Citizen participation and changing governance: cases of devolution in England

Prosser, Brenton; Renwick, Alan; Giovannini, Arianna; Sandford, Mark; Flinders, Matthew; Jennings, Will; Smith, Graham; Spada, Paolo; Stoker, Gerry; Ghose, Katie

doi:10.1332/030557317x14895974141213

Cited by 22 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 14 publications

(18 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This was allied to opaque and largely secret deal negotiations, also the subject of considerable critique Prosser, Renwick, Giovannini, Sandford, & Flinders, 2017;Sandford, 2016b). Participants may have perceived this too as a price worth paying to obtain new powers, but it stymied the process in a number of localities.…”

Section: Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Territory, power and statecraft: understanding English devolution

2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent decades, the devolution of power to subnational regional authorities has formed a key element of what has been termed the 'unravelling' or 'unbundling' of the state in many parts of the world. Even in the United Kingdom, with its distinctive global reputation as a power-hoarding majoritarian democracy, the devolution of powers to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland since 1998 can be located within this broader devolutionary dynamic. In recent years, this process has focused on 'the English question' and a reform agenda that claimed to offer a 'devolution revolution'. This paper offers the first research-led analysis of the scope, scale and implications of these post-2015 reforms to English governance. It utilizes Jim Bulpitt's statecraft approach to explore the changing nature of centre-periphery relationships within England. The main conclusion has been that a 'rhetoric-reality gap' currently exists and a 'devolution revolution' has not occurred.

show abstract

Section: Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Territory, power and statecraft: understanding English devolution

2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The common thread to these approaches is that they frame the North within a centripetal narrative according to which Whitehall 'knows best' how to address the North's problems -leading to devolution policies negotiated mainly between national and local elites, and involving feeble powers, modest budgets, vast liabilities and the maintenance of substantial control from the centre (Giovannini, 2016: 592;Deas, 2014). Thus, devolution in the North of England has followed a characteristically bewildering and underwhelming path -leading to complexity, experimentation, fragmentation and incoherence with largely negative implications for territorial equity and justice (Pike and Tomaney, 2009), as well as for local politics and democracy (Tomaney, 2016;Prosser et al, 2017).…”

Section: The Political-economic Environmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction: Powerhouse Politics and Economic Development in the North

Berry

Giovannini

2017

Developing England’s North

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Third, informality is pertinent to English devolution as the Government has negotiated a range of 'devolution deals' with localities, each of which individually brokered. Finally, the policy has led to much criticism from academics (Prosser et al, 2017) and practitioners (DCLG, 2016) who have labelled the process secretive, exclusionary, undemocratic and lacking legitimacy. English devolution, therefore, provides a timely case study to explore the impact of informal governance on democratic legitimacy in a network where formal structures are weak.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A decentred assessment of the impact of ‘informal governance’ on democratic legitimacy

Ayres

2020

Public Policy and Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this article is to examine the impact of informal governance on democratic legitimacy. It draws on the literatures on informal governance and decentred theory to examine how governance mechanisms that are un-written, un-codified and non-institutional impact on democratic legitimacy in governance networks. Drawing on a case study of English devolution in the United Kingdom, this article explores how informal governance impacts on different dimensions of legitimacy -input, throughout and output. It does so by drawing on the narratives and stories of central government officials directly involved in English devolution between 2015 and 2018. Findings reveal that even when formal structures are weak, democratic legitimacy can be secured, especially in promoting effective decision making and problem solving -throughput legitimacy. Nonetheless, a decentred analysis has shown a high level of selectivity and differentiation in central-local relationships that undermines legitimation based on input (inclusiveness) and outcome (results) legitimacy. This assessment provides important new insights into how governance networks characterized by high levels of informality can promote democratic legitimacy in ways that reflect the nuances of political decision making in highly complex environments. The challenge for politicians and policy makers moving forward is to actively manage the inevitable trade-offs generated through the use of informality if accusations of a democratic deficit are to be averted.

show abstract

Citizen participation and changing governance: cases of devolution in England

Abstract: This is a repository copy of Citizen participation and changing governance: cases of devolution in England.

Cited by 22 publications

References 14 publications

Territory, power and statecraft: understanding English devolution

Territory, power and statecraft: understanding English devolution

Introduction: Powerhouse Politics and Economic Development in the North

A decentred assessment of the impact of ‘informal governance’ on democratic legitimacy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About