“Networked coalitions” as metropolitan governance: lessons from the emergence of Australia’s Committees for Cities and Regions

Thomas Sigler, Clare Mouat, Glen Searle, Kirsten Martinus

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The continuous rescaling of metropolitan governance has been a prominent feature of the neoliberal state. Metropolitan coalitions are one variant of governance in which disparate actors are brought together around a common agenda or platform. Drawing upon the example of Australia’s Committees for Cities and Regions (CCRs), this article applies urban governance theory to better understand the effectiveness of networked metropolitan governance coalitions. We find that such coalitions derive political legitimacy from the externalities produced by their network relations, which we theorize as a three-dimensional nexus of vertical (between levels of government), horizontal (between local actors), and diagonal (with CCR counterparts) components. Although the CCR model is distinctive to Australia and New Zealand, it reflects similar networked and multiscalar processes at work elsewhere, serving as a template for political landscapes in which in-built legacy political arrangements largely preclude metropolitan-scale issues from being addressed.
Original languageEnglish
Number of pages19
JournalJournal of Urban Affairs
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 11 Jun 2019

Fingerprint

coalition
governance
New Zealand
legitimacy
city
externality

Cite this

@article{8bbea14298eb4e84b2a3f2c1082bacb7,
title = "“Networked coalitions” as metropolitan governance: lessons from the emergence of Australia’s Committees for Cities and Regions",
abstract = "The continuous rescaling of metropolitan governance has been a prominent feature of the neoliberal state. Metropolitan coalitions are one variant of governance in which disparate actors are brought together around a common agenda or platform. Drawing upon the example of Australia’s Committees for Cities and Regions (CCRs), this article applies urban governance theory to better understand the effectiveness of networked metropolitan governance coalitions. We find that such coalitions derive political legitimacy from the externalities produced by their network relations, which we theorize as a three-dimensional nexus of vertical (between levels of government), horizontal (between local actors), and diagonal (with CCR counterparts) components. Although the CCR model is distinctive to Australia and New Zealand, it reflects similar networked and multiscalar processes at work elsewhere, serving as a template for political landscapes in which in-built legacy political arrangements largely preclude metropolitan-scale issues from being addressed.",
author = "Thomas Sigler and Clare Mouat and Glen Searle and Kirsten Martinus",
year = "2019",
month = "6",
day = "11",
doi = "10.1080/07352166.2019.1592651",
language = "English",
journal = "Journal of Urban Affairs",
issn = "0735-2166",
publisher = "Taylor & Francis",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - “Networked coalitions” as metropolitan governance

T2 - lessons from the emergence of Australia’s Committees for Cities and Regions

AU - Sigler, Thomas

AU - Mouat, Clare

AU - Searle, Glen

AU - Martinus, Kirsten

PY - 2019/6/11

Y1 - 2019/6/11

N2 - The continuous rescaling of metropolitan governance has been a prominent feature of the neoliberal state. Metropolitan coalitions are one variant of governance in which disparate actors are brought together around a common agenda or platform. Drawing upon the example of Australia’s Committees for Cities and Regions (CCRs), this article applies urban governance theory to better understand the effectiveness of networked metropolitan governance coalitions. We find that such coalitions derive political legitimacy from the externalities produced by their network relations, which we theorize as a three-dimensional nexus of vertical (between levels of government), horizontal (between local actors), and diagonal (with CCR counterparts) components. Although the CCR model is distinctive to Australia and New Zealand, it reflects similar networked and multiscalar processes at work elsewhere, serving as a template for political landscapes in which in-built legacy political arrangements largely preclude metropolitan-scale issues from being addressed.

AB - The continuous rescaling of metropolitan governance has been a prominent feature of the neoliberal state. Metropolitan coalitions are one variant of governance in which disparate actors are brought together around a common agenda or platform. Drawing upon the example of Australia’s Committees for Cities and Regions (CCRs), this article applies urban governance theory to better understand the effectiveness of networked metropolitan governance coalitions. We find that such coalitions derive political legitimacy from the externalities produced by their network relations, which we theorize as a three-dimensional nexus of vertical (between levels of government), horizontal (between local actors), and diagonal (with CCR counterparts) components. Although the CCR model is distinctive to Australia and New Zealand, it reflects similar networked and multiscalar processes at work elsewhere, serving as a template for political landscapes in which in-built legacy political arrangements largely preclude metropolitan-scale issues from being addressed.

U2 - 10.1080/07352166.2019.1592651

DO - 10.1080/07352166.2019.1592651

M3 - Article

JO - Journal of Urban Affairs

JF - Journal of Urban Affairs

SN - 0735-2166

ER -