Search
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Policy Area
Browse By Session Type
Browse By Keyword
Program Calendar
Personal Schedule
Sign In
Search Tips
Collaborative governance, a flexible approach leveraging diverse stakeholders to tackle complex problems, is increasingly utilized by governments. Defined as decision-making processes crossing public, private, and civic boundaries, collaborative governance enables solutions otherwise unattainable by single actors. However, initiating and sustaining effective collaboration remain challenging, particularly concerning stakeholder inclusion and balancing asymmetric power. The concept of collaborative platforms—organizations offering dedicated resources and competencies for facilitating multiple or ongoing collaborative projects—has emerged to address these challenges. Platforms, including international organizations, federal agencies, and state governments, provide local actors with guidelines, structures, and resources to support local collaborations tailored to their unique contexts.
Despite existing knowledge, gaps persist. First, the extent to which local collaborations adopt and adapt platform-provided design rules and resources remains unclear. Second, mechanisms through which platforms influence internal collaboration processes and the equitable distribution of outputs among participants are understudied. Addressing these gaps, we pose three research questions: (1) What rules and resources do collaborative platforms provide to facilitate local collaborations? (2) How and to what extent do local collaborations modify these platform rules? (3) How do these adaptations influence output distribution among local collaboration members?
We examine these research questions using the case of Florida's hazard mitigation program, guided by the Florida Department of Emergency Management (FDEM). Under FDEM, county governments voluntarily establish Local Mitigation Strategy (LMS) working groups involving municipal governments and non-governmental actors to develop mitigation plans. These groups prioritize infrastructure projects and often institutionalize their collaborative processes through formal bylaws. Given resource asymmetries, smaller municipalities frequently possess limited influence, resources, and expertise, despite often having the greatest needs. We hypothesize that adherence to membership design rules provided by platforms mitigates power imbalances and results in fairer outcomes. Additionally, including platform-level representatives within local collaborations is hypothesized to further balance participant power dynamics by providing expertise and authority.
To test our hypotheses, we employ mixed methods. First, multilevel modeling assesses whether including specific participant types outlined by the collaborative platform—and platform-level participants themselves—helps mitigate power imbalances. Second, semi-automated textual analysis compares working group bylaws with FDEM guidelines to evaluate adherence and adaptation of design rules. Third, interviews with LMS working group members were analyzed to explore how platform-level resources helped address power imbalance. This mixed-method approach aims to identify guideline elements effectively adopted at the local level, revealing whether these elements help sustain collaborations by addressing internal power asymmetries.
The findings of our study offer significant theoretical and practical contributions. Theoretically, it deepens understanding of how collaborative platforms' resources and design rules foster fair, sustainable local collaborations capable of achieving policy goals. Practically, findings provide actionable insights for federal and state agencies seeking to effectively guide local governments, particularly benefiting smaller municipalities. Ultimately, this research enhances the design and effectiveness of collaborative governance structures, ensuring equitable distribution of collaborative benefits.