decisions and encourages a flexible decision-making process more open to divergent viewpoints and stakeholder involvement. Moreover, it is seen as a new style of governing, in which politicians, public managers, and public administrators have to adopt new ways of doing things, which can involve new roles, new procedures, and new institutions.

Background

Collaborative governance fits in the shift from “government” to “governance,” from hierarchical and well-institutionalized forms of government toward less-formalized, bottom-up forms of governance in which state-authority makes way for an appreciation of mutual interdependence with different stakeholders. Public authorities recognize this interdependence more and more as a basic governing principle in a continuous process of negotiating. Stakeholders are approached as knowledgeable actors in the policy-making process.

Collaborative governance takes place in different forms. An important type is the so-called collaborative dialogue. Collaborative governance practices are a reaction on traditional planning and policy-making approaches that are primarily top-down oriented, focusing on the government instead of the governed, mainly technocratically oriented and adversarially organized. Collaborative governance is used to realize collective decision making that builds on a solid basis of trust and consensus, enhances governmental legitimacy, and makes efficient use of the dispersed resources of the different stakeholders. By doing so, reaching effective policy solutions can be realized far more easily than in traditional governmental ways.

Potential Benefits

Collaborative decision making tries to provide a solution for a number of existing problems in complex decision-making processes, which are as follows:

  • Acceleration of the policy process: By involving all kinds of actors at an early stage, it is hoped that the use of veto power will decrease and support for decisions will increase.
  • More flexible policies better suited to changed circumstances: By involving more actors in the decision-making process, more and various aspects of the problem can be included in the search for solutions, and problem formulation becomes more flexible.
  • Enrichment of solutions: Because not only different perspectives on and ideas about problems and solutions are let loose in the process, but also multiple types of knowledge, information, skill, and experience are employed, a better analysis of the problem area is possible, and better solutions can be created. Collaborative governance offers the potential to utilize the creativity and experience expertise of those involved in order to address issues on a broader, and possibly more innovative, way.
  • Enhancing democratic legitimacy: Collaborative governance is often referred to as the solution to restore the bad relationship between citizens and decision makers. When the citizen can identify with the policy products of government, the expectation is that they will be more satisfied with government and politics, restoring and developing trust in government. Moreover, by involving more stakeholders, decision making acquires a less-closed character and more democratic legitimacy.

Criticism

Collaborative governance is not without problems. Its critics mention diverse shortcomings of the practice of collaborative governance, of which the following are mentioned the most. First, processes of collaborative governance have high transaction costs and take time and energy because processes get complex (many different actors) and difficult to manage. Second, there is the problem of biases in the representation of interests. Well-informed and organized interest groups are better equipped to participate in these processes than “weak actors,” like unorganized citizens. Sometimes in collaborative governance, policy development leads to the concentration of power in the hands of those who oppose development, shout the loudest, and have the time to campaign. Third, traditional administrative procedures and practices are not suitable to facilitate collaborative governance practices. Collaborative processes are driven out by the traditional ways of doing things. Fourth, there is the problem of venue shopping. In practice, actors don't want to commit themselves exclusively to one collaborative process. When they think they can realize their ambitions via another way (the court or the representative democracy), collaborative processes often fail to enforce commitment. Fifth, the democratic anchorage of collaborative governance practices is often missing. Collaborative governance can be seen as a form of participatory democracy, which oftentimes runs parallel to existing representative forms of democracy. This missing link has the danger that outcomes from the collaborative governance process vanish in the changeover to formal decision-making procedures.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading