Collaborative Governance in Theory and Practice

CollaborativeGovernanceinTheoryandPracticeChrisAnsellAlisonGashUniversityofCalifornia,BerkeleyABSTRACTOverthepastfewdecades,anewformofgovernancehasemergedtoreplaceadversarialandmanagerialmodesofpolicymakingandimplementation.Collaborativegovernance,asithascometobeknown,bringspublicandprivatestakeholderstogetherincollectiveforumswithpublicagenciestoengageinconsensus-orienteddecisionmaking.Inthisarticle,weconductameta-analyticalstudyoftheexistingliteratureoncollaborativegovernancewiththegoalofelaboratingacontingencymodelofcollaborativegovernance.Afterreview-ing137casesofcollaborativegovernanceacrossarangeofpolicysectors,weidentifycriticalvariablesthatwillinfluencewhetherornotthismodeofgovernancewillproducesuccessfulcollaboration.Thesevariablesincludethepriorhistoryofconflictorcooperation,theincentivesforstakeholderstoparticipate,powerandresourcesimbalances,leadership,andinstitutionaldesign.Wealsoidentifyaseriesoffactorsthatarecrucialwithinthecollaborativeprocessitself.Thesefactorsincludeface-to-facedialogue,trustbuilding,andthedevelopmentofcommitmentandsharedunderstanding.Wefoundthatavirtuouscycleofcollaborationtendstodevelopwhencollaborativeforumsfocuson‘‘smallwins’’thatdeepentrust,commitment,andsharedunderstanding.Thearticleconcludeswithadiscus-sionoftheimplicationsofourcontingencymodelforpractitionersandforfutureresearchoncollaborativegovernance.Overthelasttwodecades,anewstrategyofgoverningcalled‘‘collaborativegovernance’’hasdeveloped.Thismodeofgovernancebringsmultiplestakeholderstogetherincommonforumswithpublicagenciestoengageinconsensus-orienteddecisionmaking.Inthisarticle,weconductameta-analyticalstudyoftheexistingliteratureoncollaborativegovernancewiththegoalofelaboratingageneralmodelofcollaborativegovernance.TheultimategoalistodevelopacontingencyapproachtocollaborationthatcanhighlightconditionsunderwhichcollaborativegovernancewillbemoreorlesseffectiveasanEarlyversionsofthisarticlewerepresentedattheConferenceonDemocraticNetworkGovernance,Copenhagen,theInterdisciplinaryCommitteeonOrganizationsattheUniversityofCalifornia,Irvine,andtheBerkeleygraduateseminarPerspectivesonGovernance.WethanktheparticipantsoftheseeventsfortheirusefulsuggestionsandMarthaFeldman,inparticular,forherencouragement.Wealsothanktwoanonymousreviewersfortheirthoug[e-mail]@berkeley.edu.doi:10.1093/jopart/mum032AdvanceAccesspublicationonNovember13,2007ªTheAuthor2007.PublishedbyOxfordUniversityPressonbehalfoftheJournalofPublicAdministrationResearchandTheory,Inc.Allrightsreserved.Forpermissions,pleasee-mail:[e-mail]18:543–571approachtopolicymakingandpublicmanagement.1Inconductingthismeta-analyticstudy,weadoptedastrategywecall‘‘successiveapproximation’’:weusedasampleoftheliteraturetodevelopacommonlanguageforanalyzingcollaborativegovernanceandthensuccessively‘‘tested’’thislanguageagainstadditionalcases,refiningandelaboratingourmodelofcollaborativegovernanceasweevaluatedadditionalcases.Althoughcollaborativegovernancemaynowhaveafashionablemanagementcache´,theuntidycharacteroftheliteratureoncollaborationreflectsthewayithasbubbledupfrommanylocalexperiments,ofteninreactiontopreviousgovernancefailures.Collabo-rativegovernancehasemergedasaresponsetothefailuresofdownstreamimplementationandtothehighcostandpoliticizationofregulation.Ithasdevelopedasanalternativetotheadversarialismofinterestgrouppluralismandtotheaccountabilityfailuresofmanageri-alism(especiallyastheauthorityofexpertsischallenged).Morepositively,onemightarguethattrendstowardcollaborationalsoarisefromthegrowthofknowledgeandin-stitutionalcapacity.Asknowledgebecomesincreasinglyspecializedanddistributedandasinstitutionalinfrastructuresbecomemorecomplexandinterdependent,thedemandforcollaborationincreases.Thecommonmetricforallthesefactorsmaybe,asGray(1989)haspointedout,theincreasing‘‘turbulence’’facedbypolicymakersandmanagers.AlthoughSusskindandCruikshank(1987),Gray(1989),andFungandWright(2001,2003)havesuggestedmoregeneraltheoreticalaccountsofcollaborativegovernance,muchoftheliteratureisfocusedonthespeciesratherthanthegenus.Thebulkofthecollaborativegovernanceliteratureiscomposedofsingle-casecasestudiesfocusedonsector-specificgovernanceissueslikesite-basedmanagementofschools,communitypo-licing,watershedcouncils,regulatorynegotiation,collaborativeplanning,communityhealthpartnerships,andnaturalresourcecomanagement(thespecies).2Moreover,anum-berofthemostinfluentialtheoreticalaccountsofthisphenomenonarefocusedonspecifictypesofcollaborativegovernance.Healey(1996,2003)andInnesandBooher(1999a,1999b),forexample,providefoundationalaccountsofcollaborativeplanning,asFreeman(1997)doesforregulationandadministrativelawandWondolleckandYaffee(2000)dofornaturalresourcesmanagement.Ourgoalistobuildonthefindingsofthisrichliterature,butalsotoderivetheoreticalandempiricalclaimsaboutthegenusofcollaborativegovernance—aboutthecommonmodeofgoverning.DEFININGCOLLABORATIVEGOVERNANCEWedefinecollaborativegovernanceasfoll