Is there a difference between policy and governance?

Introduction

1. In this essay, I will describe my initial thoughts to the question. Following this, I will list some of the definitions of ‘Policy’ and ‘Governance’ presented in the literatures, and in the process I will highlight their differences. Towards the conclusion, I will present their similarities, and propose how policy and governance could be seen as grapevines and their trellis.

Personal Views

2. My initial views of policy and governance are simplistic and mutually exclusive. These are rooted in my memories and experience in dealing with my former organisation.

3. I see policies as documented statements expressing the important ‘concerns and activities’ (Colebatch, 2002, p.8) of an organisation. They are so important that these statements ‘set limits on the behaviours of’ (Colebatch, 2002, p.9) her workforce.

4. As for governance, I see it as frameworks of ‘overseeing and controlling’ (Rhodes, 1996) how these concerns are addressed and how these activities are carried out. I do not see governance as activities carried out to bring policy outcomes into existence. Rather, I see governance as separate occurrences (Rhodes, 1996, p. 654) that ensure policy related activities are done within certain accepted and agreed norms or boundaries.

5. After reading some of the articles on both topics, I found some alignments between my personal views and those provided in the literatures.

Defining Policy

6. Most of the readings suggest that at the macro level, policy could be defined in three board ways:

Policy as disposition, intervention, and allocation,
Policy as intention, documentation and in-use, and
Policy as text, discourse, (Ball, 1994) and ideology

7. Hogwood & Gunn (1984) was specific when they unveiled the ten different uses of the word ‘policy’. Of these, I find affinity with 'Policy as an expression of general purpose or desired state of affairs' since the intent of this statement seems to correspond with my initial view of policy as important ‘concerns’ of an organisation.

8. Colebatch (2002, p.9) described policy as ‘labelling thoughts about the way the world is and the way it might be, and of justifying practices and organisational arrangements…’. This definition denotes that policy has three central attributes of order, which gains consistency in behaviours; of authority, that enforces compliance; and expertise in using the policy to solve problems. These, I see as mechanisms in addressing the concerns in the form of 'activities' in the organisation.

9. Nevertheless, lt seems that there is no one definition of what policy really is. It comes across to me as if each author attempts to describe the boundaries of the envelope that keeps policy within, similar to describing a fish by talking about the aquarium that contains it.

10. However, by referencing these with the Colebatch’s vertical dimension of policy, these perspectives become clearer. I can see that these authors are trying to talk about the description, creation, and transmission of policies, their justifications and ‘authorised decisions’ (Colebatch, 2002, p.22) downwards to the subordinates to have them bring these policies outcomes into existence.

Defining Governance

11. Most usage of governance ‘denotes a more complex organisational framework for governing, but retaining a central role for the government’ (Pierre, 2000). The demands for greater social participation and engagement (Dean & Hindess, 1998) forces the public sector to adopt open market practises, managerialism, and new institutional economics (Rhodes, 1996), to delivery public services more effectively and efficiently. Since the government is now comprised of stakeholders not within her control in the traditional sense, governance is the only means affordable to the government some control over how police outcomes are produced responsibly and responsively. Thus, government can only steer now, and not row (Osborne & Gaebler (1992) like in the past.

12. Rhodes described six distinct meanings of governance, and I understand governance as 'corporate governance', 'New Public Management', and ‘Good Governance’ better as these clearly indicated governance is a separate activity from policy.

13. I think Rhodes’ simulative definition of governance as ‘self-organising, interorganisational networks’ as governing structures for authoritatively allocating resources and exercising control and co-ordination best describe the nature of governance from policing. By referencing this to Colebatch’s horizontal dimension of policy, it seems all these governance related activities are actions related to policy of ‘structuring of action’ (Colebatch, 2002, p.23) so that the accountability of non-governmental participants are addressed when public services are delivered to the public in an environment of shrinking government and influence vis-à-vis non-governmental entities.

14. In the face of these, it is quite clear that there is a striking difference between policy and governance. The formal addresses the contents in the form of 'what's', while the latter talks about the boundary in which the 'how's' are carried out.

Grapevines and Their Trellis

15. Up to this point, the impressions I get from these readings indicate that the academia is attempting to converge on an acceptable definition of what policy and governance should and could be. It is this need to converge that perhaps indicates that there are also many similarities between policy and governance.

16. One suspicion I harbour is that if policy involves behaviour as well as intentions, the same would apply to governance. The Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy recommended ‘holding individuals responsible for their actions by a clear allocation of responsibilities and clearly defined role’ (1994), which must be 'an expression of general purpose or desired state of affairs'. Maybe, there is no difference in policy and governance except for the frame of mind or the context the expected behaviour and purpose is intended for.

17. Going back to Colebatch’s ‘three central elements’ of order, authority and expertise in policy, I begin to understand that without setting the context, it is very difficult to differentiate policy from governance. Figure 3.1, the vertical and horizontal dimensions of policy (Colebatch, 2002, p.24), shows vertical policy and horizontal governance while separated by two boundaries, are overlapped in many ways, because there is order, authority and expertise related to statements found in policy as well as in governance.

18. We could see policies as grapevines. Controlled by its own set of rules called genes, it will grow and bear grapes, which are important outputs for our champagnes and wines. However, vines are basically weak bushes. They need physical support to govern the spread of the branches to keep the weight of the grapes off them. Trellis has specific rules that determine how the weight on the bush is supported and spread out without obstructing the growth of the grapes.

Conclusion

19. From the readings and writings, I proposed that policies and governance are different because of the context of their application. However, there are also significant similarities in their production and distribution.

This article was first completed on 10 Mar 2007
Copyright 2007. Anthony Mok. All Rights Reserved.