The Politics of Urban Governance - "One of the shortcomings in much of governance research is that it has been too much concerned with the cast of actors and the configuration of collaboration."

The 4 ‘ideal type’ urban governance models

“One of the points I make in The Politics of Urban Governance is, simply put, that you choose different collaborators depending on what you want to achieve as an urban political leader. Later, as collaboration gels and institutionalizes, the cast of collaborators will to a large extent define the overarching policy preferences of a city. Thus, where you want to go defines who you should collaborate with, and later those you collaborate with will influence where you want to go. The 4 models I outline in the book describe 4 different casts of actors and urban governance objectives. The models frequently tend to coexist, and urban political conflict is not seldom a clash between two or several of these models.” The four ‘ideal type’ models which form the author’s urban governance typology are:

• The pro-growth camp, has little understanding for catering to those segments of society that do not contribute to that growth.
• In corporatist governance, powerful local organized interests seek to ensure that urban policy caters to their constituencies and that policy making remains a process among a limited number of interest organizations.
• Managerial governance—much in vogue these days—is a model of governance where politicians step back and “let the managers manage”, the argument being that running a city is not about politics but about delivering good, cost-effective services.
• This philosophy stands in stark contrast to welfare governance where the victims of economic restructuring scramble to ensure that the city supports them.

The EU2020 goals talk of smart-, sustainable-, and inclusive growth. How can urban governments see to this?

This is where the urban governance perspective probably offers better analytical mileage than the local government approach. All these models of future cities have one thing in common; they depart from a notion of the city government as a coordinator and facilitator rather than as the chief agent. In the EU, cities are also important instruments in vertical communication, frequently direct communication between the EU and subnational government. Thus, in smart cities, sustainable cities and inclusive growth cities, the role of local government is to set the goals, mobilize strategic actors and resources in society and to get everyone involved and share responsibilities. That is the only way those bold policy objectives can be attained.
“This would not solve the issue of how different governance models clash but no one ever said that urban politics should be consensual. Well, John Stuart Mill and de Tocqueville said that, or hoped that, but then again their models of local democracy did not have to deal with the messy issues confronting today’s cities.”

EU to keep an eye out on government decisions with regards to stimulating the financial markets

I personally believe that government has a major responsibility in overseeing and regulating financial markets. Whether the EU should oversee national governments’ decisions with regards to those markets is a matter of how far we want the federal nature of the EU to develop. The Greek crisis has highlighted the need for national governments to keep correct and reliable financial records but there is little to suggest that Greece is representative to the Eurozone as a whole in terms of national accounts reporting. Those who want to strengthen the EU may well use the Greek crisis to support their claim that the Commission should monitor closely what national governments do vis-à-vis financial markets.

How can a sense of togetherness, a sense of Europe be instilled within local urban governments?

I am going to stick my neck out on this one and say that the issues related to the balance of strength between the EU and national governments is a national issue, not a local issue, and that there is a strong sense of shared European destiny at the regional and local levels than at the national levels. We must not forget that while that battle is raging the collaboration among cities and regions in Europe is both deepening and expanding. Cross-border networks are mushrooming, cities with shared economic interests forge coalitions within the EU, and regions have for decades been collaborating closely. It is, indeed, a Europe of the cities and regions.

Multilevel Urban Governance

I continue to be amazed by the pragmatic, goal-oriented nature of collaboration among cities and regions in the EU. Cities and regions have to deal with issues of horizontal and vertical collaboration at once. The multilevel nature of EU governance rewards entrepreneurial cities and regions. Unlike domestic public decision-making processes where all the steps are known beforehand, the EU tends to organize a conference, or set up a fund for some purpose, and cities that are “in the know” will have a much better shot at those funds compared to more idling cities; cities in some countries know how to play the multilevel game while others are still learning.

EUKN, Elizabeth Winkel