The article examines the character of political control in the meta-governance of Nordic regional governance networks, and asks to which degree the different meta-governance strategies ensure democratic legitimacy. We draw upon a unique comparative survey targeting regional network participants in four Nordic countries, enabling us to have a comparative approach. We find variations in how the meta-governance strategy of participation by regional politicians is used, and to what extent the networks are embedded in the local political level. The Danish networks are the ones having a clear bottom-up character, being deeply embedded in the local level. In contrast, the networks in the other countries are to a considerable extent meta-governed by national government, by hands-off strategies – designing and framing, as well as hands-on strategies; process management and participating in the networks. However, in all countries the networks seem to be legitimated by the participation and control by regional and local politicians, and to a lesser degree by the national level. We nevertheless find variation, and the general legitimacy of the networks seems to be lower in Sweden than in other countries.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fotel et al. (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: