Leadership and systems of governance: the constraints on the scope for leadership of place-based development in sub-national territories

ABSTRACT

Leadership and systems of governance: the constraints on the scope for leadership of place-based development in sub-national territories. Regional Studies. A triadic conceptualization of leadership, governance systems and central–local relations is constructed in order to aid understandings about the influence of systems of governance on the scope for place-based leadership. Deploying the dual concepts of ‘permissibility’ and ‘acceptability’ provides an innovative analytical device for deciphering the actually existing nature of place-based leadership. Recently initiated public–private partnerships in one of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) most centralized countries are analysed to articulate characteristics of controlling mechanisms of the national system of governance which shape the degree of autonomy of leadership of city and regional development in sub-national terrains.

摘要

领导力与治理系统：次国家领域中，以地方为基础之发展的领导力范畴之限制，区域研究。本文概念化领导力、治理系统与中央—地方关係间的三元关係，以协助理解治理系统对于以地方为基础的领导力范畴之影响。 “允许”与“可容受性”的双元概念之部署，提供了创新的分析工具，用以辨识以地方为基础的领导力实际存在的本质。本研究分析一个在经济合作与发展组织（OECD）中最为中央极权化的国家晚近开始实施的公私伙伴关係，以阐明在次国家领域中，形塑城市与区域发展领导力的自主程度的国家治理系统控制机制之特徵。

RÉSUMÉ

Le leadership et les systèmes de gouvernance: les contraintes pesant sur la portée du leadership quant au développement par la territorialité dans les délimitations territoriales sous-nationales. Regional Studies. On élabore ici une conceptualisation triadique de leadership, de systèmes de gouvernance et de relations État-collectivités afin de mieux comprendre l’influence des systèmes de gouvernance sur la portée du leadership par la territorialité. Utilsant le binôme ‘permissibilité’ et ‘acceptabilité’ fournit un outil analytique original pour décoder les présentes caractéristiques du leadership par la territorialité. On analyse les derniers partenariats public-privé établis dans l’un des pays les plus centralisés de l’Organisation de coopération et de développement économique (Ocde) pour articuler les caractéristiques des mécanismes de contrôle du système de gouvernance national qui influencent le degré d’autonomie pour ce qui est du leadership de l’aménagement du territoire dans les délimitations territoriales sous-nationales.

ZUSAMMENFASSUNG

Führung und Regierungsformen: Grenzen des Umfangs der Führung von ortsbasierter Entwicklung in subnationalen Gebieten. Regional Studies. Um das Verständnis des Einflusses von Regierungsformen auf den Umfang der ortsbasierten Führung zu verbessern, entwickeln wir eine triadische Konzeptualisierung der Führung, Regierungsformen und zentral-lokalen Beziehungen. Die Umsetzung der dualen Konzepte von 'Zulässigkeit' und 'Annehmbarkeit' bietet ein innovatives analytisches Mittel zur Entschlüsselung der tatsächlichen Beschaffenheit der ortsbasierten Führung. Wir analysieren in jüngster Zeit eingeführte öffentlich-private Partnerschaften in einem der am stärksten zentralisierten Länder der Organisation für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung (OECD), um die Merkmale der Kontrollmechanismen der nationalen Regierungsform zu artikulieren, die den Umfang der Autonomie der Führung der Stadt- und Regionalentwicklung in subnationalen Gebieten prägen.

RESUMEN

Liderazgo y sistemas de gobernanza: las limitaciones del alcance del liderazgo en el desarrollo basado en el lugar en territorios subnacionales. Regional Studies. Para poder entender mejor la influencia de los sistemas de gobernanza sobre el alcance del liderazgo basado en el lugar, construimos una conceptualización triádica del liderazgo, los sistemas de gobernanza y las relaciones centrales-locales. Al proponer los conceptos duales de ‘permisibilidad’ y ‘aceptabilidad’ podemos utilizar una herramienta analítica innovadora para descifrar la naturaleza existente del liderazgo basado en el lugar. Analizamos las asociaciones públicas y privadas iniciadas hace poco en uno de los países más centralizados de la Organización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económico (OCDE) para articular las características de los mecanismos de control del sistema nacional de gobernanza que determinan el grado de autonomía del desarrollo urbano y regional en terrenos subnacionales.

KEYWORDS:

• leadership
• governance
• sub-national scale
• city and regional development

关键词:

• 领导力
• 治理
• 次国家尺度
• 城市与区域发展

MOTS-CLÉS:

• leadership
• gouvernance
• échelle sous-nationale
• aménagement du territoire

SCHLÜSSELWÖRTER:

• Führung
• Regierungsführung
• subnationale Ebene
• Stadt- und Regionalentwicklung

PALABRAS CLAVES:

• liderazgo
• gobernanza
• escala subnacional
• desarrollo urbano y regional

JEL:

• D78
• R12
• R50
• R58

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Earlier versions of this paper were presented at the Regional Studies Association European Conference in Izmir, Turkey, June 2014, and at the annual Policy and Politics Conference in Bristol, UK, September 2014. The authors thank those who commented on the presentation at these conferences. They also thank the anonymous reviewers of the paper for enabling enrichment of the arguments, and Nick Gray at Northumbria University for his comments on an early draft of the paper.

DISCLOSURE STATEMENT

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

ORCID

Gill Bentley http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8798-8714

Lee Pugalis http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8987-6356

John Shutt http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6338-7853

Notes

1. Conceptualized in terms of centralism and localism and which manifest in a vertical dimension of governance, encapsulated in the character of central–local relations.

2. This encompasses regional, sub-regional and local government scales.

3. Beer (2014) carried out interviews with leaders and stakeholders.

4. As a social science methodology, GT method involves the discovery of theory through the analysis of data (Glaser, 1992). It represents traditional, orthodox empiricism but, nonetheless, GT contains both inductive and deductive elements. It does not rule out the construction of hypotheses before an investigation; it does not rely wholly on empiricism. The task of a GT approach is to generate ideas, concepts and categories from an analysis of data to discern patterns and relationships to derive hypotheses for subsequent testing (emphasis added).

5. Generally, multilevel governance represents a conceptualization of the European Union where it is observed that decision-making capacity resides in and involves a number of different levels.

6. This would be represented in the diagram presented in Figure 1 by an interconnection between the horizontal and vertical spheres of governance. This would indicate that national-level institutions have a seat at the table in decision-making bodies at sub-national scale.

7. This changes the focus on leadership by an individual leader and enables reference to leadership by a collective.

8. The term ‘actor’ is here taken to refer to those taking part in decision-making in institutional structures and who might also occasion action. As such these actors have agency and are involved in policy-making and implementation networks.

9. Central government could participate in the governance structure at sub-national level. This does not preclude it having influence or control over the sub-national level (see note 6 above).

10. The lack of capability at the sub-national scale might necessitate conditionalities.

11. Others might utilize the term ‘new public management’. This refers to the concept that ideas used in the private sector must be successful in the public sector; it represents a shift from bureaucratic administration to a business-like professional management. The term ‘New Centralism’ is utilized here since it relates to the debate on decentralization. New Centralism refers to the situation where central governments ‘impose tight centrally-defined controls on public policy and services, including those which are delivered on a decentralised basis’ (Lee, 2000, p. 96).

12. Politically or ideologically; or from the point of view of pragmatism.

13. In common parlance the difference is between ‘you agree with my objectives so you can do what I say you can do to meet objectives for place-based development in your sub-national territory’ (New Centralism). Conditional localism means ‘you can do what you want, provided you agree with my objectives and if you don’t, you won’t be enabled to do what you want to do to meet your objectives for place-based development in your sub-national territory’.

14. Not all local authorities in LEP localities are represented on the board.