A Framework for Assessing Power in Collaborative Governance Processes

Abstract

The growing use of collaborative methods of governance raises concerns about the relative power of participants in such processes and the potential for exclusion or domination of some parties. This research offers a framework for assessing power that considers authority, resources, and discursive legitimacy as sources of power and considers the participants, the process design, and the content of collaborative governance processes as arenas for power use. A case study of a collaborative governance process is presented and analyzed using the power framework. Implications for the design of collaborative governance processes are discussed, including the benefits of a multidimensional definition of power, tools for managing power imbalances among participants, and strategies that participants can use to participate more fully in collaborative governance processes.

Cross-Sector Collaboration and Information Integration in Local Government One-Stop Services Centres: The Experiences and Lessons from a Case Studies in China

“…Collaboration can be a way of advancing self-interested goals such as increasing power [22]. Many of these concerns are linked to power disparities among participating organizations and how power affects such issues as representation, participation, and voice [37]. The political party, such as CPC (Communist Party of China) can exercise powers through authority resources, and discursive legitimacy in collaborative governance processes.…”

“…The growing use of collaborative methods of governance raises concerns about the relative power of participants in such processes and the potential for exclusion or domination of some parties [37]. Collaboration can be a way of advancing self-interested goals such as increasing power [22].…”

“…More recent models include not just antecedents, process, and outcomes, they also include factors such as institutional design, leadership, number and variety of groups, issues and incentives, structure and governance, and contingencies and constraints [4,10,14,37]. Thomson and Perry provide a multidimensional model of collaboration [40]: the governance dimension, the administration dimension, the autonomy dimension, the mutuality dimension, trust and reciprocity dimension.…”

“…Ansell and Gash provides a model of collaborative governance which has four broad variables [4]: starting conditions, institutional design, leadership, and collaborative process. Purdy builds a framework for assessing power in collaborative governance processes by juxtaposing the three sources of power with the three arenas for power [37]. Three sources of power that can be used to influence the participants, process design, and content of a collaborative process are particularly useful for understanding interorganizational dynamics: authority, resources, and discursive legitimacy.…”

Fit-for-Purpose Institutions? An Evaluation of Biodiversity Conservation in the Agricultural Landscape of the Tasmanian Midlands, Australia

“…Power and authority shape the structure and process of collaboration by deciding who is involved, how issues are framed, where resources are directed, etc. (Purdy, 2012). Self--organizing: This component addresses: whether actors are empowered to act at…”