Explaining INSTITUTIONAL DYNAMICS within LOCAL PARTNERSHIPS: THE CASE OF ‘EQUAL II’ AND ‘LEADER+’ IN CRETE DESPOINA GRIGORIADOU, MSc. Thesis submitted to the University of Nottingham for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy January 2013 1 Abstract This neo institutional study analyses the dynamic interaction between formal/informal rules and agents’ behaviour inside a political institution, examining these relationships through primary research on local partnerships in Greece. The theoretical assumptions of this analysis derive mainly from normative neo institutionalism but also include insights from rational choice and the historical institutionalism. Consideration is also given to the way in which theories of the structure/agent duality are related to neo institutional propositions on the relationship between rules and agents’ strategic behaviour. The neo institutional approach to local partnerships is also situated in relation to concepts and empirical observations from the literature on urban governance, urban regimes and Europeanisation. This research adopts the critical realism stance which acknowledges a reflexive approach to reality and it applies an embedded case study strategy. The case study consists of two local partnerships in the region of Crete, which were established under the EU Community Initiatives Programmes EQUAL II and LEADER+ and coordinated by the Local Development Agency of Heraklion. A triangulation method is selected, making use of interviews, storytelling, a short questionnaire, direct observation and secondary analysis of documentation. The research data reveal that the formal rules of the partnerships are not indicative of what actually happens. It is the configuration of formal and informal rules that offers a deep understanding of partnership. It is concluded that some formal rules are realised (albeit with deviations along the way), like partnership and programming, while others are remained mostly on paper, like community participation, decentralisation and innovation. In these cases, the informal rules appear to be conflicting with the formal rules, leading to different results than those expected. 2 The research also shows the importance of agents' intentionality in the process of institutional change. Specific actors within the partnership, such as established local leaders and institutional entrepreneurs, select and reinforce particular features of formal rules that restrict partners’ freedom and promote values of efficiency within the partners. Moreover, the findings confirm a gradual changing of local policy making and an increase of local social capital. EQUAL II and LEADER+ partnerships create new possibilities for the empowerment and participation of new actors such as NGOs and vulnerable groups in the local policy-making process. They also promote the establishment of policy networks and enhance the development of collaborative learning processes (trust building and sharing understanding). Finally, they lead to the re-articulation of mayors-chief executives’ relationship inside local authorities and of central state’s position by creating new possibilities for broadening local authorities’ autonomy. 3 Acknowledgements First of all, I would like to thank Prof. Vivien Lowndes, who has supervised this thesis. She has always been encouraging and interested. She has been my lifeguard in the emergent ocean of knowledge guiding me successfully on the way to the shore. A debt of gratitude is also owned to all the participants of this research. Without their valuable information and generously hearted participation, I would not have completed this thesis. My appreciation goes also to the academic staff of the Local Governance Research Unit of De Montfort University, especially to Dr. Tomila Lankina and the School of Politics and International Relations, University of Nottingham for their advice and useful insight over all these years. I would like also to thank the Greek Ministry of Internal Affairs for its funding support. My thanks are also due to friends and colleagues in Greece for the discussions we had enjoyed around the subject of this thesis. I am particularly grateful for the friendship of Litsa. She had encouraged me offering her emotional support generously, a cup of coffee and a place to stay when I needed. I would like also to thank my friends in Crete, especially Despoina and Vagelio for their hospitality during my data collection. Special thanks to members of my extended family, aunt Sofia and uncle Dimitris who were always there available to offer me their help with patience. Finally, I would like to thank my daughter Ioanna from who I had to be away physically for days; she has made this easier with her understanding. 4 Table of contents Abstract ........................................................................................................... 2 Acknowledgements ......................................................................................... 4 Contents ........................................................................................................... 5 List of figures .................................................................................................. 7 List of tables .................................................................................................... 8 List of abbreviations ....................................................................................... 9 Introduction .................................................................................................. 10 Chapter 1: The NI approach: rules, agency and context .......................... 17 Section 1: Institutions and Rules .................................................................. 18 Section 2: Agency, power and institutional change .................................... 30 Section 3: Institutions and context .............................................................. 44 Chapter 2: Neo institutional approaches to understanding local partnership ............................................................................................... 55 Section 1: Theories of urban politics and their approaches to local partnership ................................................................................. 57 Section 2: A review of the neo institutional literature on local partnership 75 Section 3: The leadership role in partnership .............................................. 86 Chapter 3: Research methodology .............................................................. 96 Section 1: Ontological and epistemological approach ................................. 96 Section 2: Case study research strategy ..................................................... 100 Section 3: Research Methods ..................................................................... 115 Section 4: Data analysis ............................................................................. 126 Section 5: Challenges and limitations ........................................................ 132 Chapter 4: Analysis of case study and context ........................................ 136 Section 1: The case study partnerships ...................................................... 136 Section 2: National and local context ........................................................ 141 Chapter 5: Partnership’ formal rules arrangements .............................. 174 First rule: Partnership and openness of decision-making .......................... 175 Second rule: Local community involvement and empowerment .............. 198 Third rule: Networking .............................................................................. 209 Fourth rule: Management: programming, monitoring and evaluation ....... 214 Fifth rule: New policy goals ...................................................................... 217 Chapter 6: Partnership in practice: the interaction of formal and informal rules ......................................................................................... 224 First rule: Partnership internal dynamics: the domination of a centralised and mayoral local government ................................................ 225 5 Second rule: Intergovernmental dynamics of partnership: the domination of a centralised and highly politicised State ........................... 239 Third rule: Community engagement: more information than participation ................................................................................................. 248 Forth rule: The partnership policy process: more technocratic than political ................................................................................................. 254 Fifth rule: The partnership policy process: more stability than innovation ................................................................................................. 258 Sixth rule: Partnership behaviour: the attitude of dependence and the fear of responsibility ........................................................................... 264 Comparison of the LEADER+ and EQUAL II programmes ..................... 270 Chapter 7: Agency: Institutional entrepreneurs and local leaders .... 277 Section 1: Institutional entrepreneurs ........................................................ 278 Section 2: Local leaders ............................................................................ 283 Conclusions ................................................................................................. 307 1. Summary of the chapters ......................................................................