Redesigning Rules for Participation in Local Governance

Corporatist arrangements in local governance are formal structures designed to incorporate interest groups in decision-making. Local corporatism is often dysfunctional. This may be a result of malign intent. However, where there are good faith actors, what are some conditions under which corporatist structures have been redesigned? Our paper tests theoretical expectations from institutionalist theory. Theory suggests that the dynamics of change are shaped by disruptions in the institutional context, which can create conditions that lead to the formation of new rules. Using a detailed case study, we examine rule redesign in local corporatism within a new tier of sub-national government in the UK. Macro-level disruption alone did not automatically generate participatory redesign. Instead, redesign was mobilised through the agency of multiple actors creating and amending rule specifications. We highlight that institutional change may take the form of a series of iterative mini-disruptions created by actor agency. Our research suggests that there is a need to refine expectations about critical junctures to incorporate a more nuanced model of layered, incremental institutional redesign. We conclude that a focus on local variation may offer a cautiously optimistic account of reform in a context often seen as resistant to innovation

Citizen journalism · Corporate governance · Corporatism · Institutional change · Local government · Public Policy and Administration Research · Sustainability and Climate Change Governance · Urban Planning and Governance