Localism in Practice: Investigating Citizen Participation and Good Governance in Local Government Standards of Conduct

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12161
• Published date: 01 January 2014
• Author: Alan Lawton,Michael Macaulay
• Date: 01 January 2014

Alan Lawton is deputy head of

the School of Business and Economics

(Gippsland) at Monash University, Australia.

He has held several professorial appoint-

ments at U.K. universities and was part-time

professor of governance and integrity at

Vrije University in Amsterdam. He has

published extensively in international

journals, authored or coauthored seven

books, and contributed numerous book

chapters. He has acted as a consultant to

the governments of Ethiopia, Lithuania,

Norway, and Bulgaria.

E-mail: alan.lawton@monash.edu

Michael Macaulay is deputy director

of the Institute for Governance and Policy

Studies at Victoria University in Wellington,

New Zealand. He is also visiting professor

in public management at the University

of Sunderland in the United Kingdom. His

research interests are integrity and ethics.

He has worked on numerous projects for

nongovernmental organizations such as

Transparency International. He has also

worked on projects at the University of

Johannesburg, South Africa, and for the

Council of Europe in Turkey.

E-mail: michael.macaulay@vuw.ac.nz

Localism in Practice: Investigating Citizen Participation and Good Governance in Local Government Standards of Conduct 75

Public Administration Review,

Vol. 74, Iss. 1, pp. 75–83. © 2013 by

The American Society for Public Administration.

DOI: 10.1111/puar.12161.

Alan Lawton

Monash University Gippsland, Australia

Michael Macaulay

Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand

 is article examines how, against a background of local-

ism endorsed by the 2010 coalition government in the

United Kingdom, a key component of local integrity and

governance was fundamentally altered.  e Localism Act

2011 abolished the English local integrity framework,

which relied on the participation of local citizens in the

policy making and implementation of local government

standards of conduct.  e article utilizes Henrik Bang’s

concepts of “expert citizen” and “everyday maker” to

explore citizen participation in local standards commit-

tees. Using a case study approach, the article demonstrates

how standards committees shaped processes and practices

in the local governance of integrity.  e authors argue

that standards committees were crucial in promoting

local participation and enhancing good governance.

There has been increasing international

interest in local integrity systems in recent

years (Head, Brown, and Connors 2008;

Huberts, Anechiarico, and Six 2008; Matei, Matei,

and Săvulescu 2010; Salminen and Ikola-Norrbacka

2009). Work from Australasia has increasingly looked

at the ways in which integrity management relates to

overall governance (Head 2012), leading one com-

mentator to suggest that the development of local

integrity shifts the debate from good governance to

“good enough” governance (Evans 2012).  is article

builds on this international interest by examining the

framework that was put in place for integrity manage-

ment in the United Kingdom at the local level and the

role of local citizens in that framework. In particular,

it looks at the role of the standards committees of

local authorities as part of that framework and the role

of independent members in those committees. Recent

legislative changes brought by the Localism Act 2011

fundamentally altered this framework and ef‌f ectively

abolished standards committees.

Our research was driven by three key questions: First,

what were the statutory and nonstatutory roles that

standards committees played in the local integrity

framework? Second, in what sense were the standards

committees a ref‌l ection of localism, that is, in what

ways did independent members inf‌l uence the local

integrity agenda? Finally, what forms of political par-

ticipation did the independent members correspond

to?

We argue that well-developed standards committees

were prominent in promoting local participation and

enhancing good governance, all within the perspective

of localism. We investigate the standards committees

using a multiple case study approach.  e article is

divided into four sections. It begins with a discussion

of participation, integrity, and governance, drawing

on a view of democracy and the role of the citizen.

Second, it outlines the origins and development of

standards committees within the context of the cur-

rent localism agenda as presented in the Localism Act

2011.  e article then outlines the methodology and

empirical f‌i ndings from the case studies and concludes

with a discussion of the links between standards com-

mittees and participation.

Participation, Integrity, and Governance

 e literature on democracy and democratic theory

is long and honorable, and it would be impossible to

attempt to summarize so much work here. Fukuyama

(2011), for example, traces the role of democracy in

human order from prehistoric societies. Dunn (2006)

assesses the impact of democracy in terms of liberation

movements in history. And Keane (2010) charts the

impact of democratic principles on current political

regimes and the reasons why democracy has begun to

receive negative connotations globally.  is supports

other research that directly criticizes democracy as a

dangerous ideal (e.g., Hawksley 2009).

 e pursuit of good governance and the desire for

greater participation by citizens in public af‌f airs are ten-

sions at the heart of discussions of systems of govern-

ment (see, e.g., Dahl 1994). Balancing ef‌f ectiveness and

participation is central to democracy.  e distinction is

important, however, because it mirrors a wider discus-

sion within democratic theory pertaining to democracy

as both process and value. Lively (1975) outlines the

Localism in Practice: Investigating Citizen Participation

and Good Governance in Local Government

Standards of Conduct