The Democratic Anchorage of Governance Networks

Abstract

Governance through the negotiated interaction of a plurality of public, semi-public and private actors seems to provide an efficient means for governing our increasingly complex, fragmented and multi-layered societies. However, the big question is whether governance networks also contribute to the democratic governance of society. Governance network theory and postliberal theories of democracy claim that there are both democratic problems and potentials associated with interactive network governance. In order to be able to assess, and possibly improve, the democratic performance of governance networks, the authors of this article develop and substantiate an analytical model for measuring the democratic anchorage of governance networks in different political constituencies and in an appropriate set of democratic rules and norms. In addition, it is argued that politicians should play a key role in efforts to ensure the democratic anchorage of governance networks.

Policy forums: Why do they exist and what are they used for?

“…What is more, there are exchange or dependency relations between different types of forums, not least in terms of joint members. Assessing such an ecology of forums and their relations is crucial for understanding the political system as a whole (see also Sörensen and Torfing 2005;Edelenbos et al 2010;Lubell et al 2010;Lubell 2013). …”

“…Research on policy forums is highly relevant for political science and public administration, given the contrasting opinions about their role for democracy (Sörensen and Torfing 2005;Klijn and Skelcher 2007). On the one hand, policy forums have been accused of undermining democratic legitimacy and being ineffective tools of governance.…”

Wicked Water Problems: Can Network Governance Deliver? Integrated Water Management Case Studies from New Zealand and Oregon, USA

“…Other elements of success include a high level of trust between network actors, strong ties within the network to assure accountability and performance, and the creation of social capital (Koliba et al, 2011). Sorensen and Torfing (2005) posit that "governance networks are democratically anchored to the extent that they are properly linked to different political constituencies and to a relevant set of democratic norms that are part of the democratic ethos of society" (p. 201) The authors define democratic anchorage as comprising a combination of control by democratically elected politicians that are:…”

“…Sorensen and Torfing (2005) posit that "governance networks are democratically anchored to the extent that they are properly linked to different political constituencies and to a relevant set of democratic norms that are part of the democratic ethos of society" (2005, p. 201). Oregon's case did lend legitimacy to the policy network both formally (via elected officials) and informally (via bureaucrats) representing citizens as well as particular interest groups.…”

“…This may be attributed to a number of factors, including the durability of the network, strong leadership, incentives for stakeholders to participate, or legal and institutional constraints that are discussed in more detail in question 5 below. To review the concept of democratic anchorage, Sorensen and Torfing (2005) posit that "governance networks are democratically anchored to the extent that they are properly linked to different political constituencies and to a relevant set of democratic norms that are part of the democratic ethos of society" (p. 201). The authors (Sorensen and Torfing, 2005, p. 201) Applying these criteria, the research illustrates that both case studies were democratically anchored; however, the New Zealand case demonstrated lower levels of transparency and public accountability.…”