Process effects of multistakeholder institutions: Theory and evidence from the Open Government Partnership

Abstract

How does membership in transnational multistakeholder institutions shape states' domestic governance? We complement traditional compliance‐based approaches by developing a process model, focusing on the independent effects of processes associated with institutional membership, but separate from commitments and compliance themselves. These effects can be driven by iterative and participatory institutional features, which are increasingly prevalent in global governance. We apply this model to the Open Government Partnership (OGP), a transnational multistakeholder initiative with nearly 80 member countries, featuring highly flexible commitments and weak enforcement. Although commitments and compliance have generally been limited, a compliance‐focused approach alone cannot account for myriad other consequences globally and domestically, driven by the iterative and participatory features associated with membership. We demonstrate these at work in a case study of Mexico's OGP membership, which contributed to the spread of new norms and policy models, new political resources and opportunities for reformers, and new linkages and coalitions.

Joining the open government partnership initiative: An empirical analysis of diffusion effects

“…Bayesian learning applied to the OGP suggests that government officials learn about norms of transparency and civic participation in international organizations (Stone, 2004), which help collective learning processes and influence national processes and policies in their institutions (Berliner et al, 2021;Wilson, 2020;Žuffová, 2020). This diffusion of norms and shared consensus incentivizes the decision to join because of the reputational benefits associated with the OGP, both in terms of the legitimacy gained by the incumbents in national politics and the harmonization benefits in the international community (Finnemore & Sikkink, 1998).…”

“…The empirical evidence concerning a decade of experience with the OGP provides a few contradictory developments surrounding the implementation and the implications of the initiative. On the one hand, the voluntary nature of the commitments, the lax enforcement rules and the absence of sanctions for noncompliance has led to accusations of window dressing (Berliner, Ingrams, & Piotrowski, 2021;Ingrams, 2020). On the other hand, there are some reasons to be optimistic, primarily related to the diffusion of norms of transparency, the empowerment of civil society actors in countries where this was largely absent and the formation of coalitions supporting participation norms in government institutions (Wilson, 2020).…”

Open Government Maturity Models: A Global Comparison

“…These kinds of determinants are relatively similar globally across developed and developing countries (Safarov, 2020), which gives scholars a reasonable assumption that capacity can lead to quite a consistent maturity process provided that the determinants are in place. Further, over time, by participating in international open government initiatives, countries facilitate a developmental process of spreading norms and building coalitions (Berliner et al, 2021).…”

¿A qué nos referimos con Gobierno Abierto? Una reinterpretación a partir de su evolución histórica

“…Además, "los gobiernos miembros", de acuerdo con los procedimientos de la Alianza, "no pueden simplemente repetir los mismos compromisos, sino que tienen que generar nuevos proyectos de reforma". Aunado a ello, los diversos ejercicios se encuentran sometidos a un monitoreo externo por parte de los Informes Independientes (IRM, por sus siglas en inglés) e, incluso se contrata a evaluadores locales para analizar la calidad de los procesos de consulta (Berliner, Ingrams y Piotrowski, 2021).…”