How Can New Governance Regulation Develop? Regulatory Dialectics and Mandatory Charity Performance Reporting

Abstract

Increasingly New Governance approaches are evident in public administration, in contrast to the New Public Management (NPM) approach and reforms of last century. In focusing on competition and outcomes, regulation under NPM has been a tool to manage self-interested decision-makers, and is beset by conflict. Kane’s model of regulatory dialectics could be applied to this approach. New Governance (variously known as New Public Governance, Public Value Governance) takes a process approach, aimed at problem solving and co-creating public good. It blurs traditional regulatory boundaries, and yet, the concern is that, when developing mandatory regulation, power imbalances may still occur and that the process approach may severely delay successful outcomes. We propose a New Governance-orientated model of regulatory dialectics. Here, the use of formal organisations, routine processes and informal dialogues facilitates repeated interactions, identifying more ‘soft’ than ‘hard’ responses by regulators and regulates. This less adversarial and more partnered process leads to greater engagement in regulatory development which impacts significantly on the regulation that results, and has the potential to improve acceptance of (and compliance with) mandatory regulation.