Deliberation, Consensus, and Stakeholder Satisfaction

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to contribute to development of collaborative governance theory by investigating whether and under what conditions a deliberative, consensus-oriented decision process among diverse stakeholders with conflicting interests can lead to decisions that are satisfactory to most of the stakeholders. Using computational simulation, we found that the benefits of collaborative governance are contingent on such conditions as the type of alternative that initiates the deliberation, the level of conflict among stakeholders and whether and how stakeholders modify their preferences over time. Based on these results, theoretical propositions for future theory building and empirical research are suggested.

Key words:

• Agent-based modeling
• collaborative governance
• consensus
• deliberation
• stakeholder satisfaction

Notes

The design of agent characteristics in the form of a binary string has been used frequently in the agent-based modeling literature (Epstein and Axtell 1996). In this case, a sixteen-digit string ensures considerable heterogeneity among agent preferences.

For example, in the case of the Sacramento Area Water Forum, 75 percent of the participants had to agree in order to make a decision (Connick 2006).

We originally analyzed three levels of conflict of interest among stakeholders: low (focal 2), moderate (focal 8) and high (focal 16). We found that when the level was low, every group successfully reached an agreement in just a few iterations, making this a fairly trivial condition. Thus, to simplify the presentation of results below, we ignore this category in our reporting of the results. However, the data from these groups were still included in the analysis of main and interaction effects.