scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal ArticleDOI

Assessing the Evidence: The Effectiveness and Impact of Public Governance-Oriented Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors identify and consolidate the current state of the evidence for public governance-oriented multi-stakeholder initiatives effectiveness and impact and highlight the ongoing process of defining MSI success and impact, and how these initiatives intersect with other accountability actors and processes.
Abstract: Transnational multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSIs) – voluntary partnerships between governments, civil society, and the private sector – are an increasingly prevalent strategy for promoting government responsiveness and accountability to citizens. While most transnational MSIs involve using voluntary standards to encourage socially and environmentally responsible private sector behavior, a handful of these initiatives – the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), the Construction Sector Transparency Initiative (CoST), the Open Government Partnership (OGP), the Global Initiative on Fiscal Transparency (GIFT) and the Open Contracting Partnership (OCP) – focus on information disclosure and participation in the public sector. Unlike private sector MSIs, which attempt to supplement weak government capacity to enforce basic social and environmental standards through partnerships between businesses and civil society, public sector MSIs ultimately seek to bolster public governance. But how exactly are these MSIs supposed to work? And how much has actually been achieved?The purpose of this study is to identify and consolidate the current state of the evidence for public governance-oriented MSI effectiveness and impact. Researchers collected over 300 documents and interviewed more than two-dozen MSI stakeholders about their experiences with five public governance oriented multi-stakeholder initiatives.This report provides a ‘snapshot’ of the evidence related to these five MSIs, and suggests that the process of leveraging transparency and participation through these initiatives for broader accountability gains remains uncertain. The report highlights the ongoing process of defining MSI success and impact, and how these initiatives intersect with other accountability actors and processes in complex ways. The study closes with key recommendations for MSI stakeholders.
Citations
More filters
Book
09 Oct 2020
TL;DR: The State of Open Data brings together over 60 authors from around the world to address these questions and to take stock of real progress made to date across sectors and around the globe, uncovering the issues that will shape the future of open data in the years to come as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: It's been ten years since open data first broke onto the global stage. Over the past decade, thousands of programmes and projects around the world have worked to open data and use it to address a myriad of social and economic challenges. Meanwhile, issues related to data rights and privacy have moved to the centre of public and political discourse. As the open data movement enters a new phase in its evolution, shifting to target real-world problems and embed open data thinking into other existing or emerging communities of practice, big questions still remain. How will open data initiatives respond to new concerns about privacy, inclusion, and artificial intelligence? And what can we learn from the last decade in order to deliver impact where it is most needed? The State of Open Data brings together over 60 authors from around the world to address these questions and to take stock of the real progress made to date across sectors and around the world, uncovering the issues that will shape the future of open data in the years to come.

71 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors explore how and why these cross-sector collaborations are evolving, and what steps can or should be taken to ensure that partnerships create public and private value, illustrated with reference to cases of market-driven partnerships for agriculture in Southeast Asia that are intended to engage marginalized smallholder farmers in global value chains in agriculture.
Abstract: The advent of the UN's Sustainable Development Goals has refocused global attention on the roles of business and other nonstate actors in achieving global goals. Often, business involvement takes the form of collaborations with the more traditional actors—governments and non‐governmental organizations. Although such partnerships for development have been seen before, the scale and expectations are new. This paper explores how and why these cross‐sector collaborations are evolving, and what steps can or should be taken to ensure that partnerships create public and private value. The arguments are illustrated with reference to cases of market‐driven partnerships for agriculture in Southeast Asia that are intended to engage marginalized smallholder farmers in global value chains in agriculture. The aims of these cross‐sector collaborations coincide with several targets of the Sustainable Development Goals such as poverty alleviation, decreasing environmental impact, and achieving food security. This is a hard case for mechanisms intended to protect public interests, given that the target beneficiaries (low‐income smallholder farmers and the environment) are unable to speak effectively for themselves. We find that structures and processes to align interests in ways that protect the public interest are both necessary and feasible, though not easy to achieve.

64 citations


Additional excerpts

  • ...…that is now available on cross‐sector collaboration as a governance approach (Ansell & Gash, 2017; Beisheim, Liese, Janetscheck, & Sarre, 2014; Brockmyer & Fox, 2015; Donahue & Zeckhauser, 2011; Jomo, Chowdhury, Sharma, & Platz, 2016; Marques, 2017; Pattberg & Widerberg, 2016; Torfing, 2016)....

    [...]

01 Jan 2016
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present evidence on the use of 23 information and communication technology (ICT) platforms to project citizen voice to improve public service delivery, highlighting both citizen uptake and the degree to which public service providers respond to expressions of citizen voice.
Abstract: This paper reviews evidence on the use of 23 information and communication technology (ICT) platforms to project citizen voice to improve public service delivery. This meta-analysis focuses on empirical studies of initiatives in the global South, highlighting both citizen uptake (‘yelp’) and the degree to which public service providers respond to expressions of citizen voice (‘teeth’). The conceptual framework further distinguishes between two trajectories for ICT-enabled citizen voice: Upwards accountability occurs when users provide feedback directly to decision-makers in real time, allowing policy-makers and program managers to identify and address service delivery problems, but at their discretion. Downwards accountability, in contrast, occurs either through real time user feedback or less immediate forms of collective civic action that publicly call on service providers to become more accountable and depends less exclusively on decision-makers’ discretion about whether or not to act on the information provided. This distinction between the ways in which ICT platforms mediate the relationship between citizens and service providers allows for a precise analytical focus on how different dimensions of such platforms contribute to public sector responsiveness. These cases suggest that while ICT platforms have been relevant in increasing policymakers’ and senior managers’ capacity to respond, most of them have yet to influence their willingness to do so.

59 citations


Cites background from "Assessing the Evidence: The Effecti..."

  • ...…causal mechanism is that transparency will inform and stimulate collective action, which in turn will provoke an appropriate institutional response (Brockmyer and Fox 2015; Fox 2014).4 In this model, both analysts and practitioners have only just begun to spell out the process behind that…...

    [...]

  • ...The assumed causal mechanism is that transparency will inform and stimulate collective action, which in turn will provoke an appropriate institutional response (Brockmyer and Fox 2015; Fox 2014)....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors argue that the complex multi-stakeholder arrangements anticipated for implementing sustainable development goals call for a distinct type of host: an interlocutor, and recognize and invest in interlocution as a pivotal role can increase the performance of internationally inspired MSIs which have a mixed but generally poor record of effectiveness.
Abstract: textThis article argues that the complex multi-stakeholder arrangements anticipated for implementing Sustainable Development Goals call for a distinct type of host: an interlocutor. This central idea arises from new comparative research on multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSIs) undertaken in four countries: Costa Rica, Indonesia, Kenya and Kyrgyzstan. This work adds a detailed dimension to meta-studies on conditions for success and practical guides for establishing and running MSIs. It begins to fill a significant gap in knowledge by analysing the attributes and competencies required for effectively orchestrating MSIs as well as illuminating their relative significance over time. The context is an anticipated expansion in demand for finely tuned and skilled hosting of Sustainable Development Goals-inspired MSIs. This task will probably be more complicated than MSIs associated with climate change and Millennium Development Goals, both of which saw business on the side lines with uneven attention paid to the principle of local ownership. Recognising and investing in interlocution as a pivotal role can increase the performance of internationally inspired MSIs which, to date, have a mixed but generally poor record of effectiveness. key words — interlocutor; host; multi-stakeholder initiatives; Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs); Costa Rica; Kenya;Indonesia; Kyrgyzstan

46 citations


Cites background from "Assessing the Evidence: The Effecti..."

  • ...…assuming that cross-sector, public–private partnerships and other multiple institutional arrangements are suited to the complex tasks and reconciling contending interests often involved (Brinkerhoff and Brinkerhoff, 2011; Brouwer and Woodhill, 2015; Stern et al., 2015; Brockmyer and Fox, 2015)....

    [...]

  • ...A narrow focus on a specific international initiative can be seen in an MSI promoting the transparency of extractive industries (Aaronson, 2011; Rich and Moberg, 2015), the promotion of social accountability (Brockmyer and Fox, 2015) and the issue of their governance (Isenman et al., 2011)....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The Medicines Transparency Alliance appears to have achieved its goal of creating a multi-stakeholder shared policy space in which government, civil society, and private sector players can come together and have a voice in the national pharmaceutical policy making process.
Abstract: Barriers to expanding access to medicines include weak pharmaceutical sector governance, lack of transparency and accountability, inadequate attention to social services on the political agenda, and financing challenges Multi-stakeholder initiatives such as the Medicines Transparency Alliance (MeTA) may help overcome these barriers Between 2008 and 2015, MeTA engaged stakeholders in the pharmaceutical sectors of seven countries (Ghana, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Peru, Philippines, Uganda, and Zambia) to promote access goals through greater transparency We reviewed archival data to document MeTA activities and results related to transparency and accountability in the seven countries where it was implemented We identified common themes and content areas, noting specific activities used to make information transparent and accessible, how data were used to inform discussions, and the purpose and timing of meetings and advocacy activities to help set priorities and influence governance decisions The cross-case analysis looked for pathways which might link the MeTA strategies to results such as better policies or program improvements Countries used evidence gathering, open meetings, and proactive information dissemination to increase transparency MeTA fostered policy dialogue to bring together the many government, civil society and private company stakeholders concerned with access issues, and provided them with information to understand barriers to access at policy, organizational, and community levels We found strong evidence that transparency was enhanced Some evidence suggests that MeTA efforts contributed to new policies and civil society capacity strengthening although the impact on government accountability is not clear MeTA appears to have achieved its goal of creating a multi-stakeholder shared policy space in which government, civil society, and private sector players can come together and have a voice in the national pharmaceutical policy making process Assuming that transparency is in place to leverage accountability, the success of MeTA’s efforts to promote accountability by the government as well as other stakeholders in the pharmaceutical sector will depend on how well efforts are sustained over time

34 citations


Cites background or methods or result from "Assessing the Evidence: The Effecti..."

  • ...This is similar to the approach used in multi-stakeholder initiatives in other sectors, including the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, the Construction Sector Transparency Initiative, and the Open Government Partnership [13]....

    [...]

  • ...MSIs are voluntary agreements between governments, civil society, and the private sector, intended to promote government transparency and accountability to citizens [13, 14]....

    [...]

  • ...Brockmyer & Fox [13] note that MSIs work by creating resources and environments that allow better communication among governments, private companies, and civil society organizations to “facilitate deliberation, consensus building, and compliance with reform commitments....

    [...]

  • ...Similar to evaluations of MSIs in other sectors [13], we did not find evidence of clear outcomes, and the impact of these policies and practices on access goals will need to be assessed over time....

    [...]

  • ...” Upon reviewing evidence of performance, however, the authors conclude that while activities initiated through MSIs may increase access to information and enhance civic participation, evidence for effectiveness and longer term social impact is uneven or absent [13]....

    [...]

References
More filters
Posted Content
TL;DR: The concept of transparency and accountability can be unpacked in terms of two distinct variants: transparency can be either "clear" or "opaque", while accountability is either "soft" or 'hard".
Abstract: The concepts of transparency and accountability are closely linked: transparency is supposed to generate accountability. This article questions this widely held assumption. Transparency mobilizes the power of shame, yet the shameless may not be vulnerable to public exposure. Truth often fails to lead to justice. After exploring different definitions and dimensions of the two ideas, the more relevant question turns out to be: what kinds of transparency lead to what kinds of accountability, and under what conditions? The article concludes by proposing that the concept can be unpacked in terms of two distinct variants. Transparency can be either 'clear' or 'opaque, while accountability can be either 'soft' or 'hard'.

505 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the conditions of a legitimate transfer of regulatory power from traditional democratic nation-state processes to private regulatory schemes, such as multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSI), are examined.
Abstract: In a globalizing world, governments are not always able or willing to regulate the social and environmental externalities of global business activities. Multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSI), defined as global institutions involving mainly corporations and civil society organizations, are one type of regulatory mechanism that tries to fill this gap by issuing soft law regulation. This conceptual paper examines the conditions of a legitimate transfer of regulatory power from traditional democratic nation-state processes to private regulatory schemes, such as MSIs. Democratic legitimacy is typically concerned with input legitimacy (rule credibility, or the extent to which the regulations are perceived as justified) and output legitimacy (rule effectiveness, or the extent to which the rules effectively solve the issues). In this study, we identify MSI input legitimacy criteria (inclusion, procedural fairness, consensual orientation, and transparency) and those of MSI output legitimacy (rule coverage, efficacy, and enforcement), and discuss their implications for MSI democratic legitimacy.

350 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors provide a framework for studying International Organization (IO) performance and present a typology of factors that influence the performance of international organizations, from process indicators to outcome indicators.
Abstract: Some international organizations (IOs) are subject to constant criticism for producing poor results while others are praised for accomplishing difficult tasks despite political and resource constraints. Indeed, IO performance varies substantially over time and across tasks, and yet the international relations literature has devoted little attention to why this occurs. This article provides a framework for studying IO performance. After addressing some of the distinct challenges of conceptualizing and analyzing performance in the context of IOs, we discuss the tradeoffs of using different performance metrics—from process indicators to outcome indicators—and present a typology of factors that influence performance. Finally, we discuss research strategies for those interested in studying performance rigorously. The policy relevance of studying IO performance is clear: only if we understand why some IOs perform better than others can we begin to improve their performance in a systematic way. As many organizations come under pressure to reform, while at the same time taking on new and more complicated tasks, scholars should be actively engaged in debates surrounding IO performance and its role in effective governance at the international level.

203 citations

Book
08 Jan 2013
TL;DR: In this article, the authors assess the impact of coalitions today and present an agenda for action for corporate responsibility coalitions and are they fit for the future? 15. Recommendations and conclusion Profiles of leading corporate responsibility coalition and Sui Generis organizations.
Abstract: Preface Acknowledgments Introduction Part 1. The past: The emergence of new models of collective business leadership 1. The rise of the corporate responsibility movement 2. The definition of business-led corporate responsibility coalitions 3. The evolution of business-led corporate responsibility coalitions 4. Global trends and motivations driving the growth of corporate responsibility coalitions 5. The leadership role of individual champions, companies and foundations in building the coalitions Part 2. The present: Assessing the impact of coalitions today 6. The number and diversity of corporate responsibility coalitions 7. Coalitions as part of a broader ecosystem promoting responsible business 8. The key roles of corporate responsibility coalitions 9. How coalitions organize themselves 10. Networking among the coalitions 11. Assessing the impact of coalitions Part 3. The Future: The leadership challenge for corporate responsibility coalitions 12. The need for greater corporate responsibility and collective action 13. An agenda for action for corporate responsibility coalitions 14. Are corporate responsibility coalitions fit for the future? 15. Recommendations and conclusion Profiles of leading corporate responsibility coalitions and Sui Generis organizations 1. Business for Social Responsibility 2. Business in the Community 3. CSR Europe 4. Instituto Ethos 5. International Business Leaders Forum 6. Maala-Business for Social Responsibility 7. National Business Initiative for Growth, Development and Democracy 8. Philippine Business for Social Progress 9. World Business Council for Sustainable Development 10. World Environment Center 11. United Nations Global Compact 12. World Economic Forum Appendix 1. Corporate responsibility time-line Appendix 2. Research methodology Appendix 3. GlobeScan coalition survey and survey respondents Endnotes Index

44 citations

OtherDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the emergence of partnerships for sustainable development as an innovative, and potentially influential, new type of governance is discussed, and the authors explore the process, extent and circumstances under which partnerships can improve the legitimacy and effectiveness of governance in sustainable development.
Abstract: This significant study discusses the emergence of partnerships for sustainable development as an innovative, and potentially influential, new type of governance. With contributions from leading experts in the field, the ‘partnership paradigm’ is discussed and the contributors explore the process, extent and circumstances under which partnerships can improve the legitimacy and effectiveness of governance for sustainable development.

35 citations