Introduction
Planning can appear at times as irrational in that decisions are made which people either find unjustified or are not based on what is perceived as evidence. Housing development is a particular aspect of planning where people generally feel that developments are approved that is not necessary. A danger is that in trying to understand what is happening, some people resort to conspiracy theories or allege corruption in some way.
But instead we can turn to the area of academic research where better and more cogent explanations can be found. So this particular blog will look at the role of metagovernance. [Based on an MSc dissertation].
The research
So what is metagovernance? Well if we get behind the word and disentangle what it constitutes we find it provides a useful means of understanding how a particular area of life works. In essence it involves the organisation of governance, the management of the complex, plural and ‘angled hierarchies’ that constitute governance (Jessop 2003), simply defined as the ‘government of governance’, (Bell and Park 2006). The whole system sees the state performing a major role in governance. The state is in the unique position to perform this key function as it combines the dual attributes of democratic legitimacy and power as ‘it alone has the ability to assign the rules and resources on which all forms of governance depend’ (Bell and Park 2006).
Government, under metagovernance, orchestrates and coordinates policy (Somerville 2005), thereby effectively maintaining its hegemony in the process of governing. Influence, command and control are exercised through a range of techniques and processes. Government is largely responsible for establishing and facilitating self-governing institutions and networks, with the capacity to install its own representatives within such frameworks (Sorenson 2003).
Central government can use its legislative power to establish formal parameters – legislation and regulations, within which those engaged in governance (and market processes) operate, it can seek to ensure conformity with centrally determined policy from actors within the system, through the use of ‘motivational frameworks’ (Whitehead 2003), such as auditing, indicators and monitoring. While control of the purse strings (Baker and Wong 2006), acts as an effective means of ‘guiding’ actors towards specific policy options.
Jessop and Sorenson provide a list of elements of metagovernance : 6) Sorenson considers that metagovernance is developed through general types such as ‘framing’ through legislation and institutional design; 'story telling’ – constructing ‘collective meaning, identities and shared visions’; the ‘establishment and facilitation of self-governing actors’; and, participation of the state in institutions and networks. (Sorenson 2003).
Using the literature we can identify twelve measures showing where metagovernance operates in planning. Each measure indicates what the state does.
Measure | Example |
1) It is responsible for ‘establishing and facilitating self-governing institutions and networks’ | Local Strategic Partnerships, Market and Coastal Towns Initiative, Community Forums. |
2) It can use its legislative power to establish formal parameters – legislation and regulations, | Planning Guidance. Planning Policy Statements |
3) It seeks to ensure conformity with centrally determined policy through the use of ‘motivational frameworks’ such as auditing, indicators and monitoring. | Appeals, Indicators |
4) It has control of the purse strings | Funding of infrastructure to facilitate projects. Cost of appeals. |
5) It provides ‘the ground rules for governance and the regulatory order’ | Local Development Framework. Appeal system. |
6) It ensures ‘the compatibility or coherence of different governance mechanisms and regimes’ | Legislation outlining the relationship between regional spatial strategies and local development frameworks. |
7) It acts ‘as the primary organiser of dialogue among policy communities’ | Barker report on housing. Use of Planning Policy Guidance. |
8) It uses and deploys ‘a relative monopoly of organizational intelligence and information with which to shape cognitive expectations’ | Producing reports indicating for example the need for additional housing development |
9) It serves ‘as a court of appeal for disputes arising within and over governance’ | Planning Inspectorate |
10) It can seek ‘to re-balance power differentials by strengthening weaker forces or systems in the interests of system integration and/or social cohesion’ | Use of community plans/strategies |
11) Plays a role in modifying ‘the self-understanding of identities, strategic capacities, and interests of individual and collective actors in different strategic contexts and hence alter their implications for preferred strategies and tactics’ | Promoting policies by emphasising ‘positive’ elements - affordable housing, sustainability, community cohesion. |
12) Assuming ‘political responsibility in the event of governance failure’ | Role of Secretary of state |
Comments