Citizens In Collaborative Governance Research Articles

Political trust and government performance in the time of COVID-19

Governments around the world have exhibited markedly different levels of effectiveness in handling the COVID-19 pandemic, and these variations have not been adequately explained by conventional correlates of good governance. This paper advances a co-production perspective, arguing that citizens’ predisposition to support and comply with government policies has played a crucial role in shaping countries’ pandemic performance. Analyzing a cross-country dataset that combines COVID-related cases and deaths with a new measure of political trust constructed from multiple international surveys, we show that the numbers of casualties from the pandemic are significantly lower in societies where citizens have greater trust in their governments. This relationship continues to hold even when we focus only on wealthy, democratic countries where the data quality is more reliable. Additional analyses suggest that higher political trust contributes to both greater compliance with mitigation measures by citizens and more decisive response by government. These findings underscore the importance of citizen—government collaboration for effective governance and the perils of declining political trust in advanced democracies.

Open government and citizen empowerment in authoritarian states

The introduction of open government has been used in many countries to improve the transparency, accountability of the state, and promote participation by citizens in collaborative governance. Its potential for public services improvement, citizen empowerment, and a positive impact on reducing corruption have attracted scholarly attention. Set alongside this, open government initiatives have facilitated greater access to information which can be used to hold governments to account and, in so doing, build trust between citizens and the state. While open government principles sit easily in democratic systems, some authoritarian states have also adopted this concept. This raises two questions. First, is there evidence that open collaboration, as the most developed form of open government, has empowered citizens in autocracies? Second, and more generally, why would authoritarian regimes seek to adopt open government when the concepts of autocracy and openness are antithetical? This paper attempts to address these questions using three case study countries in Central Asia: Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Kyrgyzstan which adopted open government policies. It finds evidence of co-optation, network authoritarianism, and state unresponsiveness/resistance to citizens’ inputs.

Trajectories of local open government: An empirical investigation of managerial and political perceptions

‘Open government’ refers to transparent, participative decision-making and platform-based citizen-government collaboration and has emerged as one paradigm at the local government level, in particular. However, substantial disparities exist in open government adoption among municipalities, and the empirical evidence on the determinants of open government adoption is sparse and mixed. This article considers open government adoption by integrating the resource- and knowledge-based views and decision-makers’ open government willingness. We argue that the positive impacts of internal capacity depend on the municipal decision-makers’ open government willingness. Using data from a survey conducted among local decision-makers, we investigate organizational ability to implement open government and decision-makers' preferences and adoption level. The findings indicate that organizational capacity is positively associated with open government. In addition, the effect of ability on adoption is partially mediated by leaders’ perceptions that open government is a meaningful opportunity for the municipality.

The challenge of the bicycle street: Applying collaborative governance processes while protecting user centered innovations

The innovation of the bicycle street allows missing links in cycling networks to be developed in places where financial or spatial constraints present challenges to implementing separated cycling facilities. Two separate cases in the Netherlands demonstrate that when the intent is to use the innovation to resolve spatial constraints, the goal of reaching consensus between different stakeholders involved with a collaborative governance process can lead to a result in which the user practices necessary to make the innovation a success are not sufficiently protected. These cases show how collaborative governance processes in transportation planning can lead to innovations being implemented in ways that fail to support the group that they are intended to benefit. This argument is supported by drawing on two different bodies of literature: 1) collaborative governance literature that describes the movement to increase the legitimacy of government supported projects through substantial stakeholder involvement; and 2) strategic niche management literature that describes the role that established user practices play in the upscaling potential of innovations. These literatures are connected through the evaluation technique of Strategic Policy Niche Management (SPNM), which has been used to apply strategic niche management principles to innovations in transportation policy. The article uses the concept of SPNM to illustrate the need for understanding the connection between citizens in collaborative governance and users in innovation development. This relationship is illustrated by examining the history of a transportation innovation, the bicycle street, with a particular focus on how its development in Germany and Belgium as a means to provide bicycle infrastructure at low cost differs from its introduction in the Netherlands, where it has been used as a compromise solution between different user groups. The history of the bicycle street and its uses in different contexts is followed by a detailed case study on the contested implementation of a bicycle street in Eindhoven, the Netherlands. This specific case reveals what can happen when an innovative project is undertaken with a focus on consensus among potentially impacted stakeholders and does not give increased weight to the needs of the users of the innovation. The innovation may develop sufficient support to be implemented but may not be sufficiently attuned to user practices to meet the needs of its intended user group, creating an obstacle to future upscaling. The article concludes with a discussion of how adopting specific regulations for bicycle streets could resolve this issue, preventing bicycle streets from being implemented in places where other options would better serve cyclists.

Broadening the Scope of Local Government: A Survey among Mayors and Public Managers

‘Open government’ refers to transparent, participative decision-making, and platform-based citizen-government collaboration and has emerged as a paradigm at the local government level in particular. However, substantial disparities exist in open government adoption among municipalities, and the empirical evidence on the determinants of open government adoption is sparse and mixed. This article considers open government adoption by integrating the resource- and knowledge-based views and decision-makers’ open government willingness. We argue that the positive impacts of internal capacity depend on the municipal decision-makers’ open government willingness. Using data from a survey conducted among local decision-makers, we investigate organizational ability to implement open government and their preferences and the adoption level. The findings indicate that organizational capacity is positively associated with open government. Further, the effect of ability on adoption is partially mediated by leaders’ perceptions that open government is a meaningful opportunity for the municipality.

Citizen–State Collaboration in Combating COVID-19 in China: Experiences and Lessons From the Perspective of Co-Production

From the perspective of co-production, this article examines how Chinese citizens and governments worked together in fighting against COVID-19 in a health emergency context. Based on observations, as well as analyses of policy documents and self-organization cases, this article shows that Chinese citizens and governments collaborated through three different channels in fighting against the virus, but different channels produced different results. First, through residential committees, Chinese governments successfully mobilized most citizens to comply with stay-at-home orders, contact traced and isolated suspected cases through existing networks within the communities. Second, as a formal channel for state–society interaction during the crisis, government-organized nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) failed in bridging demands of the health system and contributions from citizens. Third, self-organizations emerged as a key informal channel for citizens to fight against the virus. The experiences and lessons learned in this citizen–government collaboration in combating the virus may offer some implications for other settings.

Does citizen coproduction lead to better urban services in smart cities projects? An empirical study on e-participation in a mobile big data platform

With contemporary development of digital technology and smart cities initiatives, citizen co-production has created a new government-citizen interface. However, it remains inconclusive whether such citizen-government collaboration has achieved the fundamental goal of improving service quality for citizens. In this research, we tested the relationship between e-participation as a form of co-production and service performance, using multiple large longitudinal datasets from a smart city mobile platform. The results of the analysis show that citizen e-participation, in providing service feedback, is positively associated with the clearance rate of urban service requests in subdistrict service units, after controlling for various factors. We also found that the effect size of e-participation on service performance varies between different types of city services. E-participation has a stronger relative influence on complex problems that may involve multiple agencies, than with simple routine services.

Government-Driven Participation and Collective Intelligence: A Case of the Government 3.0 Initiative in Korea

The Park Geun-hye Administration of Korea (2013–2017) aims to increase the level of transparency and citizen trust in government through the Government 3.0 initiative. This new initiative for public sector innovation encourages citizen-government collaboration and collective intelligence, thereby improving the quality of policy-making and implementation and solving public problems in a new way. However, the national initiative that identifies collective intelligence and citizen-government collaboration alike fails to understand what the wisdom of crowds genuinely means. Collective intelligence is not a magic bullet to solve public problems, which are called “wicked problems”. Collective deliberation over public issues often brings pain and patience, rather than fun and joy. It is not so easy that the public finds the best solution for soothing public problems through collective deliberation. The Government 3.0 initiative does not pay much attention to difficulties in gathering scattered wisdom, but rather highlights uncertain opportunities created by collective interactions and communications. This study deeply discusses the weaknesses in the logic of, and approach to, collective intelligence underlying the Government 3.0 initiative in Korea and the overall influence of the national initiative on participatory democracy.

A sentiment analysis of U.S. local government tweets: The connection between tone and citizen involvement

As social media tools become more popular at all levels of government, more research is needed to determine how the platforms can be used to create meaningful citizen–government collaboration. Many entities use the tools in one-way, push manners. The aim of this research is to determine if sentiment (tone) can positively influence citizen participation with government via social media. Using a systematic random sample of 125 U.S. cities, we found that positive sentiment is more likely to engender digital participation but this was not a perfect one-to-one relationship. Some cities that had an overall positive sentiment score and displayed a participatory style of social media use did not have positive citizen sentiment scores. We argue that positive tone is only one part of a successful social media interaction plan, and encourage social media managers to actively manage platforms to use activities that spur participation.

Citizen–government collaboration on social media: The case of Twitter in the 2011 riots in England

How social media can enable opportunities for collaboration between citizens and governments is an evolving issue in theory and practice. This paper examines the dynamic aspects of collaboration in the context of the 2011 riots in England. In August 2011, parts of London and other cities in England suffered from extensive disorder and even loss of human lives. Based on a dataset of 1746 posts by 81 local government Twitter accounts during or shortly after the riots, we explore how local authorities attempted to reduce the effects of the riots and support community recovery. Using Twitter's conversational and rapid update features, they produced a variety of informational and actionable messages with clear calls for offline or online action. In some cases, collective against the riots evolved in a mutual way: not only citizens were mobilized by local authorities, but also local authorities actively promoted actions initiated by citizens.

Investing in Democracy: Engaging Citizens in Collaborative Governance - By Carmen Sirianni

A review of the book Investing in Democracy: Engaging Citizens in Collaborative Governance, by Carmen Sirianni is presented.

Investing in Democracy: Engaging Citizens in Collaborative Governance by Carmen Sirianni

Investing in Democracy: Engaging Citizens in Collaborative Governance <i>by Carmen Sirianni</i>

Investing in democracy: Engaging citizens in collaborative governance, by Carmen Sirianni

<i>Investing in democracy: Engaging citizens in collaborative governance</i>, by Carmen Sirianni

Collaborative Governance and Civic Empowerment: A Discussion of Investing in Democracy: Engaging Citizens in Collaborative Governance

Whether as a solution to problems of political legitimacy or social mistrust, as a way of involving civil society, or as a method of crafting more effective “third way” policies, collaborative governance has been a topic of renewed interest for political scientists and policy intellectuals. Carmen Sirianni's Investing in Democracy: Engaging Citizens in Collaborative Governance (Brookings, 2009) is an important new book that raises many of these issues. Perspectives on Politics is a forum for raising questions of interest to a broad range of political scientists. In this symposium, we have asked a number of prominent political scientists and policy analysts to assess the book and to address two broader questions: in what ways does the book draw from and add to political science scholarship, and in what ways does political science scholarship help to shed light on the book's core themes?

Collaborative Governance and Civic Empowerment: A Discussion ofInvesting in Democracy: Engaging Citizens in Collaborative Governance

Whether as a solution to problems of political legitimacy or social mistrust, as a way of involving civil society, or as a method of crafting more effective “third way” policies, collaborative governance has been a topic of renewed interest for political scientists and policy intellectuals. Carmen Sirianni'sInvesting in Democracy: Engaging Citizens in Collaborative Governance(Brookings, 2009) is an important new book that raises many of these issues.Perspectives on Politicsis a forum for raising questions of interest to a broad range of political scientists. In this symposium, we have asked a number of prominent political scientists and policy analysts to assess the book and to address two broader questions: in what ways does the book draw from and add to political science scholarship, and in what ways does political science scholarship help to shed light on the book's core themes?

Collaborative Governance and Civic Empowerment: A Discussion of Investing in Democracy: Engaging Citizens in Collaborative Governance

Whether as a solution to problems of political legitimacy or social mistrust, as a way of involving civil society, or as a method of crafting more effective “third way” policies, collaborative governance has been a topic of renewed interest for political scientists and policy intellectuals. Carmen Sirianni's Investing in Democracy: Engaging Citizens in Collaborative Governance (Brookings, 2009) is an important new book that raises many of these issues. Perspectives on Politics is a forum for raising questions of interest to a broad range of political scientists. In this symposium, we have asked a number of prominent political scientists and policy analysts to assess the book and to address two broader questions: in what ways does the book draw from and add to political science scholarship, and in what ways does political science scholarship help to shed light on the book's core themes?

Collaborative Governance and Civic Empowerment: A Discussion of Investing in Democracy: Engaging Citizens in Collaborative Governance

Whether as a solution to problems of political legitimacy or social mistrust, as a way of involving civil society, or as a method of crafting more effective “third way” policies, collaborative governance has been a topic of renewed interest for political scientists and policy intellectuals. Carmen Sirianni's Investing in Democracy: Engaging Citizens in Collaborative Governance (Brookings, 2009) is an important new book that raises many of these issues. Perspectives on Politics is a forum for raising questions of interest to a broad range of political scientists. In this symposium, we have asked a number of prominent political scientists and policy analysts to assess the book and to address two broader questions: in what ways does the book draw from and add to political science scholarship, and in what ways does political science scholarship help to shed light on the book's core themes?

Investing in Democracy: Engaging Citizens in Collaborative Governance

Investing in Democracy: Engaging Citizens in Collaborative Governance

Investing in democracy: engaging citizens in collaborative governance

The health of American democracy ultimately depends on our willingness and ability to work together as citizens and stakeholders in our republic. Government policies often fail to promote such collaboration. But if designed properly, they can do much to strengthen civic engagement. That is the central message of Carmen Sirianni's eloquent new book. Rather than encourage citizens to engage in civic activity, government often puts obstacles in their way. Many agencies treat citizens as passive clients rather than as community members, overlooking their ability to mobilize assets and networks to solve problems. Many citizen initiatives run up against rigid rules and bureaucratic silos, causing all but the most dedicated activists to lose heart. The unfortunate --and unnecessary --result is a palpable decline in the quality of civic life. Fortunately, growing numbers of policymakers across the country are figuring out how government can serve as a partner and catalyst for collaborative problem solving. Investing in Democracy details three such success stories: neighborhood planning in Seattle; youth civic engagement programs in Hampton, Virginia; and efforts to develop civic environmentalism at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The book explains what measures were taken and why they succeeded. It distills eight core design principles that characterize effective collaborative governance and concludes with concrete recommendations for federal policy.

Connecting Neighborhood Councils and City Agencies: Trust Building through the Learning and Design Forum Process

Though citizen trust in government is very important for the legitimacy of the government, there is evidence to show that citizen trust in government is decreasing, not only in the United States of America but also all over the world. Scholars argue that citizen participation and collaborative processes involving citizen stakeholders in government decision-making could lead to increasing citizen trust in government. However, the argument that citizen participation in governance and citizen-government collaboration can lead to increased trust in governance from a conceptual or macro level perspective is difficult to visualize or establish empirically. We suggest that this collaboration and participation has to be at the experiential micro or local government level rather than at the conceptual macro level. Citizen participation in general has to translate into collaborative relationships between specific micro-level citizen organizations and city or local public agencies. We also propose that citizen participation mechanisms like collaborations and cooperative arrangements as well as the processes of collaboration are critical to establish the participation-trust causal relationship. We then present our Learning and Design Forum model as a process that facilitates a sustainable agreement between neighborhood councils and city agencies model for developing mutual trust and collaboration.