Multi‐stakeholder public policy and governance in China: an analysis

• Published date: 01 May 2014
• Date: 01 May 2014
• Author: John F. Mahon,Carla C. J. M. Millar
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/pa.1513

■Special Issue Paper

Multi-stakeholder public policy and

governance in China: an analysis

Carla C. J. M. Millar

1,2,3

*and John F. Mahon

4

1

University of Twente, School of Management & Governance, The Netherlands

2

Ashridge Business School, Hertfordshire, UK

3

University of Chester, Business School, Chester, UK

4

University of Maine, Maine Business School, Orono, Maine, USA

In this article, public policy is put into a multi-stakeholder rather than adversarial perspective: we argue that there is a

role for multi-stakeholder involvement in both the development and implementation of public policy; these are

separate processes that can involve different patterns of stakeholder involvement (stakeholders have different skills

and levels of interest in public policy) in either one or both the development and implementation phases. We need

new models, approaches and examples of such multi-stakeholder public policy, and in this Special Issue, we focus

on China, where such research is only slowly emerging. We present and analyse six papers that fall naturally into

three categories: (1) corporate social responsiveness and societal relationships; (2) public affairs (particularly

reputation management) and citizen involvement; and (3) public-management-oriented, data-based analyses. These

articles, takentogether, increaseour understanding of multi-stakeholder researchand practice, but equallyas important,

they give us insights into how Chinese public policy academics research and report public policy. This window into

academic research and thinking offers us an opportunity to expand and deepen our understanding of public policy

and its implications for public affairs in China. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

There is growing interest in how organizations, both

corporations and non-governmental organizations

(NGOs), can engage in the development and imple-

mentation of public policy. Much of the existent

research starts with the view that this is a deeply

adversarial relationship (see, e.g. Freeman, 1984).

Governments, citizens, businesses and NGOs are

always in competition for the edge that public

policy initiatives afford, and such initiatives are also

of the fixed pie variety—that if one stakeholder

gains, whether it be business, government, citizens or

NGOS, the other stakeholders lose or gain less. Far

too often, the benefits to the larger community/society

are ignored or compromised as the process unfolds.

There is more than one stakeholder, more than one

who is involved, more than one who benefits.

We believe that there are, and have been, extraordi-

nary opportunities to move away from an adversarial

approach in public policy development and imple-

mentation. Note the distinction that we are suggesting

here—that there is a role for multi-stakeholder involve-

ment in both the development and implementation of

public policy and that development and implementa-

tion are separate processes and can involve different

patterns of stakeholder involvement in both the devel-

opment and implement phases or both. We believe

that stakeholders have different skills and levels of

interest in public policy that can be reflected in either

development or implementation or both.

Current worldwideeconomic conditions, muddied

even further by various political upheavals—for

example, Egypt, Ukraine and Syria—have exposed

significant weaknesses in the ability of government

at all levels, to develop, fund, implement and sustain

public policy initiatives without the involvement and

support of a large setof stakeholders outside the gov-

ernmental sphere. We need new models, approaches

*Correspondence to: Carla C. J. M. Millar, University of Twente,

School of Management & Governance, PO Box 217, 7500 AE

Enschede, The Netherlands.

E-mail: c.millar @utwente.nl

Journal of Public Affairs

Volume 14 Number 2 pp 85–92 (2014)

Published online 22 April 2014 in Wiley Online Library

(www.wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/pa.1513

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.