The Environmental Performance of Participatory and Collaborative Governance: A Framework of Causal Mechanisms

Abstract

Many have advocated for collaborative governance and the participation of citizens and stakeholders on the basis that it can improve the environmental outcomes of public decision making, as compared to traditional, top‐down decision making. Others, however, point to the potential negative effects of participation and collaboration on environmental outcomes. This article draws on several literatures to identify five clusters of causal mechanisms describing the relationship between participation and environmental outcomes. We distinguish (i) mechanisms that describe how participation impacts on the environmental standard of outputs, from (ii) mechanisms relating to the implementation of outputs. Three mechanism clusters focus on the role of representation of environmental concerns, participants' environmental knowledge, and dialogical interaction in decision making. Two further clusters elaborate on the role of acceptance, conflict resolution, and collaborative networks for the implementation of decisions. In addition to the mechanisms, linking independent with dependent variables, we identify the conditions under which participation may lead to better (or worse) environmental outcomes. This helps to resolve apparent contradictions in the literature. We conclude by outlining avenues for research that builds on this framework for analysis.

Participation in Multiple Decision Making Water Governance Forums in Brazil Enhances Actors’ Perceived Level of Influence

“…We specifically focus here on the role of participatory forums, which we take to represent organized and clearly articulated games where participation takes place, similar to “collaborative institutions” in the language of Lubell et al (). We borrow the definition given by Newig et al of participatory governance as “processes and structures of public decision making that engage actors from the private sector, civil society, and/or the public at large, with varying degrees of communication, collaboration and delegation of decision power to participants” (Newig, Challies, Jager, Kochskaemper, & Adzersen, , p. 5). We similarly prefer the term participation to collaboration, as collaboration more aptly describes one of the possible forms of interaction within participatory forums.…”

“…We similarly prefer the term participation to collaboration, as collaboration more aptly describes one of the possible forms of interaction within participatory forums. Most importantly, participation “stresses the involvement of actors who are not normally charged with decision making” (Newig et al, , p. 4). We do, however, acknowledge that the literature does not consistently follow this distinction and that the term collaboration might still be appropriate here, particularly as it conveys the presence of actors representing organized interests.…”

Legitimate planning processes or informed decisions? Exploring public officials' rationales for participation in regional green infrastructure planning in Estonia

“…Many studies have analysed the performance of participatory processes in environmental policy and governance (e.g., Newig et al, 2017). However, literature exploring the presence and influence of different rationales in participatory practice is scarce.…”

“…There is a wealth of literature on the evaluation and performance of participation (e.g., Newig, Challies, Jager, Kochskämper, & Adzersen, 2017). However, the rationales for stakeholder participation-the underlying meanings attributed to participatory approaches-have rarely been explicitly explored in the CEE region, especially in the Baltic countries (Blicharska, Isaksson, Richardson, & Wu, 2011;Caddell, 2009;Wesselink, Paavola, Fritsch, & Renn, 2011).…”

The Effect of Public Participation on Environmental Governance in China–Based on the Analysis of Pollutants Emissions Employing a Provincial Quantification

“…Scott used quality data to test the relationship between collaborative governance and watershed quality, and found that a group engaging in management activities would be beneficial to greater environmental gains [23]. Newig et al identified five clusters of causal mechanisms describing the relationship between participation and environmental outcomes [24].…”