Comparing accountability relationships between governments and non‐state actors in Canadian and European international development policy

This article examines the alignment of different governance arrangements and alternative accountability mechanisms in international development policy making in Canada and the European Union (EU), with a particular focus on relationships between governments and non‐governmental organizations. The Canadian case illustrates an entrepreneurial mode of governance that aligns with fiscal auditing and performance management mechanisms, while the networked governance model of the EU relies more heavily on accountability instruments of public reporting and deliberation. The article concludes that the European accountability regime likely provides policy makers with more opportunities for social policy learning but would be difficult to implement in Canada given the underlying action logic of the federal government.     

The role of citizens in the “soft law” of select social policy areas in Canada and the European Union

This article compares the role of citizens in public reporting exercises of Canada's National Child Benefit and health care service delivery to that of the European Union's open method of coordination (OMC) for social protection and social inclusion. It finds that the institutional infrastructure providing for coordination across social policy areas and possible roles for non‐governmental actors in policy development is more extensive in the OMC than in the “new modes of governance” in Canada. However, there are obstacles to developing such infrastructure in Canada, given the different histories and political contexts of the European community and the functioning of federalism in Canada.     

Shifting scales of governance and civil society participation in Canada and the European Union

This article compares how the role and place of civil society groups in multilevel governance have evolved in Canada and the European Union (EU). It argues that, while the scope for engagement of organizations in the EU has broadened, it has been increasingly narrowed in Canada, to the extent that the policy process may be undermined. The article concludes with some insights from the EU experience in order to revive policy coordination in Canada as a governance technique.     

Third wave,third sector: A comparative provincial analysis of the governance of third sector relations

Across Canada, provincial governments are engaged in a “third wave” of consultations, policy dialogues, and policy alignment strategies with the third sector. Unexplored to date is how provincial governments internally administer their third sector file. This internal configuration could have important implications for internal adherence to cross‐cutting policy mandates as well as third sector policy implementation and bilateral collaboration agreements. This is a new point of analysis for public administrators and third sector intermediary organizations alike. This comparative analysis of network governance structures in eight provincial governments reveals that some structures are more compatible with policy alignment and implementation than others.     

What are the challenges of multilevel governance for urban sustainability? Evidence from Ottawa and Canada's national capital region

Urban sustainability is a priority for cities, challenging public administrators to coordinate action on environmental policy, economic development and social policy. Multilevel governance is now a popular theoretical framework but research must illuminate the constraints on local administrators. This case study reviews efforts of public administrators in the City of Ottawa and Canada's national capital region to implement sustainability policies with collaborative governance, but new governance relationships are constrained by traditional intergovernmental relations. Case study research illuminates the challenges of multilevel governance for local governments and provides insights on the pursuit of sustainability with environmental programs, land use, and urban and development by Crown corporations.     

Multilevel policy from the municipal perspective: A pan‐Canadian survey

Building on in‐depth case studies and extensive theory‐building by Canadian multilevel governance scholars, this article identifies and describes multilevel policy involvement by federal, provincial, municipal, private, and NGO actors in three policy phases and eighteen policy domains that specifically involve local governments in Canada. Drawing from an original pan‐Canadian survey of municipal mayors and councillors, we show that municipal politicians see multilevel policy involvement as remarkably prevalent across many policy domains. Using an original measure of multilevel policy involvement, we identify the policy domains in which policy involvement is most concentrated or fragmented and then describe the correlates of this measure. Multilevel policy involvement, we argue, is more clearly associated with policy phase and policy domain than with municipal population or region. We conclude with a discussion of implications for future research.     

Comparing employment policy governance regimes in Canada and the European Union

This article assesses the performance of Canada's employment policy governance regime post‐1996 by explicitly comparing Canadian approaches to those used in the European Union (EU) through the open method of coordination (OMC). It concludes that Canada has moved so far along the decentralization continuum — with 13 provincial systems as well as a federal‐only system in place — that coordination, coherence, mutual learning and information sharing on a pan‐Canadian basis have been lost. While EU OMC approaches hold promise, to be realized stakeholders would need to become more engaged in the policy domain and provinces, rather than the federal government, must take the initiative for enhanced coordination.     

Cannabis legalization and the machinery of government

This study compares provincial and territorial approaches re‐organizing the machinery of government to promote efficiency, innovation, and continuous improvement in legalizing recreational cannabis. Based on interviews with government officials from across Canada, our research assesses the effectiveness of various models, which ranged from officials‐level working groups and task teams to cabinet committees and formal secretariats. Findings reveal that, while governments took more integrated, network‐style approaches to policy development, modes of policy implementation and evaluation involved more conventional modes of hierarchy and market‐based organization. This shift will impact governments’ ability to execute and evaluate the legalization process.     

Strengthening the ties that bind? An analysis of aboriginal–municipal inter‐governmental agreements in British Columbia

Abstract: Despite a rich and well‐developed literature on Canadian federalism, multilevel governance, and aboriginal–settler relations, scholars have tended to ignore the variety of inter‐governmental agreements that have emerged between aboriginal and municipal governments in Canada. This article examines ninety‐three such agreements to construct a typology of aboriginal–municipal inter‐governmental partnerships in British Columbia. It finds that over time there has been a shift from mundane, service‐provision agreements towards more collaborative, cooperative and sometimes decolonizing, horizontal and multilevel governance partnerships. As a result, the authors suggest that scholars study these agreements to further explain and understand the evolution of aboriginal–settler relations and multilevel governance in Canada.     

Accountability regimes in federal‐provincial Labour Market Agreements 1995‐2015

Workforce development policy in Canada has undergone extensive reforms in the past two decades, often driven by intergovernmental pressures. Many of these reforms, including the transfer of thousands of federal civil servants to the provinces, along with $2.5 billion annually, have occurred largely unnoticed by the public, or even recipients of services. Accountability measures have remained weak as the federal and provincial governments have few incentives to increase public scrutiny. In particular, transparency (making information available for public scrutiny) and justification (the provision of reasons for decisions) are inadequate. A more inclusive public accountability framework in the policy area needs to be developed that can support innovation in programs.     

Networked learning in complex policy spaces: A practitioner's reflection on the open method of coordination

Open method of coordination (OMC) mechanisms have not gained much acceptance in Canada in spite of evidence that they could improve policy making and implementation. In Canada, “learning,” in particular at the political level, occurs somewhat differently from how it was envisaged in the intellectual underpinnings of the OMC because of the ethos of intergovernmental relations. The provinces, territories and the federal government might, however, improve policy learning by approaching the process in a somewhat different fashion while still benefiting from the European experience. The market for learning may exist less at the level of governments and more at a localized practitioner level. Canada may benefit from taking an indirect approach to the issue and creating institutional arrangements that will allow civil society groups to engage in mutual learning more easily.     

Public health and collaborative governance

Abstract: The nature of governance in Canada, both horizontally (between federal departments) and vertically (between federal and provincial governments) is changing. Or is it? Two distinct trends seem to have emerged over the past decade: one towards horizontal coordination and one towards vertical collaboration. These trends are perhaps best exemplified by the Public Health Agency of Canada, which depends very emphatically on integrated relationships both with other federal departments and with provincial and territorial governments. Yet in the past year, severe criticisms have emerged regarding the agency's ability to meet its objectives. To what extent are these problems due to the failure of collaborative governance? On a wider level, have decision-makers been too insouciant about making importunate public policy decisions on an assumption of the viability of collaborative governance? This article argues that problems in vertical collaboration in public health have occurred largely due to failures in horizontal coordination within the national government.     

“Man plans,God laughs”: Canada's national strategy for protecting critical infrastructure

Critical Infrastructure Protection seeks to enhance the physical and cyber‐security of key public and private assets and mitigate the effects of natural disasters, industrial accidents and terrorist attacks. In 2009, several Canadian governments published the National Strategy and Action Plan for Critical Infrastructure (NS&AP), a framework for governments and the owners and operators of critical infrastructure – largely in the private sector – to collaborate on the security and increased resiliency of Canada's critical assets. Drawing on the social science risk literature, audits, and a three‐year research and education project, this article argues that the strategy of relationship building, collaborative risk management and information sharing is under‐developed and limited by market competition, incompatible institutional cultures, and legal, logistical and political constraints. The NS&AP should better delineate risks and identify how governments can work with industry, and acknowledge the paradox between trust and transparency, the role of small‐ and medium‐sized enterprise, and how risk management processes can vary.     

La subsidiarité en droit européen et canadien : Une comparaison

The principle of subsidiarity, one of the most important in European Union (EU) law and entrenched in the EU treaties, has recently entered the constitutional discourse in Canada thanks to some Supreme Court decisions regarding division of powers. After a brief overview of the intellectual history of subsidiarity, this article offers a comparison of how subsidiarity has been dealt with by the Supreme Court of Canada and by the European Court of Justice. The ultimate goal is to see what lessons Canada can draw from the EU's longstanding experience with subsidiarity, particularly in the ambit of social policy.     

Treaty federalism as a model of policy making: Comparing Canada and the European Union

Systematic analyses of Canada and the EU as comparable federal systems have been neglected for a variety of methodological reasons. Most importantly, neither body fits the mould of the dominant model of the American federal state. A revised conceptual framework can show, however, that Canada and the EU both provide a similar institutional and procedural environment for policy making: powers are shared rather than divided; policy directions are determined by executive negotiation rather than parliamentary deliberation; unanimity takes precedence over majority rule; and inter‐regional competition is moderated by a commitment to equalization.     

Federal policy ideas and involvement in Canadian urban transit, 2002‐2017

Although provincial and local governments bear primary responsibility for urban transit projects and operations in Canada, the Government of Canada engages intermittently in this policy field, mainly through research and short‐term funding programs. This article analyzes federal policy concerning urban transit over the period 2002‐2017, with a substantive focus on policy ideas—the cognitive and normative concepts that provide direction for, and shape the perceived legitimacy of, policy choices. Through a thematic content analysis of policy documents, this article explicates the paradigms, programmatic foci, frames and public sentiments that have underpinned federal urban transit policy over this 15‐year period.     

Does public reporting measure up? Federalism,accountability and child-care policy in Canada

Abstract: Governments in Canada have recently been exploring new accountability measures within intergovernmental relations. Public reporting has become the preferred mechanism in a range of policy areas, including early learning and child-care, and the authors assess its effectiveness as an accountability measure. The article is based on their experience with a community capacity-building project that considers the relationship between the public policy, funding and accountability mechanisms under the federal/provincial/territorial agreements related to child-care. The authors argue that in its current form, public reporting has not lived up to its promise of accountability to citizens. This evaluation is based on the standards that governments have set for themselves under the federal/provincial/territorial agreements, as well as guidelines set by the Public Sector Accounting Board, an independent body that develops accounting standards over time through consultation with governments.     

Public‐Private Partnerships in Canada: Reflections on twenty years of practice

Across Canada, governments of all level have increasingly embraced public‐private partnerships (PPPs) as their preferred approach to deliver large‐scale public infrastructure. After twenty years of practice, this paper examines the evolving rationales, governance structures and partnership models that have been used to deliver PPPs in Canada. In particular, the analysis highlights common deal structures, types of risks and responsibilities that are transferred to the private sector, and the significant role that public funding continues to have. Outstanding issues facing Canadian PPPs relate to their high upfront costs, limitations placed on meaningful community consultations, and a procurement process that can inhibit design or architectural excellence.     

Region‐building: Western Canadian joint cabinet meetings in the 2000s

Abstract: Joint cabinet meetings are increasingly used for inter‐governmental dialogue, at both international and sub‐state levels. Provincial governments in western Canada, in particular, have employed the joint cabinet meeting format, and, between 2003 and 2009, nine such joint cabinet meetings were held. The resulting inter‐provincial collaboration at these meetings produced over thirty inter‐provincial agreements. Using the details of these particular joint cabinet meetings as a case study, this article considers three questions: First, why do governments hold joint cabinet meetings? Second, are joint cabinet meetings effective mechanisms for inter‐governmental policy‐making? And, third, particular to the Canadian context, what are the implications of joint cabinet meetings for federalism and democracy? The author argues that joint cabinet meetings are designed to build relationships and trust between governments and to allow a “whole‐of‐government” approach for inter‐governmental policy‐making. The joint cabinet meeting model appears to facilitate expedient inter‐governmental policy‐making, but the effectiveness of the resulting policies depends on the political will of the participating governments. Furthermore, in the Canadian context, joint cabinet meetings have the potential of reinforcing regionalism and the undemocratic tendencies associated with executive federalism.