Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 91
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Bice, Sara and Merriam, Angela 2016. Defining Asia Capabilities for Australia's Public Service. Australian Journal of Public Administration, p. n/a.

    Cobbinah, Patrick Brandful and Erdiaw-Kwasie, Michael Odei 2016. Population Growth and Rapid Urbanization in the Developing World.

    George, Colleen and Reed, Maureen G. 2016. Revealing inadvertent elitism in stakeholder models of environmental governance: assessing procedural justice in sustainability organizations. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, p. 1.

    Johansson, Håkan and Koch, Max 2016. Combating Poverty in Local Welfare Systems.

    Johansson, Håkan and Panican, Alexandru 2016. Combating Poverty in Local Welfare Systems.

    Rabe, Noor Suzilawati Osman, Mariana Mohammed and Bachok, Syahriah 2016. An Assessment of Stakeholder Perception on the Development of Iskandar Malaysia: Review of Process and Procedure. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 222, p. 644.

    Scott, Tyler A. and Thomas, Craig W. 2016. Unpacking the Collaborative Toolbox: Why and When Do Public Managers Choose Collaborative Governance Strategies?. Policy Studies Journal,

    Scott, Rodney J. Cavana, Robert Y. and Cameron, Donald 2016. Client Perceptions of Reported Outcomes of Group Model Building in the New Zealand Public Sector. Group Decision and Negotiation, Vol. 25, Issue. 1, p. 77.

    Smith, Cobi and Rowe, Gene 2016. Big Picture Bioethics: Developing Democratic Policy in Contested Domains.

    Wood, Dominic A. 2016. The importance of liberal values within policing: police and crime commissioners, police independence and the spectre of illiberal democracy. Policing and Society, Vol. 26, Issue. 2, p. 148.

    Bradley, Quintin 2015. The political identities of neighbourhood planning in England. Space and Polity, Vol. 19, Issue. 2, p. 97.

    Cheyne, Christine 2015. Changing Urban Governance in New Zealand: Public Participation and Democratic Legitimacy in Local Authority Planning and Decision-Making 1989–2014. Urban Policy and Research, Vol. 33, Issue. 4, p. 416.

    Crowley, Anne 2015. Is Anyone Listening? The Impact of Children’s Participation on Public Policy. The International Journal of Children's Rights, Vol. 23, Issue. 3, p. 602.

    McCall, Vikki and Rummery, Kirstein 2015. The Theory and Practice of Welfare Partnerships: The Case of the Cultural Sector. Social Policy & Administration, p. n/a.

    Mitchell, Michael Lockwood, Michael Moore, Susan A. and Clement, Sarah 2015. Scenario analysis for biodiversity conservation: A social–ecological system approach in the Australian Alps. Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 150, p. 69.

    Monsalve, Carlos Puyosa, Hector and Teran, Luis 2015. 2015 Second International Conference on eDemocracy & eGovernment (ICEDEG). p. 1.

    Ojiako, Udechukwu Papadopoulos, Thanos Stamati, Teta Anagnostopoulos, Dimosthenis and Marshall, Alasdair 2015. Collaborative governance in Greek infrastructure projects. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Management, Procurement and Law, Vol. 168, Issue. 3, p. 135.

    Olaoye, Olanrewaju 2015. Handbook of Research on Globalization, Investment, and Growth-Implications of Confidence and Governance.

    Orr, Christopher J. Adamowski, Jan F. Medema, Wietske and Milot, Nicolas 2015. A multi-level perspective on the legitimacy of collaborative water governance in Québec. Canadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques, p. 1.

    Powe, Neil Pringle, Rhona and Hart, Trevor 2015. Matching the process to the challenge within small town regeneration. Town Planning Review, Vol. 86, Issue. 2, p. 177.


Public Participation and Collaborative Governance

  • DOI:
  • Published online: 01 April 2004

This paper draws on the findings of a study within the ESRC's Democracy and Participation Programme. It explores the processes of participation within deliberative forums – such as user panels, youth forums, area based committees – developed as a means of encouraging a more active, participating mode of citizenship and of improving welfare services by making them more responsive to users. Our findings open up a number of issues about constraints on the development of ‘collaborative governance’. To understand these constraints, we suggest, there is need to locate participation initiatives in the context of government policy, to explore ways in which such policy is interpreted and enacted by strategic actors in local organisations and to examine the perceptions of members of deliberative forums themselves. Our findings highlight the constraints on the ‘political opportunity structures’ created by the enhanced policy focus on public participation, and the consequent limits to ‘collaborative governance’. We discuss how governance theory and social movement theory can each contribute to the analysis, but also suggest productive points of engagement through which each of these bodies of theory might enrich the other.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Journal of Social Policy
  • ISSN: 0047-2794
  • EISSN: 1469-7823
  • URL: /core/journals/journal-of-social-policy
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *