No Cover Image

Book chapter 745 views 38 downloads

Participatory Processes as Unreliable Narrators: Political Legitimacy and Governance Narratives in the Social OMC Peer Review Process

Dion Curry Orcid Logo

Decentring European Governance, Pages: 60 - 81

Swansea University Author: Dion Curry Orcid Logo

Abstract

This paper explores the development of governance narratives focused on governing processes as a way of determining political legitimacy. It aims to explore the following questions: theoretically, how does the idea of decentred governance square with legitimating political processes? How do EU-level...

Full description

Published in: Decentring European Governance
ISBN: 978-0-8153-8181-5 978-1-351-20955-7
Published: Routledge 2019
URI: https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa48805
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
first_indexed 2019-02-28T14:05:57Z
last_indexed 2019-08-09T16:23:50Z
id cronfa48805
recordtype SURis
fullrecord <?xml version="1.0"?><rfc1807><datestamp>2019-08-08T15:25:04.2491006</datestamp><bib-version>v2</bib-version><id>48805</id><entry>2019-02-12</entry><title>Participatory Processes as Unreliable Narrators: Political Legitimacy and Governance Narratives in the Social OMC Peer Review Process</title><swanseaauthors><author><sid>a2d0f6869c6a2478047431f92ea21841</sid><ORCID>0000-0003-2222-5190</ORCID><firstname>Dion</firstname><surname>Curry</surname><name>Dion Curry</name><active>true</active><ethesisStudent>false</ethesisStudent></author></swanseaauthors><date>2019-02-12</date><deptcode>APC</deptcode><abstract>This paper explores the development of governance narratives focused on governing processes as a way of determining political legitimacy. It aims to explore the following questions: theoretically, how does the idea of decentred governance square with legitimating political processes? How do EU-level coordinating governance processes affect conceptions of political legitimacy? Does interpreting governance through a legitimating lens enhance our understanding of these EU-level processes? The paper develops a new &#x2018;decentred&#x2019; analytical framework for understanding governance that positions it as a legitimating force that affects and is affected by relationships between actors (policy inputs), institutional structures (policy throughputs) and policy outputs. It uses this framework to analyse the peer review process of the Social Open Method of Coordination, a non-binding, coordinating instrument used by the EU and its Member States in the area of social policy. The research draws on a participant and text analysis of 65 Social OMC peer reviews held from 2008 to present. It uses the goals and summaries of these reviews to assess whether they focus on improving inputs (participation), throughputs (process) or outputs (policy outcomes) and how this focus then affects the shape of the peer reviews as a governance process. It finds that, as a governance process, the peer reviews lack a clearly defined governance narrative. While it does show a clear shift from focusing overwhelmingly on policy outputs to including participatory rhetoric, this is not always indicative of a widening of focus to include input legitimacy. Instead, there are clearer linkages between narratives of the peer reviews as output-focussed processes and the inclusion of throughput mechanisms into the narrative. This illustrates a potential disconnect between the stated goals of the process as an inclusive, participative one and what it accomplishes in narrative and practice, creating a potential governance mismatch and decoupling between governance inputs and outputs.</abstract><type>Book chapter</type><journal>Decentring European Governance</journal><paginationStart>60</paginationStart><paginationEnd>81</paginationEnd><publisher>Routledge</publisher><isbnPrint>978-0-8153-8181-5</isbnPrint><isbnElectronic>978-1-351-20955-7</isbnElectronic><keywords>governance; European Union; legitimacy</keywords><publishedDay>28</publishedDay><publishedMonth>2</publishedMonth><publishedYear>2019</publishedYear><publishedDate>2019-02-28</publishedDate><doi/><url/><notes/><college>COLLEGE NANME</college><department>Politics, Philosophy and International Relations</department><CollegeCode>COLLEGE CODE</CollegeCode><DepartmentCode>APC</DepartmentCode><institution>Swansea University</institution><apcterm/><lastEdited>2019-08-08T15:25:04.2491006</lastEdited><Created>2019-02-12T12:10:03.0528387</Created><path><level id="1">Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences</level><level id="2">School of Culture and Communication - Politics, Philosophy and International Relations</level></path><authors><author><firstname>Dion</firstname><surname>Curry</surname><orcid>0000-0003-2222-5190</orcid><order>1</order></author></authors><documents><document><filename>0048805-28022019091807.pdf</filename><originalFilename>48805.pdf</originalFilename><uploaded>2019-02-28T09:18:07.2630000</uploaded><type>Output</type><contentLength>205881</contentLength><contentType>application/pdf</contentType><version>Accepted Manuscript</version><cronfaStatus>true</cronfaStatus><embargoDate>2020-08-28T00:00:00.0000000</embargoDate><copyrightCorrect>true</copyrightCorrect><language>eng</language></document></documents><OutputDurs/></rfc1807>
spelling 2019-08-08T15:25:04.2491006 v2 48805 2019-02-12 Participatory Processes as Unreliable Narrators: Political Legitimacy and Governance Narratives in the Social OMC Peer Review Process a2d0f6869c6a2478047431f92ea21841 0000-0003-2222-5190 Dion Curry Dion Curry true false 2019-02-12 APC This paper explores the development of governance narratives focused on governing processes as a way of determining political legitimacy. It aims to explore the following questions: theoretically, how does the idea of decentred governance square with legitimating political processes? How do EU-level coordinating governance processes affect conceptions of political legitimacy? Does interpreting governance through a legitimating lens enhance our understanding of these EU-level processes? The paper develops a new ‘decentred’ analytical framework for understanding governance that positions it as a legitimating force that affects and is affected by relationships between actors (policy inputs), institutional structures (policy throughputs) and policy outputs. It uses this framework to analyse the peer review process of the Social Open Method of Coordination, a non-binding, coordinating instrument used by the EU and its Member States in the area of social policy. The research draws on a participant and text analysis of 65 Social OMC peer reviews held from 2008 to present. It uses the goals and summaries of these reviews to assess whether they focus on improving inputs (participation), throughputs (process) or outputs (policy outcomes) and how this focus then affects the shape of the peer reviews as a governance process. It finds that, as a governance process, the peer reviews lack a clearly defined governance narrative. While it does show a clear shift from focusing overwhelmingly on policy outputs to including participatory rhetoric, this is not always indicative of a widening of focus to include input legitimacy. Instead, there are clearer linkages between narratives of the peer reviews as output-focussed processes and the inclusion of throughput mechanisms into the narrative. This illustrates a potential disconnect between the stated goals of the process as an inclusive, participative one and what it accomplishes in narrative and practice, creating a potential governance mismatch and decoupling between governance inputs and outputs. Book chapter Decentring European Governance 60 81 Routledge 978-0-8153-8181-5 978-1-351-20955-7 governance; European Union; legitimacy 28 2 2019 2019-02-28 COLLEGE NANME Politics, Philosophy and International Relations COLLEGE CODE APC Swansea University 2019-08-08T15:25:04.2491006 2019-02-12T12:10:03.0528387 Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences School of Culture and Communication - Politics, Philosophy and International Relations Dion Curry 0000-0003-2222-5190 1 0048805-28022019091807.pdf 48805.pdf 2019-02-28T09:18:07.2630000 Output 205881 application/pdf Accepted Manuscript true 2020-08-28T00:00:00.0000000 true eng
title Participatory Processes as Unreliable Narrators: Political Legitimacy and Governance Narratives in the Social OMC Peer Review Process
spellingShingle Participatory Processes as Unreliable Narrators: Political Legitimacy and Governance Narratives in the Social OMC Peer Review Process
Dion Curry
title_short Participatory Processes as Unreliable Narrators: Political Legitimacy and Governance Narratives in the Social OMC Peer Review Process
title_full Participatory Processes as Unreliable Narrators: Political Legitimacy and Governance Narratives in the Social OMC Peer Review Process
title_fullStr Participatory Processes as Unreliable Narrators: Political Legitimacy and Governance Narratives in the Social OMC Peer Review Process
title_full_unstemmed Participatory Processes as Unreliable Narrators: Political Legitimacy and Governance Narratives in the Social OMC Peer Review Process
title_sort Participatory Processes as Unreliable Narrators: Political Legitimacy and Governance Narratives in the Social OMC Peer Review Process
author_id_str_mv a2d0f6869c6a2478047431f92ea21841
author_id_fullname_str_mv a2d0f6869c6a2478047431f92ea21841_***_Dion Curry
author Dion Curry
author2 Dion Curry
format Book chapter
container_title Decentring European Governance
container_start_page 60
publishDate 2019
institution Swansea University
isbn 978-0-8153-8181-5
978-1-351-20955-7
publisher Routledge
college_str Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
hierarchytype
hierarchy_top_id facultyofhumanitiesandsocialsciences
hierarchy_top_title Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
hierarchy_parent_id facultyofhumanitiesandsocialsciences
hierarchy_parent_title Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
department_str School of Culture and Communication - Politics, Philosophy and International Relations{{{_:::_}}}Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences{{{_:::_}}}School of Culture and Communication - Politics, Philosophy and International Relations
document_store_str 1
active_str 0
description This paper explores the development of governance narratives focused on governing processes as a way of determining political legitimacy. It aims to explore the following questions: theoretically, how does the idea of decentred governance square with legitimating political processes? How do EU-level coordinating governance processes affect conceptions of political legitimacy? Does interpreting governance through a legitimating lens enhance our understanding of these EU-level processes? The paper develops a new ‘decentred’ analytical framework for understanding governance that positions it as a legitimating force that affects and is affected by relationships between actors (policy inputs), institutional structures (policy throughputs) and policy outputs. It uses this framework to analyse the peer review process of the Social Open Method of Coordination, a non-binding, coordinating instrument used by the EU and its Member States in the area of social policy. The research draws on a participant and text analysis of 65 Social OMC peer reviews held from 2008 to present. It uses the goals and summaries of these reviews to assess whether they focus on improving inputs (participation), throughputs (process) or outputs (policy outcomes) and how this focus then affects the shape of the peer reviews as a governance process. It finds that, as a governance process, the peer reviews lack a clearly defined governance narrative. While it does show a clear shift from focusing overwhelmingly on policy outputs to including participatory rhetoric, this is not always indicative of a widening of focus to include input legitimacy. Instead, there are clearer linkages between narratives of the peer reviews as output-focussed processes and the inclusion of throughput mechanisms into the narrative. This illustrates a potential disconnect between the stated goals of the process as an inclusive, participative one and what it accomplishes in narrative and practice, creating a potential governance mismatch and decoupling between governance inputs and outputs.
published_date 2019-02-28T03:59:28Z
_version_ 1763753033130311680
score 11.024221

Similar Items