A Critical Perspective on Collaborative Governance Implementation: A Third Sector Perspective

• In Event: Collaborative Governance for Systems Change

Abstract

During the prolonged period of austerity within the UK context (Hernandez, 2021), followed by economic crises and political turmoil, local areas have increasingly been looking to the third sector to devise solutions to enduring, ‘wicked’ problems (Alford & Head, 2017). Where the role of third sector in delivering public services has been thoroughly considered (Macmillian & Payne, 2021), what is underexplored is the role and position of third sector organisations which are established to facilitate (and lead) large-scale systems change within a collaborative governance context. Our paper explores an example of a third sector organisation at the heart of a collaborative governance programme, working to effect change within a complex mental health system within an English borough beset with what are often perceived as ‘intractable’ challenges.
Collaborative governance (Stoker, 2006; Ansell & Gash 2008; Emerson & Nabatchi & Balough, 2012) is increasingly becoming the ‘new normal’ (Cristofolia, Douglas, Torfing, Trivellato, 2022) tool to tackle wicked problems particularly in a context where citizens expect quality public services whilst fiscal austerity bites and service demand increases (Ansell, Sørensen & Torfing, 2017). Where in the past collaborative governance was the approach of last resort, it is now being characterised as the ideal approach to promote collective action and create ‘robust policy and services to secure the sustainable development of society and the economy’ (Sørensen & Torfing, 2021; p. 1590).
Whilst collaborative governance has received much attention, most studies are derived from the perspective of the public sector (Cristofolia, Douglas, Torfing, Trivellato, 2022). There are very few examples of collaborative governance studies where a separate organisation is created to oversee collaborative activities, particularly examples where that organisation is from the third sector (Bianchi, Nasi & Rivenbark, 2021). This is despite the long-standing argument that community-based organisations are well placed to take on this role in the design and implementation of such collaborative approaches (Skelcher, 2007). Equally, most of the research focuses on the upstream efforts like recruitment and inclusion of actors, reaching agreement on solutions, leadership and trust building (Bianchi et al., 2021). In contrast, the downstream work of implementation after the joint decision reached is much less well understood and studied (Sørensen & Torfing, 2021).
We present our learning from a developmental evaluation of this collaborative partnership based on the analysis of 72 qualitative interviews over a five-year period. Our paper contributes to the extant collaborative governance literature by illustrating the complex role that such third sector organisations can play in this context, beyond the classic role of service delivery agent. We contribute to the understanding of collaborative governance implementation – specifically from the perspective of the third sector. In particular we draw attention to downstream challenges faced around such issues as accountability and role conflict in this work. In so doing we extend the understanding of collaborative governance and challenge established notions of public sector dominance and sector relationships.

References

Alford, J., and Head, B.W. (2017). Wicked and Less Wicked Problems: A Typology and A Contingency Framework. Policy & Society, 36(3), 397–413.

Ansell, C., and Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative Governance in Theory and Practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 543–571.

Ansell, C., Sørensen, E., and Torfing, J. (2017). Improving Policy Implementation through Collaborative Policymaking. Policy & Politics, 45(3), 467–486.

Bianchi, C., Nasi, G., & Rivenbark, W.C. (2021) Implementing collaborative governance: models, experiences, and challenges. Public Management Review, 23(11), 1581-1589

Cristofolia, D., Douglas, S., Torfing, J., Trivellato, B. (2022) Having it all: can collaborative governance be both legitimate and accountable?. Public Management Review, 24(5), 704-728.

Emerson, K., Nabatchi, T., and Balogh, S. (2012). An Integrative Framework for Collaborative Governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(1), 1–29.

Hernandez, T. A. (2021). The consequences of the austerity policies for public services in the UK. Studies in Social Justice, 15(3), 518-537.

Macmillan, R. O. B., & Paine, A. E. (2021). The third sector in a strategically selective landscape–the case of commissioning public services. Journal of Social Policy, 50(3), 606-626.

Stoker, G. (2006). Public Value Management: A New Narrative for Networked Governance?. The American Review of Public Administration, 36(1), 41–57.

Skelcher, C. (2007). “Does Democracy Matter? A Transatlantic Research Design on Democratic Performance and Special Purpose Governments. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 17(1), 61–76.

Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2021) Radical and disruptive answers to downstream problems in collaborative governance?. Public Management Review, 23(11), 1590-1611.

Authors

• Beth Patmore, Nottingham Trent University

• Ellen Bennett, Sheffield Hallam University

• Christopher Dayson, Sheffield Hallam University