Local governance structures

In discussion about local governance structures, use of the word 'proliferation' has, well, multiplied. There is much to be celebrated about new initiatives that offer local involvement and accountability. But is the sometimes bewildering array of initiatives, partnerships and forums to be found below the local government level going to result in more responsive services, more meaningful involvement in decision-making, a greater sense of democratic validity? JRF have just published a collection of studies of local governance in the four nations, called Mapping governance at the local level, which assesses the range and type of initiatives for various policy sectors such as health, public safety, education, area regeneration, children’s services, local housing strategies, Agenda 21 and others. At the risk of seeming anglo-centric, I've so far only read the report for England (well, it's where I live and work) written by Kirsten Bound and Paul Skidmore of Demos, and it's very enlightening. As a case study, they tried to map local governance arrangements in Bradford, and the variety is daunting. They note that it can seem quite opaque to citizens trying to navigate their way around it.

"With public trust and legitimacy in governing institutions of most kinds at a low ebb at both national and local level ... there is a risk that the complexity of the new local governance landscape simply becomes a source of confusion, misunderstanding and distrust."

Stepping back from the Bradford case study, the authors go on to reflect on the wider policy context:

"What we are seeing at present seems to be something of a gamble about how public legitimacy can be restored. On the one hand, it is possible that new distributed structures will give people a growing range of opportunities to shape service delivery, clarify understanding of the issues and trade-offs involved, and result in decisions backed by a broader base of public support. On the other hand, there is a real danger that the gap between the simple mental models and heuristics that ordinary citizens use in thinking about local governance and the increasing complexity of the situation on the ground becomes ever wider."

I've wittered on before about what I think are some of the requirements: (a) some concerted work on bringing about a participative culture, stimulating citizens' lifelong expectations of participation in the decision-making processes that affect them; and (b), as I put it here, moving on from the present policy preoccupation with formal organisations as if they wholly represent community life.