Morphology and governance
•
•
•
•
Abstract
Governance Narrative
Morphology
Context
Kevin Morrell, University of Birmingham
Jonathan Grix, University of Birmingham
Abstract
A central proposition in orthodox theories of governance is that
there has been a shift from government to governance. Indeed,
this is sometimes how ‘governance’ is understood. A challenge
facing a general proposition such as this is that it is unbounded.
Here we argue that the range and scope of this proposition needs
to be qualified and empirically tested. Once we accept the
premise that not all sectors will have made this shift in the same
way, over the same time period, and to the same extent, we can
develop a number of more nuanced theoretical propositions to
frame future research. To do this we propose and develop a
morphology of public sector services. Morphologies attempt to
group and relate objects that are similar to one another into a
general class or set. This offers scope to examine in greater detail
the central proposition underpinning orthodox governance theory.
Context – the ‘Governance Narrative’
• First wave governance narrative = posited the retreat of
governmental power and its dispersal among a wide variety of
intermediary organisations
• Second wave = (Bevir and Rhodes) critique first wave by
suggesting an interpretivist alternative, rejecting focus on
institutions and structures
• Pioneering ‘decentred approach’ sees government as only one
of a number of key actors in governing the UK
• Decentred approach sought to restore individuals to the
literature on network governance in contrast to the often
agentless, technocratic accounts given in previous work
Our Approach
• Formalist (pejorative) associated with: Schklovski, Jakobson, Tynjanov,
Eikhenbaum (Onega and Landa, 1996). Sociological & aesthetic critique
(Greenfeld, 1987). Flourished 1920s (Erlich, 1980) suppressed 1930s.
• Tightly defined school, pace disagreements (Schmitz, 2007). E.g. some
(Schklovski) felt literature a distinct category, others interested in texts’ (inc
scientific writing, political speeches & texts) ‘literariness’ (Bennett, 1989).
• Enormous influence - Jakobson & Prague Linguistic Circle developed forerunner
to structuralism (Schmitz, 2007) + influence on Levi-Strauss’ work on
structuralism in anthropology (Levi-Strauss, 1963). Derrida’s rejection of neutral
categories of classification is a profound rejection of Formalism (Derrida, 1981).
• 20th C: crystallisation > transcendence > negation of Formalist principles.
• Morphology – search for deeper structures/commonalities across phenomena.
An Example of Morphology –
Folk Tales Before Propp
• Miller tales of: (i) fantasy, (ii) everyday life, and (ii) tales involving
animals; Wundt:(i) mythological folk tales, (ii) pure fairy tales, (iii)
biological tales and fables, (iv) pure animal fables, (v) genealogical tales,
(vi) joke tales and (vii) moral fables.
• Volkov 15 kinds of fantastic tales (e.g. feature hero-fool, or 3 brothers,
or magical objects, or search for a bride, or unfaithful wife.
• Aarne-Thompson index 7 kinds of fairy tale, e.g.: those that concern a
supernatural adversary, those that concern a
supernatural spouse, those that concern a
supernatural task, those concerning a
supernatural helper and so on.
The Problem and Solution
• Unstable categories so needed a deeper
structural analysis to find commonalities – a
Morphology
• Propp examined (i) characters and (ii) their
functions
• Not all are present, but all the tales displayed
the functions in unvarying sequence
The 31 Functions
1. A member of a family leaves home (the hero is introduced);
2. An interdiction is addressed to the hero ('don't go there', 'go to this place');
3. The interdiction is violated (villain enters the tale);
4. The villain makes an attempt at reconnaissance;
5. The villain gains information about the victim;
6. The villain attempts to deceive the victim to take possession of victim or
victim's belongings;
7. Victim taken in by deception, unwittingly helping the enemy;
8. Villain causes harm/injury to family member; or, a family member
lacks or desires something ;
9. Misfortune or lack is made known;
10. Seeker agrees to, or decides upon counter-action;
11. Hero leaves home;
12. Hero is tested preparing the way for his/her receiving magical agent or helper
(donor);
13. Hero reacts to actions of future donor;
14. Hero acquires use of a magical agent;
15. Hero is transferred, delivered or led to whereabouts of an object of the
search;
16. Hero and villain join in direct combat;
17. Hero is branded;
18. Villain is defeated;
19. Initial misfortune or lack is resolved;
20. Hero returns;
21. Hero is pursued;
22. Hero is rescued from pursuit;
23. Hero unrecognized, arrives home or in another country;
24. False hero presents unfounded claims;
25. Difficult task proposed to the hero;
26. Task is resolved;
27. Hero is recognized;
28. False hero or villain is exposed;
29. Hero is given a new appearance;
30. Villain is punished;
31. Hero marries and ascends the throne.
‘The Hero Is Transferred, Delivered, Or Led To The
Whereabouts Of An Object Of Search’ (Propp, 1968: 50-1).
• The hero may fly through the air, either on horseback, or on a
giant bird, or a flying carpet, or on the back of a giant, or a spirit,
or in the carriage of the devil.
• They may go on the ground on foot or on the back of a horse, or
wolf.
• They may have to climb a stairway, use an underground
passageway, descend into the earth using leather straps, or a cat
may go on the back of a dog, or a person with no hands may carry
someone with no legs.
• They may travel on a ship or cross a body of water on the back of
an enormous pike.
• They may be shown the way by a ball of thread, or a fox may lead
the hero to the princess, or a hedgehog may point the way to a
kidnapped brother, or they may follow a set of bloody footprints.
Method / Research Question
“can the broad propositions underpinning governance orthodoxy be empirically
tested?”.
• Propp’s method is so clearly identified with an influential and coherent approach >
some common questions: stability of categories, challenge of identifying mutually
exclusive and exhaustive categories.
• Even if it provokes disagreement it is engaging with something definite: a discrete
sense of structural analysis, and clear affiliation to a body of ideas.
• Basic aim: explore extent to which a morphology of governance forms is possible.
• Case 1: Sports and use of morphology based on Aristotle’s Categories
Genus
DE-CENTRALISED GOVERNANCE – Sport Policy Sector
Species
Divides into sector-specific interventions, reforms and modes of control, different foci for reform, different
ways of evaluating the effects of reform and its success / failure
Aspect
REGIME
ORGANIZATION
Surface
suggest
appearances The
de-centralised proliferation
governance
however,
creation
POLITY
and A wide range of NDPBs The shift to governance
of have been created, along has produced an array of
exists; professionals working in with partnerships, trusts ‘enforced
‘asymmetrical sport
policy
has and committees – all to
governance’ persists in accompanied the process remain
partnerships and relations of increasing government dependent
with policy
community involvement in sport
(elite and mass sport)
Properties Hierarchical
AUTHORITY
Professional
which
stakeholders
resource- have to belong in order
on
government,
the to
access
funding;
hence ‘partnerships’
‘asymmetrical
seen
as
governance’
agencies’
Clan/Fiefdoms
‘Partnerships’ but
enforced
Accident
partnerships’
Features that are non-necessary conditions for membership of the species.
become
‘government
Beyond the ‘Governance
Narrative’?
• Some public policy sectors do not ‘fit’ the notion of the dominant
‘governance narrative’
• Such ‘deviant’ sectors (for example, sport, education, social housing) are
often misread and misunderstood by commentators to mean a dispersal
of government power among many actors
• The actual underlying power relations in ‘deviant’ policy sectors are
constituted in asymmetrical networks and partnerships (rather than the
assumed diffusion of power which characterises the dominant governance
narrative)
• The real power to make decisions, to decide on or how to deliver policy is
held by the Government, not actors with ‘significant autonomy from the
state’ (Rhodes)
• This paper moves beyond a recognition that some policy sector do not fit
the ‘governance narrative’ ideal type