Collaborative Governance Models Research Project by mpu40073

VIEWS: 0 PAGES: 36

									                         Collaborative Governance Models
                                 Research Project

  Community
   University
  Institute for       Collaborative Governance Project - CUISR Internship
Social Research
                                   Social Economy Workshop
Saskatchewan
Association for
                              May 2, 2008, 10:00 p.m. to 10:30 p.m.
 Community
    Living               Saskatoon Indian and Metis Friendship Centre
Urban Aboriginal
                                         168 Wall Street
   Strategy

                   Summer Internship Research Project with Saskatchewan Association for
 Centre for the
   Study of         Community Living (SACL) and the Urban Aboriginal Strategy (UAS) in
 Co-operatives
                            Saskatoon as part of the SSHRC sponsored project:
                                     Linking, Learning, Leveraging
                             Social Enterprises, Knowledgeable Economies,
                                     and Sustainable Communities
                                      The Project

                      Purpose of the research project was to
  Community
   University
                       compile a literature review on the topic of
  Institute for
Social Research        collaborative governance models
Saskatchewan
Association for       From this literature review, observations
 Community
    Living
                       and conclusions are drawn about factors
Urban Aboriginal
   Strategy
                       that lead to successful collaborative
 Centre for the
                       practices.
   Study of
 Co-operatives
                                 This Presentation

  Community           Scope of the literature review
   University
  Institute for
Social Research       What is Collaborative Governance?
Saskatchewan
Association for
                      History of the collaborative governance
 Community
    Living             lexicon in the policy realm
Urban Aboriginal
   Strategy
                      How the research is clustered
 Centre for the
   Study of
                      Conceptual frameworks
 Co-operatives
                      Common themes in the research
                      Analysis of the literature’s significance
                       vis-à-vis the partner organizations
                           Scope of the Literature Review


  Community
                      Collaborative governance models are found in
   University
  Institute for        diverse forms literature encompassing a wide
Social Research
                       range of cases
Saskatchewan
Association for
 Community
                      Searches focused on key terms such as
    Living
                       collaborative governance, collaborative
Urban Aboriginal       management, collaborative policy development,
   Strategy
                       collaborative funding, funding tables, shared
 Centre for the
   Study of            management, participatory strategic planning,
 Co-operatives
                       community development and planning,
                       deliberative democracy
                      Searches yielded many results given the
                       diversity of the fields
                          Reviewing the Literature: Process

                      A survey of the literature shows significant
  Community            clusters by field of study, including management
   University
  Institute for
Social Research
                       theory, economics, health management, political
                       science and public policy, planning, community
Saskatchewan
Association for        development, and public administration.
 Community
    Living
                      Different scholars have proposed various
Urban Aboriginal
   Strategy
                       conceptual frameworks and typologies in
                       discussing the literature
 Centre for the
   Study of
 Co-operatives
                      Some relevant themes can be ascertained from
                       a review of this literature
                          What is Collaborative Governance?
                      Collaborative Governance is a new model of
                       governance that has arisen in the last two
  Community            decades.
   University
  Institute for
Social Research       It can be characterized as bringing multiple
                       stakeholders together in a common forum for
Saskatchewan
Association for        consensus decision-making, often led by public
 Community
    Living             agencies (Ansell and Gash)
Urban Aboriginal      A principle characteristic of collaborative
   Strategy
                       processes is that they lead to outcomes
 Centre for the
   Study of
                       satisfactory to all parties involved. (Gray 50)
 Co-operatives
                      Booher’s analysis of collaborative governance
                       case studies shows some common characteristics
                       such as: policy consensus, community visioning,
                       consensus rule-making, and collaborative network
                       structures.”
                          What is Collaborative Governance?
                      “One of the obstacles to theory building is that
  Community
                       researchers employ different definitions of collaboration”
   University
  Institute for
                       (Imperial 2005: 286)
Social Research
                      Jody Freeman argues that collaborative governance
Saskatchewan           “requires problem-solving, broad participation,
Association for
 Community             provisional solutions, the sharing of regulatory
    Living
                       responsibility across the public-private divide and a
Urban Aboriginal       flexible engaged agency.” (Freeman, 2)
   Strategy
                      Innes and Booher argue that collaborative governance
 Centre for the
   Study of
                       models must engage in “authentic dialogue” with each
 Co-operatives         stakeholder legitimately representing the interests for
                       which they claim to speak, coming to the table with
                       interests, but also with open minds about their positions
                       and a willingness to “seek mutual gain solutions” (Innes
                       and Booher 38).
                         Collaboration and Cooperation
                      “Collaboration is a purposive relationship
  Community            designed to solve a problem by creating or
   University
  Institute for
Social Research
                       discovering a solution within a given set of
                       constraints” (Agranoff and McGuire, 4) such as
Saskatchewan
Association for        knowledge, time, money, competition,
 Community
    Living             conventional wisdom (Schrage, 1995).
Urban Aboriginal
   Strategy
                      Co-operation “refers to working jointly with
 Centre for the
   Study of
                       others to some end” but also normally implies
 Co-operatives
                       those working jointly have a relationship of
                       mutual help, rather than divergent, and possibly
                       adversarial, interests (Agranoff and McGuire, 4).
                            “Collaborative Governance” and
                                     Collaboration

  Community
                      Collaborative governance is virtually
   University
  Institute for        indistinguishable from collaboration theory in the
Social Research
                       literature
                       Takahashi and Smutny’s broad
Saskatchewan
Association for    
 Community
    Living
                       conceptualization of governance: “purposive
Urban Aboriginal       means of guiding and steering a society or
   Strategy
                       community” consisting of “a particular set of
 Centre for the
   Study of            organizational arrangements” (169)
 Co-operatives
                      “Collaborative governance” therefore
                       encompasses a wide variety of fields.
                             History in the Policy Realm
                      Inter and Intra-governmental collaboration,
  Community
   University
                       some examples:
  Institute for
Social Research           cooperative federalism in the 1930’s under Roosevelt
                          Blair government document: Modernising Government
Saskatchewan
Association for
 Community
                          Interagency collaboration in the war on terror
    Living
                          In Canada, provincial and federal negotiations in the
Urban Aboriginal           1990s over budgets, jurisdictions, and cost-sharing
   Strategy
                           agreements (Delacourt and Lenihan, eds).
 Centre for the
   Study of
                          Given the budget cutbacks in the 1990’s, collaboration
 Co-operatives             entered the policy lexicon in an effort to seek new
                           ways at service delivery, contracting out to the private
                           sector and offloading service delivery onto the third
                           sector.
                        Collaboration in Public Management
                                       Theory
                      Collaborative management is seen as a new paradigm
                       from New Public Management (NPM) theory that was
  Community
   University          predominant since the 1980’s in public sector reform
  Institute for
Social Research
                      NPM was characterized by more market orientation in the
Saskatchewan
                       public sector aiming toward increased cost-efficiency and
Association for
 Community
                       running government more like the private sector.
    Living
                      Public-private partnerships lead to more collaborative
Urban Aboriginal       models with social economy stakeholders.
   Strategy
                      Collaborative governance can be seen as a reaction to
 Centre for the
   Study of
                       NPM with its emphasis on efficiency (Stein’s Cult of
 Co-operatives         Efficiency)
                      Some argue collaborative approaches will increasingly
                       dominate with globalization in a digital age (five
                       discussion pieces from the Centre for Collaborative
                       Government) to address “democratic deficits”
                   Reviewing the Literature: Deliberative and
                           participatory democracy

  Community
                      These tend to be more theoretical pieces
   University
  Institute for
                       examining the nature of democracy, leadership,
Social Research
                       or policy making and collaboration as a new
Saskatchewan           model of governance (Freeman, 1997; Fung,
Association for
 Community             2001; Innes and Booher; Healey, 2003;
    Living
                       Adronovich, 1995; Gazley et al.; Ghose, 2005)
Urban Aboriginal
   Strategy
                      Caledon Institute,Tamarack, Vibrant
                       Communities
 Centre for the
   Study of
 Co-operatives
                      Literature in community planning genre looks at
                       collaboration as a means of community
                       engagement. Participatory planning genres
                       build on key pioneers such as Paulo Friere.
                         Reviewing the Literature: Resource
                                   Management

                      There are a significant number of case studies
  Community
   University
                       in collaboration and resource management.
  Institute for
Social Research        This literature tends to focus on cases where
Saskatchewan
                       stakeholders have opposing interests but
Association for
 Community
                       resolutions are economically paramount and
    Living
                       adversarial decision-making is costly (Leach et
Urban Aboriginal       al, 2002; Beierle, 2000; Wondolleck and Yaffee, 2000;
   Strategy
                       Weber, 2003; Smith 1998; Schuckman 2001; Porter
 Centre for the        and Salveson, 1995; Plummer and Fitzgibbon, 2004;
   Study of
 Co-operatives         Nelson and Weschler, 1998; Manring, 2005; Lee, 2003;
                       Leach 2002; Hamalainen et al, 2001; Echeverria, 2001;
                       Ebrahim, 2004; Connick and Innes, 2003; Coggins,
                       1999; Heikkila and Gerlak, 2005)
                       Reviewing the Literature: Healthcare and
                                 Community Health
                      A cluster of literature focuses on healthcare and
  Community
   University          community health usually examining collaborative
  Institute for
Social Research        governance as a management strategy for service
                       delivery (Weech-Maldonado and Merrill, 2000; Hageman
Saskatchewan
Association for        et al, 1999; Erickson et al, 2003; Fawcett, 1995)
 Community
    Living


Urban Aboriginal
   Strategy


 Centre for the
   Study of
 Co-operatives
                   Reviewing the Literature: Voluntary Sector


  Community
                      Another body of literature clusters around the
   University
  Institute for        collaborative governance models in the
Social Research
                       voluntary sector, looking at service delivery
Saskatchewan
Association for
                       and citizen participation
 Community
    Living
                      Some of the literature is theoretical in nature:
Urban Aboriginal       looking at issues such as deliberative and
   Strategy
                       participatory democracy as alternatives to
 Centre for the
   Study of            vertical management structures (Bingham,
 Co-operatives
                       2006; Phillips, 2001; Pine et al, 1998)
                       Reviewing the Literature: Evaluation and
                                   Best Practices


  Community
                      There is a body of literature regarding
   University
  Institute for
                       accountability of collaborative governance
Social Research
                       processes, and effective evaluation of
Saskatchewan           collaboration (Taylor-Powell et al., 1998)
Association for
 Community
    Living
                      Less academic but more practical guides and
                       case studies concerning effective collaborative
Urban Aboriginal
   Strategy
                       processes (Tamarack; Caledon Institute)
 Centre for the
   Study of
 Co-operatives
                                 Conceptual Frameworks
                      Ansell and Gash argue in their preliminary
  Community
                       research that collaborative governance
   University
  Institute for
                       literature can be characterized as either:
Social Research
                          normative: adopting a tone how policy making,
Saskatchewan
                           decision making or negotiations ought to be
Association for
 Community
                           (Scholars such as Freeman, Gray, Innes and
    Living                 Booher);
Urban Aboriginal
                          descriptive: describing how a case is operating
   Strategy                (Seidenfeld, Lober, Takahashi and Smutny, Booher,
                           Fung and Wright); or
 Centre for the
   Study of               instrumental: showing how adopting a collaborative
 Co-operatives
                           process would lead to certain outcomes (Smith,
                           Gray, Coggins, Walter and Petr, Manring)
                       Freeman’s Model of Collaborative Governance

                      A problem solving orientation. The focus is on solving regulatory
                       problems. This requires information sharing and deliberation
  Community
   University
                       among parties with the knowledge most relevant to devising
  Institute for        and implementing creative solutions
Social Research
                      Participation by interested and affected parties in all stages of
Saskatchewan           the decision-making process.
Association for
 Community            Provisional solutions. Rules viewed as temporary and subject to
    Living             revision requiring a willingness to move forward in uncertainty,
                       adopting innovative solutions.
Urban Aboriginal
   Strategy           Accountability transcending traditional public and private roles.
                       New mechanisms of governance aimed at supplanting
 Centre for the        traditional roles and functions seen as dysfunctional or not
   Study of
 Co-operatives         accountable.
                      A flexible engaged agency. Collaborative governance used to
                       facilitate multi-stakeholder negotiations, seeking broad
                       participation and building capacity of the parties through the
                       sharing of information and resources. (Freeman, p. 22-26)
                                 Reasons for collaboration

                      Collaborative governance generally arises in
  Community
   University
                       response to three problems:
  Institute for
Social Research
                          jurisdictional entanglements - seek to overcome
Saskatchewan               procedural inefficiencies in the decision making
Association for
 Community
    Living
                           process (lack of efficient procedure)
Urban Aboriginal
                          efficiency problems in decision-making - use
   Strategy
                           collaboration to achieve better results than the
 Centre for the            status quo (lack of results)
   Study of
 Co-operatives
                          legitimation crises - use collaboration to alleviate
                           democratic deficits through participatory
                           democracy (lack of legitimation)
                                Reasons for collaboration

                   Commonly cited advantages of collaboration:
  Community
                    - Effective and efficient program delivery
   University
  Institute for     - professional development / capacity building
Social Research
                    - Improving communication
Saskatchewan
Association for     - Elimination of duplication
 Community
    Living          - Increasing use of programs

Urban Aboriginal
                    - Increasing access and effectiveness of programs
   Strategy
                    - Improving public image
 Centre for the     - Better needs assessment
   Study of
 Co-operatives
                    - Quality of information
                    - Increasing available resources.
                                Principle-Agent Problem

  Community
                      Literature in management theory about the
   University
  Institute for        principle-agent problem
Social Research
                      Principle-agent problem is the problem of
Saskatchewan
Association for
 Community
                       motivating one party to act on behalf of another
    Living
                      Managers and employees. Bureaucracies as
Urban Aboriginal
   Strategy            agents of governments that are agents of the
 Centre for the
                       public.
   Study of
 Co-operatives        Collaborative governance models seek to
                       overcome this engaging the stakeholders
                       directly
                               Reasons for collaboration
                      Jurisdictional: Legal fragmentation and multi-
                       jurisdictional problem-solving--“The intricate labyrinth
  Community
   University          of federal and state regulatory policies for removal and
  Institute for
Social Research        destruction of contaminants creates an almost
                       insurmountable task for those charged with improving
Saskatchewan
Association for
                       and protecting the region’s water resources. Under
 Community             such conditions, the appeal of collaboration is
    Living
                       understandable…” (Kraft and Johnson 134).
Urban Aboriginal      Efficiency: highly adversarial or costly nature of many
   Strategy
                       decision-making processes lead to a search for more
 Centre for the        collaborative forms of governance or decision making
   Study of
 Co-operatives
                       (costs of litigation, appeals, high costs of delays).
                      Legitimation: a search for more direct modes of
                       legitimating public decisions through participation from
                       indirect modes of legitimation through forms of
                       representative democracy to more direct and
                       participatory democracy (Thomas 1995; Daniels and
                       Walker 2001)
                               Themes from the Literature

                      A need to be inclusive of all the stakeholders.
  Community
   University             Collaborative governance strategies are best
  Institute for
Social Research            suited for situations that require on-going
                           cooperation--building ongoing relationships.
Saskatchewan
Association for
 Community
                          Power and resource imbalances among
    Living
                           stakeholders need to be mitigated. Each
Urban Aboriginal           participant must have an equal voice.
   Strategy
                          Participants need to feel empowered to take
 Centre for the
   Study of                ownership of the process and render results
 Co-operatives
                           legitimate.
                          Bureaucratic turf wars can hinder collaboration.
                          Accountability standards can be used as
                           mechanisms of control: power and resource
                           imbalances (measures of success, accountability)
                                            Analysis

                      A need to be inclusive of all the stakeholders.
  Community
   University             Consistent with the social model of disability and
  Institute for
Social Research            the aim of empowering stakeholders in the policy
Saskatchewan
                           and decision making process.
Association for
 Community
    Living
                          Consistent with traditional Aboriginal forms of
                           governance aimed at consensus building. The
Urban Aboriginal
   Strategy                chance for all those at the table to have a say.
 Centre for the
   Study of
 Co-operatives
                               Themes from the Literature
                      Collaborative processes can succeed even
  Community
                       where there is antagonism and a lack of
   University
  Institute for
Social Research
                       trust.
                          Where incentives to collaborate exist and power
Saskatchewan
Association for            distribution is relatively equal there may be
 Community
    Living                 success.
Urban Aboriginal          An antagonistic history requires more time to
   Strategy
                           foster effective collaboration and build trust.
 Centre for the
   Study of
                          Choosing winners or losers early in the process
 Co-operatives
                           may be problematic.
                          Mandated participation may be needed in
                           situations where there is little incentive for
                           participation, but it may encourage short term or
                           instrumental perspectives.
                                            Analysis
                      Collaborative processes can succeed even
  Community
                       where there is antagonism and a lack of trust.
   University
  Institute for           Collaboration does not necessary mean sharing the
Social Research
                           same views. Where incentives to participate are
Saskatchewan
Association for            high it can succeed.
 Community
    Living
                          Collaboration does not mean ceding jurisdiction or
Urban Aboriginal
   Strategy
                           sovereignty (it occurs often between levels of
                           government). Maintaining control or jurisdiction
 Centre for the
   Study of                does not preclude collaborative practices (voice vs
 Co-operatives
                           vote)
                          Collaborative governance processes are about
                           building relationships. Cultural considerations are
                           crucial.
                               Themes from the Literature
                      Strong leadership and/or mediation that
  Community
                       commands the respect of all the stakeholders is
   University
  Institute for
Social Research
                       important.
Saskatchewan
                          A neutral and mutually trusted mediator is often the
Association for
 Community                 key leadership figure.
    Living
                          Strong mediation is often key in offsetting power
Urban Aboriginal
   Strategy                and resource imbalances.
 Centre for the           Among adversarial participants with little
   Study of
 Co-operatives             interdependence, strong leadership and/or being the
                           only forum for decision making is crucial.
                          Work must often be done to make the participants
                           respect the decisions of the process where it is not
                           the authoritative decision maker.
                                            Analysis

                      Strong leadership and/or mediation that
  Community
   University
                       commands the respect of all the stakeholders
  Institute for
Social Research        is important.
Saskatchewan
Association for
                          Bureaucratic initiative / inertia is important when
 Community
    Living                 public agencies are involved.
Urban Aboriginal
                          Strong leadership and neutral mediation are key
   Strategy
                           for the process.
 Centre for the
   Study of
 Co-operatives
                               Collaborative Processes

                      Is the collaborative process addressing
  Community
   University
                       horizontal or vertical issues (alleviating
  Institute for
Social Research        vertical power structures or coordinating
Saskatchewan
                       diffuse and weakly related structures)
Association for
 Community            Both may require intersectoral approaches
    Living
                       (coordination across a rage of sectors) as well
Urban Aboriginal
   Strategy            as addressing power and resource
 Centre for the
                       imbalances.
   Study of
 Co-operatives        Both seek to remedy principle-agent problems
                      How standards of accountability and
                       measures of success are defined is crucial.
                                 Urban Aboriginal Strategy
                      Horizontal: bringing together diverse players
                       under one roof: avoiding duplication,
  Community
   University          coordinating programs (UAS)
  Institute for
Social Research           Inclusion of all stakeholders important: consensus
                           based decision making
Saskatchewan
Association for
 Community
                          Bridging jurisdictional boundaries
    Living
                          Legitimate decision making: collaboration while
Urban Aboriginal
                           retaining jurisdictional sovereignty. Taking ownership
   Strategy                of policy formation and service delivery.
 Centre for the
                          Parties may be adversarial; different interests,
   Study of                representational politics
 Co-operatives
                      Funder’s tables -- examples such as the
                       collaborative funding process to address
                       homelessness in Alberta
                   Saskatchewan Association for Community Living

                      Vertical: seeking to “flatten” historically vertical
  Community
                       relationships through a collaborative/
   University
  Institute for        participatory process: addressing power
Social Research
                       resources imbalances, top-down service
Saskatchewan
Association for
                       delivery, participatory policy making
 Community
    Living               Efficiency: changing traditional service
Urban Aboriginal           delivery--flexibility
   Strategy
                         Legitimation: participatory rather than top
 Centre for the
   Study of
 Co-operatives
                           down, alleviating resource and power
                           imbalances
                      Social vs medical model of disability: IF and IFS
                       -- cognitive disabilities action plan
                               Barriers to Collaboration
                   A study, conducted by Orland, summarized by Ginsler,
  Community           lists the following barriers: (from Ginsler 16)
   University
  Institute for
Social Research    Structural/Monetary/Legal Barriers
Saskatchewan
                    Confidentiality requirements and reticence to share
Association for
 Community            are potential barriers to service provision.
    Living

                    Structural difficulties in transferring funds hampered
Urban Aboriginal
   Strategy           by the funder’s' categorical program requirements.
 Centre for the     Lobour issues, such as salary differences between
   Study of
 Co-operatives
                      workers from different organizations in a
                      collaborative project.
                               Barriers to Collaboration

                   Inadequate Knowledge and Commitment to
  Community          Collaboration
   University
  Institute for
Social Research     Lack of experience in joint service delivery. Most

Saskatchewan
                     administrators spend their working lives promoting the
Association for
 Community
                     activities of the organization they work for, not the
    Living
                     activities of others.
Urban Aboriginal
   Strategy         difficulty getting other administrators to attend

 Centre for the
                     meetings to discuss collaboration.
   Study of
 Co-operatives      Collaboration challenges the authority structure of an
                     organization. Employees sometimes see collaboration
                     as a threat to their status in their organization.
                    Collaboration allows others to challenge the
                     assumptions of one's profession or occupation.
                                Barriers to Collaboration
                   Lack of Sustained External Political Support
                    Operating collaborative delivery systems in the face of
  Community
   University
                     sometimes volatile political support is difficult.
  Institute for
Social Research    Inadequate Information and Evaluation Data Systems
Saskatchewan        Funders demand increased accountability and evidence
Association for
 Community           that new initiatives provide better service at lower cost.
    Living
                    Limited in ability to demonstrate cost-effectiveness for
Urban Aboriginal
   Strategy          two main reasons:
 Centre for the
                       Inadequate and uncoordinated data collection and
   Study of
 Co-operatives
                        lack of outcome information
                       Inability to document outcomes in the initial phases
                        of the collaborative's work due to a predominant
                        focus on preventative measures and the long term
                        nature of initiatives.
                                    Considerations
                      Clear articulations of interests / roles by the
  Community
                       stakeholders, and policy guidelines so
   University
  Institute for
                       members clearly understand their roles
Social Research
                      Inclusion of all stakeholders in process:
Saskatchewan
Association for
                       representation, giving all a voice
 Community
    Living            Capacity building of stakeholders
Urban Aboriginal
                      Accountability and reporting measures (too
   Strategy
                       much or too little problematic: bureaucratic
 Centre for the        lack of inertia, or offloading responsibility)
   Study of
 Co-operatives
                      Measures of success (different stakeholders
                       may hold different measures). Evaluative
                       criteria must be agreed upon
                      Distinctions between control, jurisdiction, and
                       collaborative participation
                                            Questions?


  Community           Researcher:
   University
  Institute for
Social Research
                       Robert Dobrohoczki
Saskatchewan
Association for
 Community             Rob.Dobrohoczki@usask.ca
    Living


Urban Aboriginal
   Strategy


 Centre for the
   Study of
 Co-operatives

								
To top