LIST OF PANELS

Polycentric governance has been embedded into a coherent theory throughout the sixties and seventies by contributions that laid the foundations of the Vincent and Elinor Ostrom Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis. Despite recent renewed interest in polycentricity, convenors of this panel identified an important research gap - the social foundations of the emergence of polycentric governance. With foundations we specifically refer to the role of characteristics of social problems (e.g. characteristics of goods provided) and constitutional (and meta-constitutional) rules –in-use, on the basis of which operational polycentric governance would be founded. The panel addresses this gap in two sessions. The first session treats the conceptual and methodological foundation for addressing a) constitutional conditions and b) characteristics of social problems in regard to their effect on polycentric governance. Papers are welcomed that engage with conceptualising either foundational category underlying polycentric governance and the mechanisms and social processes at work in structuring governance. For example, the role of either weak vs. strong states, shared cultural understandings, provision of public or private goods, formal and informal constitutional level practices or specific scale-specific constraints on self-organisation of collective decision units could be addressed. While contributions are expected to be conceptual in nature, empirical illustrations can cover diverse fields. The second session specifically aims to build on recent advances in our understanding of polycentric water governance. Contributions will be welcomed that empirically illustrate the role of the foundations of polycentric governance for the way water governance is organized, for the way it evolves and performs. Questions could address, for example, the role of perceptions about the specific features of ecological and technical systems in the water governance is structured, the role of the constitutionally codified state structure, the role of changes in perceived uncertainties about social-ecological system behaviour for the way water governance evolves and performs.  

Through the sixties and seventies, Vincent and Elinor Ostrom and affiliates of their Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis developed the foundations of a theory of polycentric governance. Since the beginning of the nineties these foundations lead to the increasingly recognized and popular work on local common pool resource governance, for which in 2009 Elinor Ostrom won the Nobel Prize in Economics. The sum of this approach has come to be known as the “Bloomington School” of public choice. Work on success factors for local common pool resource management and its behavioural dimensions has flourished through these years and provided fertile ground for social scientific discoveries concerning the role of institutions for socialized behaviour. The underlying theory and conceptualization of polycentric governance has received less attention through the latter period. Nevertheless, various works have relied on polycentric governance presumptions. In particular, work on water governance has mobilized elements of polycentric governance theory for explanation of change and performance of particular institutional arrangements. It may well be for that reason that some of the recent work that tries to further develop the theory of polycentric governance addresses water governance. Polycentric water governance and its methodological operationalization have been elaborated in terms of the water governance outcomes. In contrast, the foundations of the emergence of polycentric governance have hardly been addressed thus far. With foundations we specifically refer to the independent variables that trigger the emergence of functionally oriented polycentric governance. In this regard we specifically refer to the role of characteristics of social problems that are addressed through governance, such as characteristics of goods and services, and constitutional (and meta-constitutional) rules –in-use, on which basis of which operational polycentric governance would be founded. Building on recent advances in our understanding of polycentric governance the panel suggests two sessions. The first session aims to treat the conceptual and methodological foundation for addressing a) constitutional conditions and b) characteristics of social contexts in regard to their effect on polycentric governance. The second session specifically aims to build on recent advances in our understanding of polycentric governance, relying on research on water governance. Contributions will be welcomed that focus on the role of social haracteristics and constitutional (and meta-constitutional) rules in the way water governance is organized, in the way it evolves and performs. For each session contributors will be requested to submit full papers at least two weeks in advance of the conference. Each session will consist of 4 papers. Presenters will have 12 minutes for presentation; subsequently, one discussant per paper (drawn from the group of contributors themselves) will be asked to provide a set of poignant comments throughout 3 minutes. At the end of each session the audience will have 20 minutes for an overarching discussion of the papers presented. The aim of the overall session is to bring constitutional rules and social characteristics back into discussion of (polycentric) natural resource governance. If selected papers attained sufficient quality, subsequent publication activities are planned.