Canadian Government Executive - Volume 22

Our data indicate a

nearly even split

between those

invited to participate

at the early stages of

policy development

and those who were

invited to participate

only in the post-

formulation or imple-

mentation stages.

February 2016 //

Canadian Government Executive /

Management

to the table. What is less clear is whether

it is true that this turn to policy-centred

work is replacing other, more tradition-

ally “political” forms of representation.

Effective policy advocacy often requires

a broad coalition of actors working in a

coordinated manner. Our data analysis

demonstrates that more frequent co-ordi-

nation between NGOs is associated with

more frequent interaction with govern-

ment. The obvious interpretation is that

the co-ordination of NGOs within a policy

field maybe a requisite step for delibera-

tion with government.

Paradoxically, despite the importance

of policy work, our study did not support

the hypothesis that the creation of more

research positions would increase inter-

actions with government officials. From

this finding, future research should exam-

ine how NGO policy networks and coali-

tions leverage a variety of resources, both

policy-related and political, that would

facilitate government responsiveness. The

success of networked NGOs may also lie in

their ability to produce the evidence that

governments demand.

Original, policy relevant research be-

comes the means to gain a hearing at

the government policy table. A critical

consideration that tests the integrity of

new governance understandings of the

policy process is the stage at which non-

governmental actors are invited to par-

ticipate. For public servants, developing a

policy proposal from the initial problem-

framing (the identification of a collective

problem) to implementation (establish-

ing a functioning program on the ground)

requires the government to determine

how that program will be delivered and

by whom.

In the Canadian context this often

means that the NGO becomes the pro-

gram delivery agent. We assumed that the

ideal point of engagement would begin at

the earliest stages of the policy making

process, when policy is still being formu-

lated and before any concrete directions

or details are decided. Engagement at this

early stage would indicate a genuine shar-

ing of decision-making on critical aspects

of policy. Our data indicate a nearly even

split between those invited to participate

at the early stages of policy development

(or all stages) and those who were invited

to participate only in the post-formula-

tion or implementation stages.

We observed a significant degree of en-

gagement during the early stages of the

process, as well as a significant degree of

engagement at the operational end. The

fact that the process is not characterized

by frequent interaction throughout the

process raises questions about the robust-

ness of the policy relationship.

Are these encounters merely perfunc-

tory, allowing government to “check the

box” on consultation? We cannot con-

clude, based on our data, that the idea of

a close relationship between the public

service and NGO is wholly inapplicable

to our three Canadian cases. Still, we

characterize them as “shallow” at least by

the measure of a much more pluralized

and open policy process.

If governments are serious about open-

ing the policy process up to non-govern-

mental actors, then a greater institution-

alization of the process is necessary. As it

stands, governments may or may not en-

gage other policy actors, and if they do so,

the effect may vary widely, from incon-

sequential to substantial. Creating new,

formal mechanisms for sustained policy

engagement would remedy the perfunc-

tory aspects of the existing model. These

could take the form of advisory councils

composed of both government and non-

government policy actors operating in a

specific policy domain and mandated to

engage in questions of policy design and

implementation.

Constructing such new councils would

serve several substantive purposes. First,

if sufficiently resourced, they might ad-

dress NGOs’ uneven capacity to engage

in research and policy advocacy. Second,

the very existence of such councils might

require government to engage with non-

state actors on a routine basis. And third,

non-governmental policy actors might

give greater priority to cross-organiza-

tional co-ordination and strategizing in

preparation for advisory council meet-

ings.

ryan

vans

is Associate Professor in

Politics and Public Administration at

Ryerson University.

dam

ellstead

is Associate Professor in Social Sci-

ences at Michigan Tech.