Vivien Lowndes

The Dynamics of Multi-organizational Partnerships: an Analysis of Changing Modes of Governance

Multi-organizational partnerships are now an important means of governing and managing public programmes. They typically involve business, community and not-for-profit agencies alongside government bodies. Partnerships are frequently contrasted with competitive markets and bureaucratic hierarchies. A more complex reality is revealed once partnerships as an organizational form are distinguished from networks as a mode of social co-ordination or governance. Data from studies of UK urban regeneration partnerships are used to develop a four-stage partnership life cycle: pre-partnership collaboration; partnership creation; partnership programme delivery; and partnership termination. A different mode of governance - network, market or hierarchy - predominates at each stage. Separating organizational form from mode of governance enables a richer understanding of multi-organizational activity and provides the basis from which theory and practice can be developed. The key challenge for partnerships lies in managing the interaction of different modes of governance, which at some points will generate competition and at other points collaboration.

Local Governance under the Coalition Government: Austerity, Localism and the ‘Big Society’

Abstract The Coalition between the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, formally created on 11th May 2010, has introduced a range of initiatives which affect local governance, from the announcement of a new Localism Bill through to the abolition of the Audit Commission and the arrival of the ‘Big Society’ agenda. This article reviews the key policy announcements of the Coalitions first year and analyses the underlying themes and trends which are emerging. It argues that the Coalitions reforms do show traces of an ideological commitment to localism and a new understanding of local self-government; there is an ideological agenda which has the potential to deliver a radically different form of local governance. However, the reform process is far from coherent and the potential for radical change is heavily constrained by: conflicts in Conservative thinking and the failure of the Liberal Democrats to assert their own ideology; the political expediency of budget cuts during an era of austerity and; the problems of implementing an apparently radical agenda after 13 years of New Labour.

Social Capital and Local Governance: Exploring the Institutional Design Variable

This article argues that Robert Putnams social capital thesis is too society-centred and undervalues state agency and associated political factors. It explores the role of institutional design in explaining how governments can shape the development of social capital and its potential influence upon democratic performance. New Labours programme of ‘democratic renewal’ within British local government provides an excellent opportunity to assess the relevance of institutional design to arguments about social capital and democracy. We propose that prospects for the creation and mobilization of social capital may depend as much upon the process as the content of institutional design.

Like a Horse and Carriage or a Fish on a Bicycle: How Well do Local Partnerships and Public Participation go Together?

Partnership and participation have co-evolved as key instruments of New Labours agenda for the ‘modernisation’ and ‘democratic renewal‘ of British local government. It is often assumed that partnerships are more inclusive than bureaucratic or market-based approaches to policy-making and service delivery. This article argues that partnership working does not in itself deliver enhanced public participation; indeed, it may be particularly difficult to secure citizen involvement in a partnership context. The article explores the relationship between partnership and participation in a wide range of local initiatives, exemplifying difficulties as well as synergies. The article concludes that public participation needs to be designed-in to local partnerships, not assumed-in. A series of principles for the design of more participative local partnerships is proposed.

SOMETHING OLD, SOMETHING NEW, SOMETHING BORROWED …

Local governance is conceptualised as an ‘institutional matrix’, comprising distinct (but interacting) rule-sets, in which forces for change and continuity coexist. Different rule-sets change at different rates and in different directions, reflecting power relationships and the ‘embeddedness’ of local governance in specific historical and spatial contexts. In England, inertia and innovation have characterised, respectively, the political and managerial domains of local governance. But it is clear that creative spaces also exist between the extremes of institutional stability and volatility. Institutional entrepreneurs exploit ambiguities in the ‘rules of the game’ in order to respond to changing environments, and to protect (or further) their own interests. Local government actors expand and recombine their institutional repertoires through strategies of ‘remembering’, ‘borrowing’ and ‘sharing’. In so doing they create a contingent and context-dependent process of institutional emergence.

Getting On or Getting By? Women, Social Capital and Political Participation

This article considers the utility of the concept of social capital in explaining differences in patterns of political participation among women and men, with particular reference to local politics and governance in Britain. It investigates whether women have access to the same quantity of social capital as men, whether their social capital is of the same type, and whether they use their social capital in the same way as men. Taking forward the ‘capital’ analogy, the article looks at how rich women are, and the extent to which they invest their social capital in political activity. As well as providing new insights into womens political behaviour, the analysis illuminates key issues for the broader social capital debate—regarding the distribution of social capital within communities, and the nature of the link between networks of sociability and patterns of political engagement.

Balancing revisability and robustness? A new institutionalist perspective on local government modernization

This article focuses upon one particular aspect of new institutionalist thinking – that which analyses the scope for, and constraints upon, deliberate interventions in institutional change. New institutionalist insights are used to illuminate the challenges faced by the British Labour government in its programme for modernizing local government. The focus is upon two core concepts: robustness and revisability – a pairing which highlights the potential contradictions that exist within the new institutionalist approach to design. It is argued that New Labour struggled to achieve a balance between these key design criteria during its first term, with revisability increasingly sacrificed in favour of robustness. In its second term in office (since June 2001), Labour has sought to rebalance robustness and revisability, largely through the principle of ‘earned autonomy’. In this context the values informing the institutional redesign of local government have become less clear and more contested, and there has been a progressive shift from commitment-based to control-based strategies for change.

Diagnosing and remedying the failings of official participation schemes: the CLEAR framework

Drawing on extensive research, the article proposes a diagnostic tool for assessing official schemes to encourage participation and discusses remedial measures that might be taken to tackle problems. According to the CLEAR framework, people participate when they can: when they have the resources necessary to make their argument. People participate when they feel part of something: they like to participate because it is central to their sense of identity. They participate when they are enabled to do so by an infrastructure of civic networks and organisations. People participate when they are directly asked for their opinion. Finally, people participate when they experience the system they are seeking to influence as responsive.

Policy Networks and Governance Networks: Towards Greater Conceptual Clarity

Networks are central to both the practice and understanding of contemporary governance. But there is a tendency to conflate and confuse different concepts. Concepts of ‘policy network’ (PN) and ‘governance network’ (GN) are often used interchangeably, with an assumption that the latter has evolved from the former. Such indiscriminate borrowing fails to recognise the different antecedents, and distinctive analytical offer, of specific network theories. The article develops a systematic distinction between PN and GN theories, enabling those engaging with networks to select from, and even combine, alternative perspectives as they confront a new wave of change in policy making and governance. The more sceptical account provided by PN theory provides a valuable counterbalance to the ‘optimistic’ character of the GN literature, which tends to underestimate the continued hold of (albeit multi-sector) elites on policy making, and overstate the extent to which networks represent a new ‘stage’ in the evolution of governance.

Religion, Resources, and Representation Three Narratives of Faith Engagement in British Urban Governance

Faith groups are increasingly regarded as important civil society participants in British urban governance. Faith engagement is linked to policies of social inclusion and “community cohesion,” particularly in the context of government concerns about radicalization along religious lines. Primary research is drawn upon in developing a critical and explicitly multifaith analysis of faith involvement. A narrative approach is used to contrast the different perspectives of national policy makers, local stakeholders, and faith actors themselves. The narratives serve to illuminate not only this specific case but also the more general character of British urban governance as it takes on a more “decentered” form with greater blurring of boundaries between the public, private, and personal.