Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T06:30:07.783Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

7 - Citizens’ Governance Spaces

from Part II - Participatory Governance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 April 2024

By
Albert W. Dzur  and
Carolyn M. Hendriks
Edited by
Brian D. Christens
Brian D. Christens
Affiliation:
Vanderbilt University, Tennessee
Get access

Summary

This chapter examines practical forms of citizen engagement occurring in collective problem-solving efforts such as civic enterprises, grassroots initiatives, and self-help groups. Drawing empirical evidence from diverse policy fields, it articulates the distinct experimental and disruptive policy work that citizens enact in these citizens’ governance spaces and challenges dominant interpretations that view them as either a testament to the capacity of citizens to effectively solve complex public problems or a symptom of advanced neoliberalism where states off-load complex problems onto citizens. The chapter moves beyond this dualism to consider the motivations, challenges, available resources, and distinct democratic work enacted by citizens in these spaces of bottom-up governance. It also discusses issues of growth and sustainability over time as well as the implications posed for conventional state and civil society institutions. Citizens’ governance spaces offer important lessons – in terms of both potential benefits and risks – for the project of deepening the quality and reach of citizen participation in modern democratic systems.

Keywords

citizen engagementpublic participationpolitical participationcitizen-led governancedemocratic theory and practicecoproductioncivic enterprisessocial innovationdemocratic renewaldemocratic innovationcivil associationscommunity organizations
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Community Empowerment , pp. 193 - 215
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2024

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abramson, L., & Beck, E. (2010). Using conflict to build community: Community conferencing. In Beck, E., Kropf, N. P., & Leonard, P. B. (Eds.), Social work and restorative justice: Skills for dialogue, peacemaking, and reconciliation (pp. 149–174). Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abramson, L., & Moore, D. B. (2001). Transforming conflict in the inner city: Community conferencing in Baltimore. Contemporary Justice Review, 4(3/4), 321–340.Google Scholar
Aiken, M., & Taylor, M. (2019). Civic action and volunteering: The changing space for popular engagement in England. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary & Nonprofit Organizations, 30(1), 15–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amnå, E., & Ekman, J. (2014). Standby citizens: Diverse faces of political passivity. European Political Science Review, 6(2), 261–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakker, J., Denters, B., Vrielink, M. O., & Klok, P.-J. (2012). Citizens’ initiatives: How local governments fill their facilitative role. Local Government Studies, 38(4), 395–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bang, H. (2005). Among everyday makers and expert citizens. In Newman, J. (Ed.), Remaking governance: Peoples, politics and the public sphere (pp. 159–178). Policy Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barraket, J., & Archer, V. (2010). Social inclusion through community enterprise? Examining the available evidence. Third Sector Review, 16(1), 13–28.Google Scholar
Bauwens, T., Gotchev, B., & Holstenkamp, L. (2016). What drives the development of community energy in Europe? The case of wind power cooperatives. Energy Research & Social Science, 13, 136–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckwith, M., Bliuc, A.-M., & Best, D. (2016). What the recovery movement tells us about prefigurative politics. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 4(1), 238–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blad, J. R. (1996). Neighborhood-centred conflict mediation: The San Francisco example. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 4(1), 90–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borzaga, C., Fazzi, L., & Galera, G. (2016a). Social enterprise as a bottom-up dynamic: Part 1. The reaction of civil society to unmet social needs in Italy, Sweden and Japan. International Review of Sociology, 26(1), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borzaga, C., Fazzi, L., & Galera, G. (2016b). Social enterprise as a bottom-up dynamic: Part 2. The reaction of civil society to unmet social needs in England, Scotland, Ireland, France and Romania. International Review of Sociology, 26(2), 201–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bovaird, T., & Loeffler, E. (2012). From engagement to co-production: The contribution of users and communities to outcomes and public value. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary & Nonprofit Organizations, 23(4), 1119–1138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyte, H. C. (2004). Everyday politics: Reconnecting citizens and public life. University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, R., Duffy, K., Gaughan, M., & Mochrie, M. (2011). Serenity café – On the road to recovery capital. Journal of Groups in Addiction & Recovery, 6(1/2), 132–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CEER. (2019, June 25). Regulatory aspects of self-consumption and energy communities. CEER Report C18-CRM9_DS7-05-03. Council of European Energy Regulators. www.ceer.eu/documents/104400/-/-/8ee38e61-a802-bd6f-db27-4fb61aa6eb6aGoogle Scholar
Chevée, A. (2022). Mutual aid in north London during the Covid-19 pandemic. Social Movement Studies, 21(4), 413–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ci, J. (2006). Political agency in liberal democracy. Journal of Political Philosophy, 14(2), 144–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Souza Briggs, X. (2008). Democracy as problem solving: Civic capacity in communities across the globe. MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denters, B. (2016). Community self-organization: Potentials and pitfalls. In Edelenbos, J. & Meerkerk, I. V. (Eds.), Critical reflections on interactive governance: Self-organization and participation in public governance (pp. 230–253). Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Dzur, A. W. (2013, December 13). Trench democracy in criminal justice: An interview with Lauren Abramson. Boston Review. www.bostonreview.net/articles/trench-democracy-in-criminal-justice-an-interview-with-lauren-abramson/Google Scholar
Dzur, A. W. (2019). Democracy inside: Participatory innovation in unlikely places. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edelenbos, J., Molenveld, A., & van Meerkerk, I. (2021). Civic engagement, community-based initiatives and governance capacity: An international perspective. Routledge.Google Scholar
Edelenbos, J., van Meerkerk, I., & Schenk, T. (2018). The evolution of community self-organization in interaction with government institutions: Cross-case insights from three countries. The American Review of Public Administration, 48(1), 52–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Einolf, C. J., Prouteau, L., Nezhina, T., & Ibrayeva, A. R. (2016). Informal, unorganized volunteering. In Smith, D. H., Stebbins, R. A., & Grotz, J. (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of volunteering, civic participation, and nonprofit associations (pp. 223–241). Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eliasoph, N. (2013). The politics of volunteering. Polity.Google Scholar
Evers, A., & von Essen, J. (2019). Volunteering and civic action: Boundaries blurring, boundaries redrawn. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary & Nonprofit Organizations, 30(1), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eversole, R. (2011). Community agency and community engagement: Re-theorising participation in governance. Journal of Public Policy, 31(1), 51–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fung, A. (2006). Varieties of participation in complex governance. Public Administration Review, 66, 66–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaventa, J. (2006). Finding the spaces for change: A power analysis. IDS Bulletin, 37(6), 23–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendriks, C. M., & Dzur, A. W. (2022). Citizens’ governance spaces: Democratic action through disruptive collective problem-solving. Political Studies, 70(3), 680–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendriks, C. M., Ercan, S. A., & Boswell, J. (2020). Mending democracy: Democratic repair in disconnected times. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendriks, F. (2019). Democratic innovation beyond deliberative reflection: The plebiscitary rebound and the advent of action-oriented democracy. Democratization, 26(3), 444–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kretzmann, J., & McKnight, J. (1993). Building communities from the inside out. ACTA Publications.Google Scholar
Kurimoto, A., & Kumakura, Y. (2016). Emergence and evolution of co-operatives for elderly care in Japan. International Review of Sociology, 26(1), 48–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laville, J. L., Young, D. R., & Eynaud, P. (Eds.). (2015). Civil society, the third sector and social enterprise: Governance and democracy. Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lupick, T. (2018). Fighting for space: How a group of drug users transformed one city’s struggle with addiction. Arsenal Pulp Press.Google Scholar
Mahanty, S., & Phillipps, N. (2020, March 25). The community-led movement creating hope in the time of coronavirus. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/the-community-led-movement-creating-hope-in-the-time-of-coronavirus-134391Google Scholar
Mitlin, D. (2008). With and beyond the state – Co-production as a route to political influence, power and transformation for grassroots organization. Environment & Urbanization, 20(2), 339–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moulaert, F., MacCallum, D., Mehmood, A., & Hamdouch, A. (Eds.). (2013). The international handbook on social innovation. Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nabatchi, T., Gastil, J., Weiksner, G. M., & Leighnenger, M. (Eds.). (2012). Democracy in motion: Evaluating the practice and impact of deliberative civic engagement. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
OECD/European Union. (2017). Boosting social enterprise development: Good practice compendium. OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
OSA. (2016). Orange Sky Australia annual report 2015–2016. Orange Sky Australia. https://adobeindd.com/view/publications/b9183de9-b84b-48a5-b384-b7fa92b7cdae/1/publication-web-resources/pdf/OSL_AnnualReport2016_A4_CMYK_PRESS_NOFINANCIALS.pdfGoogle Scholar
OSA. (2020). Orange Sky Australia annual report 2019–2020. Orange Sky Australia. https://orangesky.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/201202_Annual_Report_FINAL_with_Financial_Report.pdfGoogle Scholar
Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostrom, E. (1996). Crossing the great divide: Coproduction, synergy, and development. World Development, 24(6), 1073–1087.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pellicer-Sifres, V., Belda-Miquel, S., Cuesta-Fernández, I., & Boni, A. (2018). Learning, transformative action, and grassroots innovation: Insights from the Spanish energy cooperative Som Energia. Energy Research and Social Science, 42, 100–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pestoff, V. (2018). Co-production and public service management: Citizenship, governance and public services management. Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pestoff, V., & Hulgård, L. (2016). Participatory governance in social enterprise. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary & Nonprofit Organizations, 27(4), 1742–1759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polletta, F. (1999). “Free spaces” in collective action. Theory and Society, 28(1), 1–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polletta, F., & Kretschmer, K. (2013). Free spaces. In The Wiley-Blackwell encyclopedia of social and political movements (pp. 477–480). Wiley.Google Scholar
Purbo, O. W. (2016). Sejarah internet Indonesia: Pembebasan frekuensi 2.4ghz. OnnoWiki. http://onnocenter.or.id/wiki/index.php/Sejarah_Internet_Indonesia:Pembebasan_Frekuensi_2.4GhzGoogle Scholar
Riutort Isern, S. (2015). The Som Energia cooperative in Spain. Planning theory & practice, 16(4), 569–572.Google Scholar
Savy Amira. (2019a, April 15). Sabtu, (13/4/2019) telah dilaksanakan Workshop 6 pembahasan rancangan Peraturan Gubernur Provinsi Jawa Timur tentang SOP Shelter dan tersusunya SOP Rumah Aman bagi perempuan korban kekerasan di Provinsi Jawa Timur, yang memasukkan penanganan kasus bagi kornam kekerasan seksual [Status update]. Facebook. www.facebook.com/savyamira.sahabatperempuan/posts/2875880952421908Google Scholar
Savy Amira. (2019b). Profil. Savy Amira Women’s Crisis Centre. www.savyamirawcc.com/tentang-kami/profil/Google Scholar
Schlozman, K. L., Verba, S., & Brady, H. E. (2012). The unheavenly chorus: Unequal political voice and the broken promise of American democracy. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Skocpol, T. (2003). Diminished democracy: From membership to management in American civic life. University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
Smith, A., & Ely, A. (2015). Green transformations from below? The politics of grassroots innovation. In Scoones, I., Leach, M., & Newell, P. (Eds.), The politics of green transformations (pp. 102–118). Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, A., & Stirling, A. (2018). Innovation, sustainability and democracy: An analysis of grassroots contributions. Journal of Self-Governance and Management Economics, 6(1), 64–97.Google Scholar
Soares da Silva, D., Horlings, L., & Figueiredo, E. (2018). Citizen initiatives in the post-welfare state. Social Sciences, 7(12), 252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steen, T., & Brandsen, T. (2020). Coproduction during and after the COVID-19 pandemic: Will it last? Public Administration Review, 80(5), 851–855.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Suyatno, . (2007). RT-RW Net and e-democracy in Indonesia. Journal Global dan Strategis, 1(2), 108–119.Google Scholar
Taylor, M. (2011). Public policy in the community (2nd ed.). Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Terzon, E. (2021, May 24). Yackandandah’s community battery may not be “big” but experts say it’s enough to “petrify” energy providers. Australian Broadcasting Corporation. www.abc.net.au/news/2021-05-24/community-battery-yackandandah-ausgrid-electricity-shakeup/100159460Google Scholar
Theocharis, Y., & Van Deth, J. W. (2018). The continuous expansion of citizen participation: A new taxonomy. European Political Science Review, 10(1), 139–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tiarks, E. (2019). Restorative justice, consistency and proportionality: Examining the trade-off. Criminal Justice Ethics, 38(2), 103–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Jacobi, N., Nicholls, A., & Chiappero-Martinetti, E. (2017). Theorizing social innovation to address marginalization. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 8(3), 265–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wagenaar, H. (2007). Governance, complexity, and democratic participation: How citizens and public officials harness the complexities of neighborhood decline. The American Review of Public Administration 37(1), 17–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wagenaar, H. (2019). Making sense of civic enterprise. Social innovation, participatory democracy and the administrative state. Partecipazione e conflito, 12(2), 297–324.Google Scholar
Wagenaar, H., & van der Heijden, J. (2015). The promise of democracy? Civic enterprise, localism and the transformation of democratic capitalism. In Davoudi, S. & Madanipour, A. (Eds.), Reconsidering localism (pp. 126–146). Taylor & Francis.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wagenaar, H., Healey, P., Laino, G., Vigar, G., Riutort Isern, S., Honeck, T., Beunderman, J., & van der Heijden, J. (2015). The transformative potential of civic enterprise. Planning Theory & Practice, 16(4), 557–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warren, M. E. (2001). Democracy and association. Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, S. (2020). Everyday humanitarianism during the 2019/2020 Australian bushfire crisis. A research project commissioned by Australian Red Cross. https://doi.org/10.4225/50/58225b8340e9aCrossRefGoogle Scholar
World Bank. (2018, March). Reaching the last mile: Social enterprise business models for inclusive development. World Bank. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/29544Google Scholar
Yates, L. (2015). Rethinking prefiguration: Alternatives, micropolitics and goals in social movements. Social Movement Studies, 14(1), 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zinsstag, E., & Vanfaechem, I. (Eds.). (2012). Conferencing and restorative justice: International practices and perspectives. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×