Gro Sandkjær Hanssen

Multi-level coordination of climate change adaptation: by national hierarchical steering or by regional network governance?

The institutional structure and public service delivery apparatus required to meet the future effects of climate change already exist in Norway. However, there are huge challenges in coordinating these institutions at different authority levels for climate change adaptation purposes. Based upon a broad case study, this article presents how local actors consider the multi-level coordination of different levels of government and policy sectors to function today, which are the mechanisms that are used and what are the coordination challenges that are identified. Based upon the challenges revealed, this article discusses how best can the government-level institutions be organised for better goal attainment. We argue here that the elected regional level in Norway – the counties – has a huge potential to act as a multi-level coordination actor.

Challenges to Democracy in Market-Oriented Urban Planning in Norway

Neo-liberal ideas have resulted in a planning practice characterized by an informal phase in which early agreements are reached in closed negotiations between municipal planners and private developers. This challenges norms of legitimacy and accountability found in traditional democratic theories, as well as deliberative planning and network governance theories. Input-based legitimacy may be weakened by the lack of participation as well as by asymmetry in resources available for participation (voice). The representative democracys (vote) responsiveness to the electorate may be weakened due to the lack of knowledge of the views of those affected, early lock-in to agreements and weak meta-governance due to the lack of adherence to overall plans. Throughput legitimacy is reduced by the lack of transparency, and thus accountability, in the informal phase. Output legitimacy might justify the privileged position of developers if tangible results are achieved. However, lack of participation weakens the quality and long-term lastingness of decisions, and lack of deliberation weakens the acceptability of justifications for those burdened by the decisions. We argue that two different types of reforms are necessary to increase the input legitimacy of planning practices: representative democracy reforms that strengthen the role of politicians and reforms that strengthen the direct participation of stakeholders in planning.

Meta-Governance of Regional Governance Networks in Nordic Countries

Abstract The article examines the character of political control in the meta-governance of Nordic regional governance networks, and asks to which degree the different meta-governance strategies ensure democratic legitimacy. We draw upon a unique comparative survey targeting regional network participants in four Nordic countries, enabling us to have a comparative approach. We find variations in how the meta-governance strategy of participation by regional politicians is used, and to what extent the networks are embedded in the local political level. The Danish networks are the ones having a clear bottom-up character, being deeply embedded in the local level. In contrast, the networks in the other countries are to a considerable extent meta-governed by national government, by hands-off strategies – designing and framing, as well as hands-on strategies; process management and participating in the networks. However, in all countries the networks seem to be legitimated by the participation and control by regional and local politicians, and to a lesser degree by the national level. We nevertheless find variation, and the general legitimacy of the networks seems to be lower in Sweden than in other countries.

Ensuring Local Community Interests in Market-Oriented Urban Planning? The Role of Local Politicians

In this paper I discuss the role of local politicians in representing, mediating, and balancing growth interests and local community interests in Norway, a country that has introduced market-oriented reforms in urban planning, giving private developers a prominent role. On the basis of a broad survey and qualitative case studies I found that local community actors predominantly confront local politicians, not planners or developers, to have their voices heard. Local community actors have few institutionalized arenas for their voices in the early phases, as mandatory involvement (public hearings, complaints) is to be found only in later phases. Thus, the arenas are predominantly accommodating ‘passive participation’, the opportunity to react and protest only on already formulated proposals. Local politicians have an important role in channelling citizen input into decision making, even if the contact is mostly informal. Developers are given the proactive, constructive role, as almost all municipalities studied have institutionalized arenas for interaction between planners and developers.

Regional Foresight, Modes of Governance and Democracy

The aim of this article is to discuss democratic potentials and pitfalls inherent in the use of Foresight methodologies, especially on the regional level. Foresight is used on the regional level as a tool for developing common visions about the future, strengthening the cohesion between regional actors and enabling coordinated action towards common goals. Based on broad participation, foresight represents a departure from expert-based scenario building and planning. The emphasis on building common goals and achieving coordinated action makes it feasible to conceptualize foresight processes as instances of governance. Based on a discussion on generalized modes of governance, a contention is made to the effect that foresight processes most closely resemble network governance as a general mode. With this point of departure, the paper uses arguments from the debate on democratic network governance to substantiate the discussion on the democratic aspects of foresight.

Multi-level governance of regional economic development in Norway and Sweden: too much or too little top-down control?

Regional level has been identified as the key institutional level for economic development policies. However, in Norway and Sweden regional economic development as a policy field is to a limited extent placed under the control of directly elected regional parliaments, whereas the most important instruments for stimulating regional economic development and innovation are controlled by national government and regional state offices. In this article we discuss the theoretical and normative arguments for centralizing or decentralizing instruments for enhancing regional economic development and the implications of the fact that strong instruments for enhancing regional economic development are controlled by national government in these countries.

Handling the Two Conflicting Discourses of Partnerships and Participation in Regional Planning

Abstract This article argues that regional planning is dominated by two conflicting discourses that have different principles of involvement: the discourse of partnerships and the discourse of broad participation. These discourses and principles are not easy to reconcile in practice. On the basis of studies in the literature and a comprehensive case study, this article discusses how these conflicting discourses in regional planning challenge democratic norms, and how this problem is dealt with by the regional political leadership. The article shows that the use of meta-governance strategies and broad arenas of participation might be used in this respect, for example, by constantly having a focus on maintaining democratic anchorage when partnerships are used in regional planning processes.

Multi‐level governance in Norway: universalism in elderly and mental health care services

Purpose – Based on a case study of Norway, the purpose of this paper is twofold: to present recent trends in the development of the multi‐level governance of the care services for the elderly and people with mental illness towards what we call the cooperative turn; and to discuss the implications of this trend for universalism in service provision.Design/methodology/approach – The paper is a study of documents and the recent research literature.Findings – A shift towards the cooperative turn can be identified as a change from command‐and‐control instruments to soft regulation mechanisms. Regulations and economic means are increasingly complemented by informational means. Soft versions of the steering instruments are used to target the results and processes of local policies. Hard instruments do not disappear, and a mixture of all the abovementioned instruments governs the two policy fields. This has implications for universalism defined as territorial uniformity, accessibility and coverage as user groups ...

Cognitive Closure in Urban Planning

Communicative planning literature has for a number of years discussed how to prevent social closure and how to improve access to planning processes for all parties interested in urban planning. The norms and measures discussed have to some degree been institutionalized into planning laws and been implemented in professional practice. In this article we examine how cognitive closure mechanisms work parallel with social and economic closure mechanisms, often reinforcing them, in three Norwegian cities. The article also discusses the democratic implications of these cognitive closure mechanisms, related to representation, inclusion, and accountability.

Market-Oriented Urban Planning – Constraining Citizen Participation

Abstract Urban planning in Norway can be characterised as market oriented, with responsibilities for the formulation of planning largely delegated to private developers. Even though the principle of citizen participation has a strong and longstanding tradition in Norway, the market-oriented practices challenge the ability of citizens to influence their spatial surroundings. Based on broad surveys and qualitative case studies, this article maps the attitudes of developers, councillors and planners towards citizen participation and studies the strategies of local community associations. Our analysis shows that developers value citizen participation to a much lesser degree than councillors and planners, which can explain the lack of participatory channels in early phases. Official avenues for participation occur later, primarily through hearings. Local associations find this to be too late, characterising urban planning as a path dependent process; as a consequence, local associations attempt to influence planning processes in a more informal way by contacting councillors directly.