Neighbourhood Governance and Aucklands Royal Commission

1
Neighbourhood Governance and Aucklands Royal
Commission

• An Interactive Discussion
• Local Government Centre
• AUT University

2
The Commissions Brief

• What governance and representation arrangements
• will best
• (i) enable effective responses to the different
• communities of interest and reflect and nurture
• the cultural diversity within the Auckland
• region and
• (ii) provide leadership for the Auckland region
  and
• its communities, while facilitating appropriate
• participation by citizens and other groups and
• stakeholders in decision-making processes

3
What We Will Share

• Brief history.
• Context the wicked issues.
• Themes conceptualising neighbourhood
  governance.
• International experience.
• New Zealand.
• Discussion what will best suit Auckland?

4
Brief History

• Conventional local government hierarchical
  decision-making.
• New public management-market rules.
• Network governance.

5
Context-the wicked issues

• Hierarchic interventions have proved incapable of
  dealing with complex issues such as social
  deprivation, economic development, an ageing
  population.
• Typically these require non-market strategies
  (even economic development involves a high degree
  of externalities of a public good character).
• Emergent practice partnership working,
  engagement, participatory or direct democracy.
• Emergent forms various means of network
  governance, partnerships, collaborative
  arrangements, consultation, facilitation.

6
Themes - styles of engagement

• Sites, spaces and spheres
• Site the physical space within central and/or
  local government deliver their interventions.
• Space physical space within which external
  agencies and the neighbourhood begin to engage
  stop
• Sphere the physical space within which genuine
  network governance begins to emerge central and
  local government implement effective devolution.

7
Themes-the rationale for engagement

• Democratisation and devolution.
• Competence and coordination.
• Steering.
• Containment.

8
International experience

• The United Kingdom strongly hierarchical,
  central government directed, emphasis on
  partnership working.
• United States locally driven, influence of
  public choice theory, local initiatives often
  foundation based community development
  corporations, community land trusts as examples.
• Australia emerging initiatives at a local
  council level Golden Plains, Blue Mountains,
  Noosa, Penrith.

9
New Zealand

• Community outcomes and LTCCPs innovative
  breakthrough or blind alley?
• Community boards.
• Economic development arms-length agencies,
  local government/business partnerships?
• Special-purpose trusts arts, culture,
  affordable housing.

10
Discussion

• What will best suit Auckland?