The government-citizen relationship in river landscape planning: doomed to conflict? So What? Workshop Sheffield 31 March 2011 Madelinde Winnubst Utrecht University School of Governance
Agenda Presentation of my PhD research - Analytical framework and case studies - Research approach - Some outcomes The value of interpretetive research
Research question What factors and mechanisms influence the social interaction between government authorities en local groups in river projects?
What is central in my research? Social interaction between government and citizens Outcomes of social interaction conflict, debate, negotiation, dialogue, collaboration Process is point of departure: - starting position of actors (action potential) - how do actors influence the process (power sources) - how do actors give meaning to social interaction (framing)
Government – Citizen Relationship Potentials of both actors (their capacity to act and motivation to act) Use of power (power sources: direct or non direct coercive power, legitimate, reward power, hindering power, knowledge power, media power, sociability) Interaction strategies (framing, bridging and buffering strategies) Interactions (conflict, debate, negotiation, dialogue, collaboration) [Culture and tradition of government and citizens]
Government – Citizen Relationship Action potential Capacity to act Resources Mandate Coordinating mechanisms Consistency Motivation to act Political priority Organisational ambition Personal vision Government Citizens Action potential Capacity to act Resources Trust Social Identity Motivation to act Common purpose Solidarity
Analytical framework
Case studies Dike relocation in Lent Emergency storage area in Ooijpolder Terps plan in Overdiep Choice was based upon: -Government involvement (top-down versus bottom-up) -Government-citizen relationship : conflict or collaboration
Research approach Interpretive approach - What is communicated? - How it is communicated? > narratives of actors ‘small stories’ as a way of making sense of actions - tellings of ungoing or future events - tellings of shared events - but also refusals to tell
Some outcomes (1) In interactions: Long term modes and short term dynamics Long term modes - Conflict mode - Collaboration mode In modes: short term dynamics - Conflict > debate and vice versa - Debate > negotiation > dialogue > collaboration and vice versa
Some outcomes (2) - Governance processen have the aim to minimise uncertainties, but provide uncertainties as well (e.g. concerning the results and creating precedents) - Citizen exclusion is a source of conflict - Power is an important mechanism in government-citizen relationship > Citizens and government authorities use hindering power > Citizens use knowledge power and media power, government authorities use coercion and legitimation power (and sometimes reward power)
The value of interpretive approach - How do public policy, theories and theoretical concepts work out in practice? (e.g. social capital, power sources, multi-level governance) - Linking ‘small’ stories with ‘big’ theories (interpreting everyday life through the lense of specific theories, bringing in multiple meanings, giving a voice to those who are acting in the field) - Through writing skills one may come to inventions: to give a voice to the feelings of people, to record their stories, as a means to get insight in social reality. To show contradictions and dissonance, experiences of individuals which may represent general social conditions (lecture Richard Sennett, 24 November 2010).