Multi-stakeholder promotion of civic participation:

assessing the Open Government

Partnership’s influence on national policy

​

​

Doctoral Defense 28 Aug 2019

Christopher Wilson Forum

Department of Media and Communication, UiO Forskningsparken, Oslo

Multi-stakeholder Initiatives (MSIs)

Public Governance MSIs emphasize public governance in member countries.

​

Criticisms and Concerns

UNCLEAR THEORIES OF CHANGE

Some [lack] clear theories of change for [...] their own transnational role[...], while others [...] remain agnostic about how their efforts might play out on the ground.” (Brockmyer & Fox, 2015)

BUZZWORD FATIGUE

“All I’m saying is, if #multistakeholder were a drinking game, I’d be in the hospital with alcohol poisoning right about now” -@pondswimmer�

LACK OF RESULTS

Countries that participate [in OGP] endorse the lofty ideals of open governance [but] have so far failed to make the necessary reforms to achieve them (Gruzd et al., 2018).

SURPRISING OUTCOMES

...most unusually in comparative international exercises – �a ‘Nordic race to the bottom’ in the OGP (Petrie, 2005).

A question of time?

“MSIs [...] are either quite new or have recently implemented significant changes to their core mission. As a result, it is simply too soon to expect meaningful evaluations of effectiveness or impact.” (Brockmyer & Fox, 2015)

1.

Mechanisms at play

3.

Quality of norms

2.

Tangential outcomes

Three assessment strategies

• Identify and test for causal mechanisms underpinning MSI influence.
• Expand analysis beyond the MSI results chain.
• Assess the quality of MSI norms and policy in the context of governance and accountability theory.

Research Focus

(How) does OGP influence civic participation policy in member countries?

OGP: Basics

Launched in 2011 w eight founding governments (BR, ID, MX, NO, PH, SA, UK, US)

Now 79 OGP participating countries

Objective:

...helping governments “become sustainably more transparent, more accountable, and more responsive to their own citizens” (OGP, 2011).

Socializing open government

“As norms shift and governments become more comfortable with transparency, governments will begin introducing more opportunities for dialogue and become more receptive to civil society input and participation”

(OGP Four Year Strategy, 2011)

“OGP countries can advance from innovation to norms”

(Global Report, 2019).

​

Research Questions

Structure of the dissertation

RQ1 (How): The Norwegian Case (1/5)

2 National Action Plans �+ OGP evaluations and self-assessments

Semi structured interviews

• 12 agency focal points
• 8 individuals responsible for coordinating national participation in OGP
• 9 civil society stakeholders & counterparts

Documentation from IRM process

• 50+ informal interviews with government and civil society representatives
• 3 sector-specific public consultations

Deviant case

​

​

​

Data rich case

​

• Quality of democracy vs. OGP performance
• E-participation vs salience of participation norms

​

​

• Founding OGP member
• IRM participation

Case selection

Data sources

RQ1 (how, 2/5): mechanisms of influence

Persuasion and Argumentation �< > �Policy Learning and Knowledge Transfer

RQ1 (how, 2/5): policy learning

Limited outcomes

• 3 instances of institutionalization (soft policy outcome)
• 3 instances of actual policy (hard policy outcome)

​

• 1 instance of a sequence from soft to hard policy outcomes

​

RQ1 (how, 3/5): policy learning

RQ1 (how, 4/5): policy learning

Levels of assessment�

• National
• Institutional
• Personal

​

(Kay & Baker, 2016)

Logics of assessment�

• Moral
• Consequential
• Specification

​

(Ben-Josef Hirsch, 2014)

OGP is a "conceptual match” but an “administrative mismatch” (NO195).

RQ1 (how, 5/5): implications

​

Policy

• Importance of framing
• Gatekeepers and go-betweens
• Fragility of policy learning
• Spectrum of policy outcomes

Theory

• Analytical model
• Propositions for middle range theory
• Cross-disciplinarity

RQ2 (global effects, 1/2): Research design

RQs and Methods

• Causal analysis �(OLS + data tables)
• Mediation analysis to assess alternative explanations for OGP’s effect (PROCESS macro for SPSS)
• Moderation analysis to assess whether OGP is more influential in autocratic or democratic countries �(OLS regressions with an interaction term)

Comparative analysis

• OGP membership (n=73)
• E-participation (n=193)�(EPI scores for e-participation and collaborative e-decision-making)
• National salience and alignment of participation norms
• years with FOIA
• Voice and Accountability scores on World Governance Indicators
• Freedom in the World score �(25 year composite)

RQ2 (global effects, 2/2): Results

A modest effect, likely causal

• Not solely attributable to national factors �(mediation analysis)
• Evidence of socialization?
• Doubly differential (moderation analysis)
• Stronger effect in more democratic countries
• Stronger effect on more progressive norm (collaborative e-decision-making)

​

RQ3 (metrics (1/1): Does it matter?

Metrics and likely impact OGP norms and policy

SUMMARY: findings

SUMMARY: Key Implications

Roadmap for developing MRT on MSI influence

• 2 theoretical propositions
• contrast typologies to define scope conditions

• OGP is working�(but not as planned)
• Socialization
• Framing
• Soft and hard outcomes
• 3 alternative assessment strategies

MSI advocacy and policy

building Middle Range Theory

Political scandals lower trust in politicians

Corruption scandals implicating right wing female politicians in small social democratic countries...

-what type of scandal

-what type of politician

-what type of media context

-what type of political context

-whose trust

PREDICTIVE CAPACITY

thanks...

Doctoral Defense 28 Aug 2019

Christopher Wilson Forum

Department of Media and Communication, UiO Forskningsparken, Oslo

Extra slides follow

Theoretical contributions

• Individuals’ gatekeeping function�(multiple logics & levels)
• Epistemic go-betweens
• Continuum of policy outcomes �(hard <> soft)�
• Analytical model granular enough to accommodate complex policy contexts

• Governance studies, IR, policy studies

“demonstrates that public governance MSIs are a useful site for integrating and strengthening the analytical capacity of both those research traditions.”

• 2 theoretical propositions for testing
• -> contrast typologies and research focus
• -> define scope conditions
• -> theory with predictive capacity

Knowledge transfer and policy learning

Foundations for a middle range theory

Cross-disciplinary approach

Policy implications

• There is a varied spectrum of outcomes for MSI policy influence
• Mechanisms of policy learning and knowledge transfer are fragile and individuals operating between institutions often play a critical role in facilitating or gatekeeping policy influence.
• OGP’s doubly differential effect challenges criticisms that the OGP is only facilitating country progress on low hanging fruit-- �“socialization strategies are likely to be most effective when encouraging democracies to adopt progressive norms and policies.”
• Productive complication

Limitations

Data and Measurement

• OGP is in early days
• EPI
• “Checklist” conceptualization (Berntzen, 2013)
• Bias against parliamentary systems
• Opacity
• Longitudinal consistency and poor concept validity
• IRM data
• Lack of validity controls
• Lot’s of false positives

Analytical

• Other mechanisms
• Other national factors
• Technological specificity
• Lack of attention to NAP processes
• Single case

​