Goulart Pedro, Falanga Roberto
CAPP and Instituto Superior de Ciências Sociais e Políticas, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.
Instituto de Ciências Sociais, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.
Eur J Dev Res. 2022;34(4):1735-1744. doi: 10.1057/s41287-022-00551-z. Epub 2022 Jul 6.
Co-production is now the gold standard in policymaking, characterised by national and international actors with different types of knowledge working together to contribute to a collaborative decision-making process. The benefits of co-production in policymaking can include improved knowledge generation that merges practice-centred, political and technical knowledge and incorporates local knowledges to provide complementary information and increase ownership over policymaking processes. Nevertheless, it can also present pitfalls such as multiple and diverging interests, incomplete and asymmetric information, and resource asymmetries and elite capture as highlighted by Bender in (Eur J Dev Res, 2022). By reviewing a case in the European periphery, we document and illustrate situations of collaboration and conflict, benefits and pitfalls resulting from policymaking co-production, throughout recent Portuguese history and in present-day participatory budget initiatives. From competing national actors to influences from the Global North and Global South, the final outcome reflects a learning process in collaboration but also underlying power struggles.
共同生产如今是政策制定的黄金标准,其特点是拥有不同类型知识的国家和国际行为体共同努力,为协作决策过程做出贡献。政策制定中共同生产的好处包括改进知识生成,将以实践为中心的、政治和技术知识融合在一起,并纳入地方知识,以提供补充信息并增强对政策制定过程的自主权。然而,正如本德在(《欧洲发展研究杂志》,2022年)中所强调的,它也可能存在诸多问题,如多重和不同的利益、不完整和不对称的信息,以及资源不对称和精英俘获。通过回顾欧洲边缘地区的一个案例,我们记录并说明了在葡萄牙近代历史和当今参与式预算倡议中,政策制定共同生产所产生的合作与冲突情况、好处与问题。从相互竞争的国家行为体到全球北方和全球南方的影响,最终结果反映了一个合作中的学习过程,但也存在潜在的权力斗争。