Introduction

As was suggested in Chapter Five, a key challenge for research influenced by Marxism is to move between the domains of theory, empirical inquiry and struggle. The first part of this chapter develops a research framework drawing on the tradition of ‘dialectical network analysis’ (Benson, 1977; Marsh and Smith, 2000). The chapter then explores the challenges of critical inquiry in the governance field, focusing on three issues: the case for seeing research as a critical intervention in public discourse, the choices at stake in adopting ‘insider’ or ‘outsider’ perspectives on governance network participation and potential avenues for comparative inquiry. The final part of the chapter considers the strengths and limitations of the network as a medium of counter-hegemonic power beyond the state–civil society interface.

Dialectical network analysis

Chapters Four and Five argued for a ‘strongly dialectical’ account of the development of governance networks as part of the flawed neoliberal hegemonic strategy. Paterson (2009, p 46) observes that neo-Gramscian research in international political economy calls for a ‘new multilateralism’, the democratisation and transformation of international organizations from the bottom up through the struggles of social movements. He notes that this agenda derives from a non-deterministic (arguably weak) dialectic, which specifies no necessary end point to conflict between social forces and depicts nothing as inevitable. In contrast, the strongly dialectical perspective maintains that the contradictory and conflictual nature of an emergent, emerging totality makes crises inevitable and transformation and democratisation highly improbable without first transforming the relations in question. It introduces no other determinism, but points to the manner in which ageing capitalism increasingly impedes the construction of stable institutions capable of realising goods such as trust, sustainability, equality and democracy.

How, then, does the strongly dialectical approach differ from the post-dialectical and weakly dialectical accounts? The following sketch draws from dialectical network analysis in political science (Marsh and Smith, 2000; Evans, 2001), organisational studies (Benson, 1977) and neo-institutionalism (Davies and Trounstine, 2012). Benson's (1977) dialectical framework sought to build on Marxism, considering how contradictions in organisational life might be exploited for emancipatory ends. He identified four elements of dialectical network analysis: social construction, totality, contradiction and praxis. Benson's concept of social construction refers to the ‘production of social structure … within a social structure’ (1977, p 3).