Collaborative governance towards cities sustainability transition

Conti, Diego de Melo; Guevara, Arnoldo José de Hoyos; Heinrichs, Harald; Silva, Luciano Ferreira da; Quaresma, Cristiano Capellani; Beté, Thiago de Souza

doi:10.1590/2175-3369.011.e20190046

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

urbe. Revista Brasileira de Gestão Urbana

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Thematic Section: Understanding Smart and Sustainable Cities • urbe, Rev. Bras. Gest. Urbana 11 • 2019 • https://doi.org/10.1590/2175-3369.011.e20190046 copy

Collaborative governance towards cities sustainability transition

Governança colaborativa para a transição da sustentabilidade nas cidades

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Abstract

Cities and their constant growth have a crucial role in global sustainable development. The objective of this article is to present a conceptual framework of collaborative governance for the shaping of sustainable cities. The adoption of the multiple case study (5) method allowed understanding the reality of the cities of Copenhagen (Denmark), Amsterdam (Netherlands), London (England), Hamburg (Germany) and Barcelona (Spain). Sources of evidence were collected through in-depth interviews, documents, and observation, plus the data analysis was performed by using the NVivo software. For that, exploratory-descriptive research was conducted with the use of a qualitative research approach. The results exhibit strategies, benefits, risks, and limits inherent to collaborative governance systems in the cities and bring contributions to the development of the governance theory.

Keywords:
Collaborative governance; Sustainability; Sustainable cities; Sustainable governance

Type of Respondent	Description
Public Administration	Technician of the local administration in a leadership position related to the area of governance or sustainability.
Politician	Politician, member of the sustainability committee (or similar) of the local parliament.
Industry and Commerce	Member of an industrial or commercial association related to the board or department of governance or sustainability.
Third sector	Member of a non-governmental organization or expressive movement linked to the city's sustainability.

Cities	Governance mechanisms
Copenhagen	Surveys, Regular Meetings, Opinion Consultation.
Amsterdam	Regular Meetings, Thematic Forums, Public Hearings.
London	Regular Meetings, Opinion Consultation, Online Surveys, Digital Platforms, Working Groups, Discussion Boards, Public Hearings.
Hamburg	Online Surveys, Networks, Discussion Groups.
Barcelona	Networks, Discussion Groups, Online Surveys, Regular Meetings.

Limits	Understanding
Discussions focused on self-interest.	The stakeholders of a collaborative process are willing to discuss only their own interests and agenda.
Demotivation in participatory processes.	The lack of motivation of the stakeholders to participate in collaborative processes due to slowness and lack of results.
Technical or highly complex subjects.	The use of consultation with citizens can be ineffective when the issues are technical or highly complex.
Difficulty to find solutions.	Stakeholders are able to identify problems but have difficulty in finding solutions.
Lack of consensus.	The lack of consensus could lead policymakers to take a decision, collapsing all the collaborative governance process.
The final decision must be made by a policy maker.	Collaborative governance should establish processes for collecting opinions, but the final decision rests with the politician.
Agenda definitions.	The political agent defines the agenda to be discussed with the population, not allowing other topics to be discussed.
Stakeholders without responsibility.	Participatory processes have empowered stakeholders with the right to decide, but not to hold them accountable for the effects of their decisions.
Lack of financial resources.	The lack of financial resources to structure the processes of collaborative governance.
Bureaucracies or excessive regulations.	Excessive laws and regulations can hamper collaborative governance processes.
Subjects with low attractiveness.	Subjects with low attractiveness or knowledge of the population can minimize the number of participants in a discussion.
Issues of political interest.	Issues of political interest do not progress in participatory governance processes.
Financial criteria to choose projects and public policy.	Financial criteria should be taken into account for the choice of projects and public policies discussed together with the population.

Risks and Threats	Understanding
Frustrations and unfulfilled expectations	The lack of management or excessive expectation of results by the stakeholders in a process of participation.
Participants recurrence in discussions	Meetings and discussions with the recurring presence of the same people or organizations.
The domain of the public agenda by organized groups	The domain of participatory processes by organizations with power, financial resources and conditions to influence the political agenda.
Conflicts and tensions	Emotions and negative effects of negotiation processes.
A long-term requirement for decision-making.	Long discussion processes that may require years and decades for decision-making.
Excludes citizens who do not have time to participate.	Exclusion of citizens and organizations that do not have time to participate in governance processes.
Communication problems and lack of feedback.	Lack of clarity or feedback in the communication process.
Excess of queries and unrealized results.	Emphasis on participation and low achievement.
Artificial queries and manipulation.	The choice of stakeholders favorable to government positions; the manipulation of participatory processes by stakeholders with greater power.
Deformity in public policy development.	The poor construction of public policies due to the poor design of participatory processes.
Extremisms in the negotiation process.	Extremist positions and speeches in negotiation processes, not consolidating a systemic and sustainable vision.

Category	Subcategories	Characteristics	Understanding
Collaborative Governance	Instruments and Mechanisms	Leadership of the political agents.	Influence of political leadership on the levels of collaborative governance.
		Arrangements and institutional aspects.	Legal or institutional aspects that influence the functioning of a collaborative governance system.
		Professional Structure.	Professional structure for the creation, coordination, and articulation of the process of collaborative governance.
		Interaction and participation mechanisms.	Instruments for consultation of opinion and participation
	Good Governance	Ability to collaborate.	Ability to collaborate and engage different stakeholders in a process of participation.
		Power balance and Consensus.	Negotiation process among independent stakeholders in an environment of a balance of power for the establishment of solutions and agreements through common sense.
		Long-term vision.	Construction of long-term policies and plans aimed at sustainable development with the participation of society's stakeholders.
		Communication and Transparency.	Communication processes and required features for the development of trust.

Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná Rua Imaculada Conceição, 1155. Prédio da Administração - 6°andar, 80215-901 - Curitiba - PR, 55 41 3271-1701 - Curitiba - PR - Brazil
E-mail: urbe@pucpr.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] DMC is doctor in Business Administration, e-mail: diegoconti@uol.com.br AJHG is doctor in Statistics, e-mail: arnoldodehoyos@yahoo.com.br HH is doctor in Sociology, e-mail: hheinric@leuphana.de LFS is doctor in Business Administration, e-mail: lf_silvabr@yahoo.com.br CCQ is doctor in Geography, e-mail: quaresma.cristiano@gmail.com TSB is master student in Smart and Sustainable Cities, e-mail: bete.souza.thiago@gmail.com