Various literature pays attention to motives or objectives for an interactive approach in municipal land. Common motives or objectives are increasing support, enriching content, accelerating policy, expanding participation and democracy, achieving a higher level of ambition, optimizing the internal organization or improving the image. In this article we discuss these motives and the conditions that interactive policy must meet.
Motives for interactive policymaking
Increasing support
The underlying goal is to create support and increase the feasibility of the policy. Various studies have shown that increasing support is a common motive for applying interactive policymaking (including Pröpper and Steenbeek, 1999).
Content enrichment
Improving the content of the policy (goals, means, time choices) so that the policy becomes more decisive, effective, more responsive or more legitimate (Pröpper, 2009). Participating parties are given the opportunity to share and explain their views, ideas, perspectives and solutions. In this way, well-considered choices can be made.
Shortening the duration or accelerating the policy
By involving stakeholders in the policy process at an early stage, resistance at the end of the process can be reduced. This allows social or administrative problems to be tackled in a shorter period of time.
Expanding participation and democracy
Interactive policymaking can have a positive effect on citizen involvement in governance. Direct democracy can be strengthened because citizens actively contribute to public affairs (Pröpper, 2009). The parliament and the board also actively look for what is going on in society. In this way, policy and society’s needs can be better coordinated, which contributes to representative democracy.
Achieving a higher ambition level
Achieving more, better or faster policy by bundling ideas, efforts, time and money.
Increasing the problem-solving capacity of society
Greater responsibility and self-reliance of citizens, social organizations and companies can contribute to public affairs.
Improve internal organization
When conducting interactive policy with citizens, social organizations, companies and/or other authorities, it is possible that shortcomings of the internal administrative apparatus come to light. These could be issues such as compartmentalization or poor internal cooperation. In line with this, the organization can receive new impulses and energy from external parties. (Klinkers, 2002, pg 16-17) By looking from the outside in, this can be an indirect objective for pursuing interactive policy.
Improving the image
Improving the image can also be seen as an indirect motive or objective. The positive image can be increased because the public welcomes interactive policy or its results.
Conditions for interactive policy making
The previously mentioned elements indicate properties that are central to the development of interactive policymaking. However, applying interactive policymaking does not necessarily have to be successful. Pröpper and Steenbeek (1999, 2009) mention a number of conditions that interactive policies must meet in order to minimize the risk of failure. Coloring these conditions actually entails a risk analysis; if one or two conditions are unfavorable, the risk of failure is significant.
The core conditions for interactive policymaking:
Openness
In addition to being a central element, openness is also one of the most important core conditions of interactive policymaking. This applies to both the board and the participants. The board must be prepared to give up real autonomy and must be open to input from participants. It is important that it shares its influence and provides insight into the policy process. Participants, in turn, must be prepared to share their influence with the board and provide insight into their considerations. The importance of mutual openness is also emphasized by Edelenbos & Monnikhof (2001, pg. 54) and van Woerkum (2000: pg. 96-97).
Clarity in advance about the role and input of the board and that of the participants
Instead of controlling the process, interactive policymaking attempts to seek out dynamics and interaction with participants. However, this does not alter the fact that the expectations of management and external parties must be recorded prior to the policy process.
Added value of participation
Interactive policy is only effective when the participation of citizens, social organizations, companies or other governments can actually contribute to the policy. The board must therefore indicate specifically what it expects from the participants, both in terms of content and process. There is only added value when participants are also able and willing to meet these expectations.
Constructive relationship
Constructive literally means constructive. However, a constructive relationship does not fully cover it in this case. A constructive relationship is actually about ensuring that the interactive process is not influenced by underlying issues of the participants. The constructive relationship is divided into the structural, cultural and personal relationship between the board and the participants. The structural relationship revolves around the fact that the board and the participants need each other to achieve certain objectives. A collaborative structure can also contribute to the constructive relationship.
A number of conditions can also be attached to the constructive relationship from the cultural perspective. The board and participants must have a common sense or meaning. It is not necessary that they share entirely the same views, but that there is a common basis for discussing differences. It follows from this that the conflicts of interest between the board and the participants must be limited, bridgeable or interchangeable. If there has been (positive) cooperation between the board and the participants in the past, this can also contribute to the constructive relationship. Personal
relationships between the board and participants also have an influence. Collaboration must not be disrupted by personal conflicts, differences or negative experiences with certain people.
Suitable problem
There are both interactive and non-interactive approaches to addressing issues. An interactive approach does not always have to be the most suitable approach. For example, problems should not be so urgent. Sufficient time should be allocated for stakeholder participation. In addition, the problem is suitable if it is sufficiently important and receives sufficient interest. It is considered whether the problem has sufficient weight for the board in relation to the extra time, effort and money. Participants must also be interested in the problem. The problem must be recognizable to them and match their experience. In addition, the problem must be manageable and not yet fully crystallized. The added value of participation plays a role in this. The problem must be sufficiently understandable for the participants and must not exceed the competencies of the board. In addition, the policy approach to the problem has not yet been known and there must not yet be sufficient agreement between different parties. Finally, the problem must be compatible with public treatment. This means that problems that require secrecy are not suitable for interactive policy.
Sufficient capabilities and resources
Finally, there must be sufficient capacity and resources available. Compared to traditional policy processes, interactive policy usually requires extra effort. It is therefore important that the board has sufficient manpower, money and other resources. External parties will also have to invest time and other resources.