Suchergebnisse

So far, the impact of local governing practices on the likelihood that municipalities will reap the potential fruits of contracting out has only received scant attention. To fill this gap, this article explores the governing practices of local municipalities in order to determine whether or not they match the forms of governance, organization and management that are generally assumed to be conducive to obtaining the desired results of contracting out. Based on a systematic literature review and an explorative empirical case study, we propose a number of conjectures about what seems to work in terms of ensuring positive outcomes from contracting out. The conjectures are compared with the results of a nation-wide survey designed to assess whether or not local municipalities in Denmark are doing what they are supposed to be doing. The empirical analysis shows room for improvement, prompting a discussion of the future prospects for governing contracting out through particular forms of governance, organization and management.

Initially, governance networks were intended as tools for making public governance more effective. Yet, scholars have argued that governance networks also have the potential to democratize public governance. This article provides an overview of theoretical arguments pertaining to the democratizing impact of governance networks. It claims that the initial celebration of the pluralization of public governance and the subsequent call for a democratic anchorage of governance networks should give way to a new concern for how governance networks can strengthen and democratize political leadership. Tying political leadership to networked processes of collaborative governance fosters 'interactive political leadership'. The article presents theoretical arguments in support of interactive political leadership, and provides an illustrative case study of a recent attempt to strengthen political leadership through the systematic involvement of elected politicians in local governance networks. The article concludes by reflecting on how interactive political leadership could transform our thinking about democracy.

The governance paradigm has been travelling a bumpy road from an enfant terrible that challenged conventional ideas about how think of the way that society and the economy is governed to a relatively mature paradigm with distinctive theories and methods and empirical studies of scope conditions and causal impact of interactive forms of governance. This article reconsiders and seeks to clarify the conceptual confusion about how to define the concept of governance. It also highlights some of the recent achievements of governance research and points to new and emerging developments that aims to further consolidate the governance paradigm. The new items on the research agenda are briefly illustrated with an empirical example. ; The governance paradigm has been travelling a bumpy road from an enfant terrible that challenged conventional ideas about how think of the way that society and the economy is governed to a relatively mature paradigm with distinctive theories and methods and empirical studies of scope conditions and causal impact of interactive forms of governance. This article reconsiders and seeks to clarify the conceptual confusion about how to define the concept of governance. It also highlights some of the recent achievements of governance research and points to new and emerging developments that aims to further consolidate the governance paradigm. The new items on the research agenda are briefly illustrated with an empirical example.

Citizen engagement is a key component of modern liberal democracy, especially at the local level, it is an important tool for generating political input, securing political support, mobilizing societal resources and finding creative solutions to the problems and challenges that governments face. Currently, we are witnessing an interesting shift in citizen engagement towards viewing citizens as co-creators of local governance, thus recognizing that citizens have both knowledge and resources that may help tackling wicked and unruly problems. Local governments increasingly focus on the design of co-creation processes and search for ways to support and enhance this new form of citizen engagement. To explore how processes of co-creation unfold at the level of local government, this article analyzes and compares a Danish and Dutch case of co-creation with local citizens. The comparative case study identifies the different reasons for initiating co-creation. It analyses the processes and outcomes of co-creation and reflects on the role of institutional design and leadership. The conclusion is that co-creation can be a viable strategy in very different situations if supported by the right design and leadership.

Citizen engagement is a key component of modern liberal democracy, especially at the local level, it is an important tool for generating political input, securing political support, mobilizing societal resources and finding creative solutions to the problems and challenges that governments face. Currently, we are witnessing an interesting shift in citizen engagement towards viewing citizens as co-creators of local governance, thus recognizing that citizens have both knowledge and resources that may help tackling wicked and unruly problems. Local governments increasingly focus on the design of co-creation processes and search for ways to support and enhance this new form of citizen engagement. To explore how processes of co-creation unfold at the level of local government, this article analyzes and compares a Danish and Dutch case of co-creation with local citizens. The comparative case study identifies the different reasons for initiating co-creation. It analyses the processes and outcomes of co-creation and reflects on the role of institutional design and leadership. The conclusion is that co-creation can be a viable strategy in very different situations if supported by the right design and leadership.

This article explores how political leadership and policy innovation can be enhanced through collaborative governance. The main findings are that while wicked and unruly problems create an urgent need for policy innovation, politicians are badly positioned to initiate, drive and lead this innovation. They are either locked into a dependency on policy advice from senior civil servants or locked out of more inclusive policy networks. In either case, they are insulated from fresh ideas and ultimately reduced to 'policy-takers' with limited engagement in policy innovation. Collaborative policy innovation offers a solution to these limitations.

Western liberal governments increasingly seek to improve the performance of the public sector by spurring innovation. New Public Management reforms from the 1980s onward viewed strategic entrepreneurial leadership and public–private competition as key drivers of public innovation. By contrast, the current wave of New Public Governance reforms perceives collaboration between relevant and affected actors from the public and private sector as the primary vehicle of public innovation, and tends to see governance networks as potential arenas for collaborative innovation. The new focus on collaborative innovation in networks poses a fundamental challenge for public managers, elected politicians, and others aiming to metagovern governance networks. Hence, we claim that a specific metagovernance strategy is needed when the purpose of governance networks is to stimulate efficiency, effectiveness, and democratic legitimacy through innovation rather than incremental improvements. The article aims to sketch out the contours of such a strategy by comparing it with more traditional metagovernance strategies. The argument is illustrated by an empirical analysis of an example of collaborative innovation in Danish elderly care.

Efforts are intensifying to spur innovation in the public sector, and multiactor collaboration seems to offer a viable strategy for doing so. However, though government actors are relatively keen to involve citizens and civil society actors in the design and implementation of innovative solutions, co-initiation of public innovation is rare. As a result, local governments often fail to tap into the experiences, ideas, and resources of civic actors when identifying and defining problems and challenges that call for innovative solutions. To explore the conditions, process, and impact of co-initiated public innovations in urban spaces, this article analyzes three Danish cases of co-initiation. The empirical cases are described and compared to identify the conditions of co-initiation, describe the different phases in the collaborative process, and assess the various impacts. The article also reflects on the role of institutional design and leadership in facilitating co-initiation of collaborative innovation.

Western liberal governments increasingly seek to improve the performance of the public sector by spurring innovation. New Public Management reforms from the 1980s onward viewed strategic entrepreneurial leadership and public–private competition as key drivers of public innovation. By contrast, the current wave of New Public Governance reforms perceives collaboration between relevant and affected actors from the public and private sector as the primary vehicle of public innovation, and tends to see governance networks as potential arenas for collaborative innovation. The new focus on collaborative innovation in networks poses a fundamental challenge for public managers, elected politicians, and others aiming to metagovern governance networks. Hence, we claim that a specific metagovernance strategy is needed when the purpose of governance networks is to stimulate efficiency, effectiveness, and democratic legitimacy through innovation rather than incremental improvements. The article aims to sketch out the contours of such a strategy by comparing it with more traditional metagovernance strategies. The argument is illustrated by an empirical analysis of an example of collaborative innovation in Danish elderly care.

In the Scandinavian countries, the regional level of governance is neither the locus of large-scale policy reforms nor a significant provider of welfare to citizens. Nevertheless, it has some important policy tasks in the area of environmental, economic, and social sustainability. These policy areas are rife with wicked and unruly problems that combine cognitive uncertainties with the risk of political conflict and stalemate. Dealing with these problems requires the construction of network arenas in which a range of public and private actors can collaborate in order to find innovative solutions to common problems. The paper analyses the efforts of Norwegian regions to enhance collaborative innovation through the formation of interactive governance arenas. It compares three different policy areas in order to better understand how different forms of interactive governance enhance collaborative innovation for economic, social and environmental sustainability. The ultimate goal is to assess the ability and potential of Norwegian regions to solve wicked and unruly problems through collaborative innovation.