Overview
Based on a systematic review of literature, Ansell and Gash (2007) discuss the issue of collaborative governance. Collaborative governance can be understood as governance executed via forums initiated by public agencies, in which stakeholders of all kinds (not only governmental agents) participate as full-fledged members, and which are aimed at reaching a consensus (even though it may not be achieved in practice) (Ansell & Gash, 2007).
Collaborative governance can be opposed to traditional governance, where state agencies and institutions make decisions using power delegated to them. The authors note that very few studies evaluate the effectiveness of collaborative governance compared to managerial or adversarial governance (Ansell & Gash, 2007, p. 549). However, it is stressed that historically, collaborative governance was employed in cases where more traditional types of governance failed, so most research evaluated “process outcomes” and not managerial or policy outcomes (Ansell & Gash, 2007). Therefore, the authors also focused on “process outcomes,” i.e. attempted to find out which factors, conditions, etc., are needed for successful collaborative governance that would satisfy those who participate in it.
Key Findings
Consequently, the authors’ main finding is the model of collaborative governance, which, in its simplified form, is constituted of four complex variables (Ansell & Gash, 2007). The main variable is the Collaborative Process. It is built upon Starting Conditions, including the basic levels of social capital, trust, and conflict; Institutional Design, defining the basic rules for the collaboration; and Facilitative Leadership, supplying the process of collaboration with mediation. The Collaborative Process includes such components as face-to-face dialogue, trust-building, commitment to the process of governance, and shared understanding of the problems; intermediate outcomes are reached within this process. The collaborative process is not a linear procedure; the authors depict it as a cycle, stressing that it is a simplification as well (Ansell & Gash, 2007).
The authors point out that collaborative governance can be time-consuming, for making a consensus requires much time, and must not be rushed; but once a consensus is reached, its implementation can often occur rapidly. Clearly, there are situations where such governance would be ineffective – e.g., in emergencies. However, collaborative governance can be a viable and effective solution that may allow for avoiding large spending on the adversarial policy-making process, increasing the level of democratic participation, and “even restor[ing] rationality to public management” (Ansell & Gash, 2007, p. 561).
Critical Remarks
The study by Ansell and Gash (2007) presents an interesting alternative to the traditional form of governance, where a large number of problems for which the governmental agencies are often notorious – e.g., poor representation of the interests of those who chose the agents of governments, corruption, serving the interests of large private corporations that offer sponsorship, disregard for the public interest, risk of power usurpation, etc. It seems that collaborative governance might be more resistant to these problems because each stakeholder represents oneself, and no voice/power is delegated. The notion appears to have something in common with the anarchist ideal of society, where no power hierarchies are present, and public governance is conducted via free cooperation and collaboration of that society’s members. A question still stands about how collaborative governance may be used for the administration of large entities, such as a state. In this respect, it is interesting that, first, anarchist ideals of a society with no hierarchies do not have a place for the state, at least as it is known today; and that, second, innovative technologies, e.g., Internet technologies, may considerably simplify the implementation of the process of collaborative governance.
Discussion Questions
- How may innovative technologies simplify the implementation of collaborative governance?
- In your opinion, can managerial or adversarial governance be completely replaced with collaborative governance? Why?
Reference
Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2007). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public and Administrative Research and Theory, 18, 543-571.