The paper has three main objectives. The first aim is to examine and clarify the burgeoning stakeholder literature that currently seeks to inform management practice, corporate governance and public policy with particular emphasis on the UK. We do this by continuing the process of clarification started by Donaldson and Preston (1995), focusing mainly on the political and practitioner literature generated within the UK. We begin this task by setting out a critique of stakeholding and develop this by using four key themes of enquiry. First, we examine stakeholding's conceptual confusion; second, we outline and develop criticism of its underlying pluralist assumptions; third, we consider the problems of implementation; and finally, we assess some of the key arguments concerning its potential impact on business performance and competitiveness.The second aim is to develop and examine the central criticisms of stakeholding from both the neo-liberal and Marxist/radical perspectives. By so doing we identify the key theoretical and practical issues which stakeholder proponents must address if they are to convince sceptics of the model's validity.The third aim is to develop a conceptual framework capable of illustrating the different stakeholder perspectives and assumptions on which they are based. This consists of five continuums: the first locates authors on a left-right political continuum; the second distinguishes between those authors who use stakeholding primarily for analysis and those who use it to formulate and prescribe specific courses of action; the third differentiates between intrinsic (good in itself ) and instrumental (means to an end) motives; the fourth identifies the various levels of proposed intervention; and the fifth illustrates the different degrees of enforcement advocated.We believe that this framework provides a clear illustration of our arguments and serves as a useful instrument for clarifying the stakeholder concept. In addition, it is used to position or map the work of key authors within the stakeholder debate and we believe it may provide a more coherent basis for future research and debate.

Drawing on research that is part of the five-year Major Collaborative Research Initiative project examining public policy in Canadian municipalities, this article provides an overview of the federal-municipal machinery developed to facilitate urban policy and program development. The ''federal-municipal machinery'' refers to the many programs and initiatives that have been used to structure federalmunicipal relations and influence urban policy and development. The research time frame begins with the period leading up to the creation of the Ministry of State for Urban Affairs, in 1971, and continues through four decades to include recent events of note such as the creation of the Prime Minister's Caucus Task Force on Urban Issues, the subsequent announcements of the New Deal, and the Gas Tax Fund for Canada's cities and communities. The authors begin with a discussion of why federal governments involve themselves in municipal and urban affairs and then provide an overview of their analysis by identifying patterns and trends in the evolution of federal-municipal machinery. They then discuss the effectiveness of the machinery, over three periods, and conclude by considering the implications of their findings for the future of federal-municipal relations in the context of the growing pressures facing urban Canada.Sommaire : Fondé sur la recherche entreprise sur cinq ans dans le cadre du projet intitulé ß Grands travaux de recherche concertée ý qui examine la politique gouvernementale dans les municipalités canadiennes,

Public private partnerships (PPPs) are increasingly advocated as beneficial for the delivery of public services, facilities, and infrastructure for municipal governments. However, such partnerships often raise serious concerns about transparency and accountability. While municipal governments across Canada have tried to increase public participation in local affairs, PPPs can impede such efforts. This article presents a case study of the Lansdowne Park PPP redevelopment in the City of Ottawa. We focus on how transparency and citizen engagement have been compromised and circumvented and link to broader issues of how to balance the privileged status of business and the demands for commercial confidentiality with the public interest, transparency, and citizen engagement in projects that use PPPs. The article concludes by arguing that some projects and some conditions can render the use of PPPs inappropriate and counterproductive in terms of both effectiveness and the basic principles of good governance.RÉSUMÉLes partenariats public-privé (PPP) sont de plus en plus préconisés par les municipalités comme étant une solution avantageuse pour la prestation de services publics ainsi que la réalisation de projets d’installations et d’infrastructures publiques. Toutefois, de tels partenariats soulèvent souvent d’importantes préoccupations quant à la transparence et la reddition de compte en lien avec ce processus. Plusieurs municipalités canadiennes ont fait de grands progrès pour accroître la participation des citoyens aux affaires municipales, mais les PPP peuvent représenter un obstacle important à de tels efforts. Cet article présente une étude de cas sur le réaménagement du parc Lansdowne dans le cadre d’un PPP à la Ville d’Ottawa. L’article se concentre sur la façon dont la transparence et l’engagement des citoyens ont été compromis et contournés dans ce processus. Cette analyse est liée à des considérations sur la façon d’atteindre un équilibre entre le statut privilégié de l’entreprise et les exigences de confidentialité des informations commerciales avec l’intérêt public, la transparence et l’engagement des citoyens dans des projets qui utilisent des PPP. L’article conclut en affirmant que certains projets et certaines conditions peuvent rendre certains PPP inappropriés et contre productifs en ce qui a trait à l’efficacité et aux principes fondamentaux de bonne gouvernance.

Résumé de l'articleDans cet article, les auteurs examinent dans une étude de cas le Train Léger, un projet raté de la Ville d'Ottawa. Malgré que le TL ait été promu par les politiciens et les bureaucrates locaux comme un symbole important de la ville, le projet était chargé avec les problèmes. L'article explore ces problèmes et identifie la façon dans laquelle le projet a été géré est un conte d'avertissement dans comment ne pas promouvoir les grands projets d'infrastructure publics.Les auteurs indiquent aux dangers qui arrivent quand ceux qui font des décisions de la dépense de fonds publics deviennent des instigateurs d'un projet. Il y a des risques sérieux quand engagements politiques sont faits premier pendant un développement du projet et l'estimation monte. Au lieu de rester fixe sur atteindre de niveaux de service dans les coûts qui sont acceptables à ceux qui payent ces services, les décideurs peuvent appartenir au piège de « promotion d'une ville » qui met l'ego et le statut en avant d'intérêt public. AbstractIn this article, the authors examine the failed City of Ottawa's Light Rail Transit (LRT) project as a case study. While the LRT was trumpeted by local politicians and bureaucrats as a symbol of the city's coming of age, the project was fraught with problems. The article explores these problems and points out that the way in which the project was managed is a cautionary tale in how not to promote large-scale public infrastructure projects.The authors point to the dangers that occur when those who make decisions about the expenditure of public funds become promoters of a project. There are serious risks when political commitments are made early on in a project's development and appraisal stage. Rather than remaining focused on achieving levels of service within costs that are acceptable to those who pay for these services, decision makers can fall into the trap of 'boosterism' that puts ego and status ahead of public interest. Rêves, déceptions et illusions : le déraillement du projet de train léger de la ville d'Ottawa par Robert Hilton et Christopher Stoney RésuméDans cet article, les auteurs examinent dans une étude de cas le Train Léger, un projet raté de la Ville d'Ottawa. Malgré que le TL ait été promu par les politiciens et les bureaucrates locaux comme un symbole important de la ville, le projet était chargé avec les problèmes. L'article explore ces problèmes et identifie la façon dans laquelle le projet a été géré est un conte d'avertissement dans comment ne pas promouvoir les grands projets d'infrastructure publics.Les auteurs indiquent aux dangers qui arrivent quand ceux qui font des décisions de la dépense de fonds publics deviennent des instigateurs d'un projet. Il y a des risques sérieux quand engagements politiques sont faits premier pendant un développement du projet et l'estimation monte. Au lieu de rester fixe sur atteindre de niveaux de service dans les coûts qui sont acceptables à ceux qui payent ces services, les décideurs peuvent appartenir au piège de « promotion d'une ville ...

No abstract

Recent mass death incidents in Japan and Haiti have again focused attention on the challenge of dealing with large numbers of dead. Focusing on mass death incidents involving large numbers of Canadian victims, including the Titanic, Halifax explosion, Air India bombing and the 2004 Tsunami, the paper researches incidents dating back to the beginning of the 20th Century. By examining each stage of the process including initial response, identification, funerals, communication, religious services and inquests, the paper identifies key changes in the way that mass death incidents are handled. For example, the research identifies greater professionalization and state control of mass death incidents, increased reliance on experts and technology and increased emphasis on accurate identification, through forensics, and causes, through inquests and inquiries.

In response to the global financial crisis that began in late 2007, many countries took on significant levels of deficit financing in order to increase spending on public works and infrastructure. This rapid infusion of public funding has raised concerns about the accountability and transparency of stimulus measures, including how best to monitor and evaluate the allocation and impact of the funds and report back to citizens. While there is growing research on the macro‐economic impacts of stimulus spending, very little comparative work has been done on the approaches of different countries to the governance of infrastructure stimulus spending programs. This article focuses on the latter by identifying and explaining the different practices in Canada, Australia and the United States in order to highlight implications for future stimulus‐led investment.

Significant changes are occurring within the federal Public Service with respect to the conditions under which policy is developed, implemented and assessed. There has been a shift to more targeted and discrete new public management (NPM) initiatives aimed at specific and incremental changes. This chapter highlights several important changes, challenges and initiatives in federal policy processes that purport to enhance innovation and creativity, while preserving ministerial responsibility. It concludes that while there is a drive to greater flexibility in policy processes, there remain important systemic and cultural barriers to achieving innovation that will take sustained leadership to overcome, including a stubborn obsession with bureaucratic accountability; shifting policy resources and competencies; adherence to error-free government; an unwillingness to open the policy process to external actors; and increased central coordination of policy priorities.