Scratching the surface of collaborative and associative governance: identifying the diversity of social action in institutional capacity building

Citation
Na. Phelps et M. Tewdwr-jones, Scratching the surface of collaborative and associative governance: identifying the diversity of social action in institutional capacity building, ENVIR PL-A, 32(1), 2000, pp. 111-130
Citations number
62
Categorie Soggetti
EnvirnmentalStudies Geografy & Development
Journal title
ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING A
ISSN journal
0308518X → ACNP
Volume
32
Issue
1
Year of publication
2000
Pages
111 - 130
Database
ISI
SICI code
0308-518X(200001)32:1<111:STSOCA>2.0.ZU;2-D
Abstract
Recent work on 'collaborative planning' has concentrated on applying Haberm as's work on communicative action to the realm of urban and regional govern ance. This work has its parallels in other disciplines, notably geography, where institutional capacity building has been considered as part of local systems of governance. Both bodies of work are premised to a degree on the rationality of communication. Habermas contrasted his ideas on the possibil ities for communicative action with the widespread presence of 'strategic b ehaviour' in social relations. The dual nature of governance as both an ins titutional and a political activity means that consideration of such strate gic forms of behaviour is essential to a deeper understanding of the nature of collaborative and associative forms of governance and their outcomes. W hat social scientists refer to as 'teleological/strategic action: 'normativ ely regulated action: and 'dramaturgical action' together with communicativ e action are all integral to collaborative governance. In this paper, we co nsider examples of the manner in which institutional capacity has been exer cised in attempts to attract a major inward investment project into the Uni ted Kingdom. The example illustrates the range of social actions that are p resent beneath the surface of collaborative and associative governance. Mor e specifically, our example highlights the structuring of institutional and organisational interactions through the strategic behaviour of a dominant local organisation.