Institutionalising democratic innovations through the Victorian Local Government Act 2020: Exposition, analysis, and implications
- Publication Type:
- Thesis
- Issue Date:
- 2024
Open Access
Copyright Clearance Process
- Recently Added
- In Progress
- Open Access
This item is open access.
Democratic innovations have burgeoned over the past few decades as a corrective to a perceived ‘democratic deficit’. Its proponents argue for greater public participation, implying that ‘ordinary’ citizens, unhindered by bias or political agendas, are more likely to make recommendations for the public good. More recently, there has also been increasing emphasis on institutionalising these practices through legal and regulatory frameworks, thereby embedding greater citizen participation in formal decision-making structures.
Whilst the literature regarding democratic innovations is extensive, empirical analysis of the implications of these practices on government organisations is less abundant. There is limited research regarding how these practices are integrated within the existing institutional norms of government organisations. This research contends that a more complete understanding of the institutional constraints policy actors navigate when operationalising democratic innovations is needed. This understanding may provide insight into why, despite the proliferation of these practices, there is little evidence that they have achieved the long-term impact or democratic renewal they espouse.
Focusing on the Victorian Local Government Act 2020, which mandated ‘deliberative engagement practices’, this research applied an institutionalist lens and utilised public value theory to analyse the competing dynamics public managers needed to consider when implementing democratic innovations. Through a mixed methods approach, including interviews, observation, document analysis and surveys, the research was designed to better understand how democratic innovations were interpreted, applied, and how authorising environments and operational capacities influenced their realisation.
The research found that, in the absence of an agreed set of principles or standards, the institutionalisation of democratic innovations was reliant on each organisation’s own imperatives and understandings. Moreover, the emerging practices were shaped by both organisational drivers and dominant discourses, making them susceptible to co-option. The research also determined that the interpretation of the practices was further complicated because much of what is described about democratic innovations is premised on normative ideals and hegemonic discourses about their outcomes.
This research demonstrates that further attention needs to be given to the existing systems, cultures, and norms within which democratic innovations are enacted and embedded. It contributes to the empirical literature by explaining how deliberative engagement practices were interpreted and applied. Given that institutionalising democratic innovations is becoming more prevalent, the findings also provide legislators with a better understanding of the context within which these mandates are enacted and potential constraints to their aspirations for democratic reform.
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: