Networks and Power

New challenges for municipal decision-making processes in Finland

M.Sc.Anne Luomala

University of Jyväskylä

Department of Social Sciences and Philosophy/

Unit of Political Science

Finland

luoanne@yfi.jyu.fi

Prepared for the European Consortium for Political Research

Workshop 25

Policy networks in Sub National Governance:

Understanding Power Relations

Uppsala, Sweden

13-18 April 2004

2

1 Changing municipal circumstances

Lines of decision-making and planning practices have been in transition in many ways dur-ing recent years in the Finnish municipalities and cities. In this paper I will examine some common changes and their impact in general, at first, and then more concretely by analysing some annual budget conversation of local councils from the viewpoint of novelties. In other words, I will try to find out how and by whom new ideas come to be part of municipal deci-sion-making processes and public management, which are the crucial points in a reform inter-action and how novelties have changed the prevailing municipal structures. The reason why I am interested in politics and power at the local level is because the local government in Fin-land has changed a lot during the last ten years1. One of the main trends has been the dis-placement of bureaucratic local governing towards more flexible governance which has been done consciously by increasing flexible strategy planning systems like with the introduction of new network tools. This has probably changed the traditional roles of local politicians and the local administrative staff.

The new understanding of the role of the municipality is also connected with the citizens’ and inhabitants’ new kinds of expectations of local government. The municipality has often been understood only as a service organisation instead of a political institution. From this point of view the local authorities and the politicians should be very responsible not only in the eyes of the citizens, but also from viewpoints of the economic companies and voluntary groups, for example. At the same time the local decision-makers have to pay a lot of attention to the eco-nomic issues because only by good (and) economic governing is it possible to guarantee a so-called good life for the citizens.

One of the aspirations in answering these challenges is to improve the organisational prac-tises at the local level by networking and seeking innovations. Both the networking and the seeking of innovations are the models, which need flexible – not bureaucratic - action. It might also mean that the power relations between traditional and new political actors in the munici-palities will change. Actually, all these changes are happening inside of the representative de-mocratic system, and also because of this, these changes are not mainly administrative but also really political alterations because by breaking the existing hierarchies, relations and models of domination the whole system is in transformation into something new.

2 Seeking for innovations by flexible governing

The recent turmoil in the sphere of municipal decision-making and its preparation is surely not only a Finnish phenomenon. Ulrich Beck, for instance, has written about those institutional and political trends of changes which are in progress in all western liberal democracies. Ac-cording to Beck (1995), in the heart of the change is that issues and events which were earlier only marginal are now moving into the centre of political action while the traditional subjects and issues of political action are becoming mere administrative governing. Beck describes the change with the concept of risk society. In the risk society, there are no clear answers to ques-tions. Solutions are found just by forecasting threats and risks and by evaluating future op-portunities. In the Finnish municipalities and cities this so-called politics of probabilities mani-

1 For example, the state subsidy system changed in 1993 and the Local Government Act in 1995 which both in-creased municipalities’ independent concerning planning and decision-making.

3

fests itself as increasing efforts to seek new ideas and departures – even innovations – that exceed the prevailing conventional administrative and political boundaries.

In practice the decision-makers do this by different kinds of networking. This tendency is strengthened especially by municipal strategy-based operations. The aim of strategy-based work is to produce new ideas for municipal life in the future. In strategies both threats and possibilities are estimated and, based on these, a future vision is built with selected partners and networks. The strategies are the visionary basis for more concrete economic planning and budget proposals. There has been little research into the prevailing municipal decision-making structure but several studies have been made concerning the networks in the private (both business and non-governmental organisations) sector.

New ways of co-operation like networking and project work help redesign the practices of local decision-making. According to Beck the prevailing tendency of individualisation does not touch only individuals but also collectives such as municipalities and cities, associations and companies. Cities and municipalities must be profiled, too, and therefore the demand for continuous regeneration is central. These institutions try to catch innovations by controlling possibilities and probable threats. There are efforts and aspirations to convert problems that are difficult to perceive into simple and understandable forms, because only by doing this it is possible to try to control them. Furthermore, the tried and found risks, threats and problems have to be put in an order of importance and these issues must be solved by new methods. (Häkli 2002) The governance of issues in the context of changing conditions emphasise the rhetoric structures of decisions instead of their details, because it is only possible to govern situational uncertainties by pronounced rules and regulations and it is a way to try and identify risks, threats and problems and to find opportunities (Beck 1995, 24). In practice this tendency has lead into emphasising expert knowledge, and seeking technical and social innovations.

It is quite conventional that when people speak about innovations, contrivances or inventions are meant more often than new action models or action practices. According to Joseph A. Schumpeter (1991, 412-418), for example, innovation and invention are not the same thing because they are produced by different processes. In any case, as an empirical concept, innovation will always get its interpretations in the context of use. It is a question of insight and realisation, and new kinds of things happening.According to Schumpeter you cannot make innovations, they just happen. Innovation is always a little surprising, and it is really something new when compared to an earlier situation. On the other hand, innovation must not be paradigmatic because mere ’change’ can be innovative in itself; in the long run it will be seen as paradigmatic or just part of normal organisational development work and action. (Hietala 1999; Saari 1998; Freeman 1982)

Different kinds of discourse practices are involved in the concept of innovation, and these divisions will produce a new kind of social reality by themselves. Innovation is a dynamic concept which is adhered to at any given time. By getting into the pre-existing, innovation will change the conventional power relations. ”Change” takes place when actors at a given time and in a given place are able to point out some new elements concerning the issues under consideration or discussion, and when they are able to introduce new special governing methods. At the same time, those not involved in this move will become separate and by doing this they also become visible. That kind of aspiration to protect and preserve the existing may also be an innovative action.

It is quite usual that new models of thinking and acting are thought to spread easily from one time and place to another (look especially at Schumpeter). But when speaking about innovations there is no possibility to just copy. One must turn and transform because in every

4

case a decision to use a reform, invention or innovation must be made. This decision is presumed to be both the identification and acceptance of the innovation (cf. Schumpeter). One example of this is the introduction of new communication technology and how it has caused changes in people’s use of time and relationships.

Meanings given to innovations and the expectations involved tell us about something essential about the determiners of innovation. Nowadays you can hear the word ’innovation’ in various situations and contexts. Actually, the concept has gradually become a governing slogan by which it is possible to present political intentions without strict substantiation. It might even be said that common speaking and demanding for innovations has arisen on the agenda of public decision-making instead of politics and political. Innovations and novelties are the ways to start something new in a certain conditions. (cf. Hänninen 2002)

In relation to innovation there is one common feature/idea both in the local political decision-making and the strategy work in Finnish municipalities and cities: from the viewpoint of municipalities only continuous development work, (reformism in other words) may guarantee the ability of competition for areas and communities. This is quite typical for the present decision-making culture where people are trying to estimate probable risks and opportunities by continuous aspirations to change the governing systems. And municipalities and cities work actively and consciously because they want to find out new working methods. The main purpose is to make the preparation, decision-making and administrative practices more effective and flexible. Seeking for innovation is directed more to the aspirations of improving cities’ and municipalities’ economic situations and images. However, this phenomenon might be interpreted as one expression of risk society at a local level. It is like a survival strategy by which municipalities and cities carry off a victory in competition which is going on (or perceived to be going on) between them.

Under these new conditions the concept of governance has become fashionable, too. It refers to all these techniques, ways, and efforts by which the leaders try to take issues and events under their control while the concept of government refers more to management operations in the prevailing bureaucracies. From the point of view of decision-makers the techniques of governance are usually interpreted positively but with a more critical eye it can be said that there is a question of governmentality like Michel Foucault and Mitchell Dean have called situations where there are aspirations to control everything by discursive practices and techniques. (cf. Dean 1999;1994; Foucault 1980, 181-193) Actually, there has been a great intervention in the individuals’ life by public power the purpose of which is to govern people and issues by using indirect and flexible techniques of power and governance. In the municipalities the aim of operations is to guarantee so called common good with good life for citizens. In principle this is a positive idea unless it does not compel people to act in a certain way. In practice, the mechanisms of power are quite entangled in discursive practices. When managing issues and people by various governing techniques, power is both compelling and productive as Foucault has emphasised.

As a consequence the challenges are directed especially towards municipal decision-makers – both lay representatives and the municipal officeholders - because they have keys to local power when new ideas are striving to get onto the agenda of the municipal decision-making. And because of this the built-in contradictions between the ‘objective’ local officers and the ‘biased’ or ‘partial’ lay representatives are not so fruitful if the aim is to develop decision-making practices, and organisations’ abilities to be more effective and responsible. Therefore, local decision-makers should recognise the threats and risks beforehand, on the one hand, and they should to be able to transform and adapt novelties to suit local circumstances on the other hand.

5

This all is basically disputable action and hence political. If we look at the municipality only as an organisation which produces just welfare services and goods in a most economic and effective way, it might be too simple a standpoint. This kind of outlook might even threaten the existence of a municipality because economic and service duties can be handled by the other organisations, too. Municipalities have given many examples of this by them-selves, indeed.

On the contrary, if municipalities are understood mainly as political institutions and the lo-cal decision-makers as subjects of political action, it will help to re-read out some dominant governing techniques and to make visible some of those power relations which are hidden in discursive practices and networks. It can also make room for more varied interpretations con-cerning decision-making in the municipalities. By reading political aspects it is possible to show some lines by which the various actors will become part of public governance practices.

In the context of this paper I will use Kari Palonen’s conceptualisation of politics (1993). He sees as well as Hannah Arendt, for instance, that politics is action itself and it should be separated of manufacturing and pure administrative affairs. It is possible to read out political aspects of phenomena when politics is understood as empirical action and as a contingent concept. And by understanding differences between policy and polity on the one hand, and differences between politicking and politicisation (politicalization) on the other, it is possible to cross those built boundaries between the local officers and councillors as well as some borders between the private and the public. And in doing so, the clue is by which arguments and by which knowledge decisions are made and via this the question who becomes important. In Palonen’s words, politics refers to action but policy refers to fabrication, explicitly expressed in the current term policy-making:

“ The difference between politicking and politicization lies in their character as actions: Politicking is action in the performative sense…; it refers to opposing to others, acting cunningly and cleverly. Politicization is an interpretative action, opening new playgrounds for politicking in showing that there is some Spielraum [room for living/AL] for action, that is choices to be made, questions to make about ‘givens’ a possible opposition against some generally accepted ‘truths’. --- …politicking takes place within some games already recognised as political, while politicization re-interprets the situation in the manner of rendering them as ones in which there is something to play within situation, and opening them as playgrounds (spaces, times etc.) for politicking.” (Palonen 1993,11)

So, the question here is, whether the parties and their representatives are in the heart of democratic action any more. Formally (and conventionally) they are situated in the centre by the proportional election system but it is important to note that a representative system of politics is not the same thing as the representative democratic system even though they are connected. Democracy is a principle which is introduced and accepted by political action. (In principal it is also changeable by politics). From these starting points it would be more fruitful to observe decision-making procedures in the municipalities, in other words how decision-makers justify their arguments and by what kind of knowledge they base their decision on in the concrete situations like in the annual budget meeting. Next, I will analyse some structural changes in the relative powers of municipal decision-making processes. At first some common lines of forms of networking in the field of municipalities (chapter 3), and then more concretely by looking which kind of reforms, novelties or innovations are including the municipal budget proposals according to the local decision-makers (chapter 4).

6

3 Politics of networking

Seeking for innovations by flexible governing is connected to fashionable networking. Municipalities and municipal actors may connect with each other in both formal and more informal networks. There are at least three kinds of co-operation models. First, the formal inter-municipal co-operation has historical roots especially in areas of health care and voca-tional education which are mostly produced and organised by municipal joint authorities. Sec-ondly, municipalities have nowadays increased their co-operation in technical fields by found-ing new limited companies, the purpose of which is to produce energy or arrange waste man-agement, for example, in an efficient and cost-effective way. Furthermore, municipalities have founded their own public utilities which are quite autonomous in relation to the power of the local council. The third way is to make some deals with non-governmental organisations (NGOs), especially concerning the production of social welfare services. One of the newer models of networking is the closer co-operation with local enterprises and research centres. In particular, the fields of information technology and biotechnology have been interesting in the eyes of municipal decision-makers. In the first case, networking takes place within the exist-ing municipal structure while the last two attempt to open boundaries between the public and the private. So, it depends on the aims, targets and intentions of co-operation which kind of networking it is possible to achieve. In these two last cases, networking can often take place with the assistance of the programmes and projects of European Union.

All of the above can be called networks in general but, of course, the networks are not similar. Multiple networking is an activity by which both municipal planning and municipal decision-making can be linked to each other, not only at the administrative levels but also among the elected municipal representatives like councillors, entrepreneurs, and volunteer associations. The main idea of networking is to minimise disadvantages and maximise advan-tages because by networking it is possible to get more wide-ranged knowledge, a precondition for innovative action and successful decision-making. In this way, networking can be inter-preted as innovative action itself. And because innovative action is always something new when comparing with existing practice, networking is also very political by nature because the main purpose is to open boundaries of municipal polity.

Figure number 1 shows the new situation of the decision-making concerning how the new ideas are getting onto the agenda of political decision-making. It illustrates the complex situation which meets anyone who tries get some ideas onto the municipal decision-making agenda. The networks are multiple and almost obligatory in the present municipal action. It shows also quite clearly how the different kinds of information resources and the subjects of political action are present in the decision-making procedures. It also addresses attention to the significance of knowledge and via this to the arguments which are behind decisions and networks. From the figure it is easier to see the challenges which are met by the decision-makers and citizens. The new situation is so complex that a new idea of governing in necessary.

Reading the municipal decision-making conditions from the edges of the figure to the centre shows the many actors who try to get their ideas to the agenda. From the viewpoint of municipal decision-makers the situation is full of challenges, risks, and opportunities which are managed only by flexible governing. In this situation the local government seems to be more sensitive and responsive in relation to citizens, enterprises, and pressure groups including the parties. The environment of municipal issues are not only local or (sub)national but sometimes also global.

7

EXPERT KNOWLEDGE; STATISTICS; STUDIES; QUANTITATIVE INFORMATION

PREPARATION;

DECISION-MAKING

• SOCIAL MOVEMENTS

• VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONS

• ORGANISATIONS

THE LEADING LOCAL OFFICERS

I

D

E

AENTERPRISES

COUNCILLORS AND OTHER ELECTED

PERSONS

P A R T I E S

EX CHANGE INFOR MATION AND KNOW LEDGE

EXPERIMENTAL KNOWLEDGE;QUALITATIVE INFORMATION

8

Therefore, networks are basically political by nature because there is always the possibility to do things in another way. When operating in networks, the action will always include vari-ous power struggles and disputes concerning representation, and there are the problems of structures and exclusive politics. In other words, how it is possible to function effectively in a network, by whom and by which arguments decisions are made, and again, who are acceptable enough to become members of a certain network. This viewpoint underlines networks as insti-tutions by which it is possible to govern both issues and people’s behaviour. Networks pro-duce new power relations between subjects themselves. Because of its nature, networking will produce certain types of administrative and political decision-making procedures, activity of citizens, as well as new hierarchies.

When evaluating the activities in the municipal democratic system, this notion is connected with a wider question: how responsive is the municipal decision-making process to the citi-zens’ and others’ expectations towards it. In the building of this power relationship knowledge and knowledge-based expert power has a remarkable role because expertise will cause de-pendence in itself. Networking with partners and interaction with others is both stimulating and obligating at the same time; staying out of networks might threaten the whole existence of the organisation. Briefly, there is a growing demand for people and organisations to be active and this is one of the most characteristic features in the recent changes in the Finnish munici-palities and cities. This has happened in connection with the new circumstances in which esti-mating risks and seeking for innovations are highly emphasised and they constitute the basis of municipal planning and decision-making.

Expert knowledge with special know-how has become the precondition for the governing, participating and political involvement. When estimating the municipal decision-making procedures, it is important to understand who has power and who uses power to select and determine the contents of the decision-making as well as what kind of knowledge the decisions are based on. For common people the importance of locally produced knowledge and qualified special information has been strengthened as citizen’s activity has increased and the possibilities to be part of local decision-making processes have improved (Rättilä 2001), at least unofficially. Lay knowledge gets into decision-making by various ways, not only mediated by (political) parties. In any way, expertise and skills are connected to the concept of innovation. Experts and skills are more and more important demands also for decision-makers – especially nowadays, when a concept of governance has become usual in decision-making. This is so because the so called good governance and seeking for innovations are connected, and both of them are given positive images by local officials and authorities, citizens and companies.

However, from this point of view networking is not unproblematic for those involved in traditional decision-making. As an action model networking repeats and renews the idea of delegating which is very typical for representative democracies. In this light, networks are not the answer to those who demand and are committed to efforts to improve citizens’ participation by exploiting the ideals of direct democracy. All of these networking variations both require and produce divergent political ways of action. Furthermore, there are various hidden discursive practices by which it is possible to produce, revise and reform local action models and ways of governing. And, as always when introducing new ways of networking, it is a challenge for the prevailing structures and dominant political practices both at organisational levels and for individuals.

9

4 Novelties in the context of annual budget meeting The budget process is important from the point of view of political action because it is a

subject of politics.2 As an acceptable document it determines lines of action during the follow-ing fiscal year and it also contains some functions and operations that must be organised be-tween different municipal sectors and beyond them. It contains practical orders of power rela-tionships between the elected representatives and the local officials. It is very political docu-ment despite its formal and official economic information because the arguments for the deci-sions are written in the budget. (Wildavsky 1974; cf. also Niskanen 1971)

Therefore, from the viewpoint of the political analysis one of the main questions concerns how these new models of governance such as networking have already been changing local politics and how they will change not only the power relations between the local decision-makers but also the structure of local decision-making and via this the understanding of the local political system. In the context of annual budget meetings, separation between politick-ing and politicisation helps to make some observations about the existing aspirations to open polity or to support existing policies by reforms. Politicking is directed more concretely and it is quite near the current moment while politicisation reaches far into the future. During the budget conversation politicking is a way to look at the past and via this argue the present de-mands concerning improvements for public service provision. Politicisation is one way to look at formal decision-making procedures in the light of more renewal action. Next, I will try to find some answers for these questions by analysing some new practises like the networks and political innovations in the context of the annual budget conversations of the Finnish local councils.

From the budget speeches various kinds of power struggles can be read out which are con-nected with both existing issues and expectations for the future. Usually the struggles present themselves when they want to own honour of some good ideas or productions; negative issues are not mentioned. They also underline their own abilities to see new situations and possibilities and to keep power in their own hands. Both by politicking and politicisation, local councillors try to convince the audience that only they are able to do the best decisions on behalf of local resi-dents. However, usually they only give their support the new ideas or novelties which are pro-duced earlier and which are usually not made by them. Most decisions have been made before the annual budget meeting of local council and a majority of members of council are commit-ted to these pre-contracts, even though local councillors are interested in improvements of citizen’s participation and involvement in municipal affairs in general. Instead, formal deci-sion-making procedures are not taken into account in visible way (cf. strategies of cities of Tampere and Jyväskylä). In efforts to increase democratic aspects the main attention is directd towards citizens instead of the prevailing decision-making system. Citizens and bureaucracies should be more active but there is no talk concerning councillors’ own roles as active decision-

2 In formal description idea of a municipal representative democracy is underlined politics as harmony action as part of municipal decision-making. For example, according to Local government Act the elected local council is a supreme in its area. Councillors are elected by proportional way for four years term. The council appoints mu-nicipal (executive) board and the other municipal boards which function most in the fields of social and health care, education and culture, and technical public services. However, if an illustration is compared the municipal internet sites, visions or strategies, for example, the picture is totally different. There are not talking about politics or even municipal-decision-making processes but more concretely about public service providing and reforms concerning co-operation with business enterprises as well as the NGOs. The lines of decision-making processes seem to hide under complexity networks and the councillors and other elected officials are more faceless compar-ing status of the municipal officeholders.

10

makers. In other words, reforms are welcome if they do not threaten the position of the local council.

Politicking as action does not try to open the prevailing boundaries between different mu-nicipal sectors in the same way as politicisation. Although councillors underline flexible man-agement and operation of sub-administrations in their municipality, both the order of the budget meeting and manners of management force councillors to make decisions within ad-ministrative boundaries. This is one reason why the disputes become visible more often when speaking about managerial and strategic operations between municipal sectors rather than within them. Only seldom get councillors critique for the budget because of its structure. However, if there are no new ideas, openings or reforms in any form they are not satisfied. Visible politicking and politicisation are often more common during smaller council groups and parties. On the other hand, representatives of these groups are more often against some part of the budget proposal and they present often alternative proposals to organise the pro-vided public services. The presented renewals are usually some new operations in different municipal sectors: establishment of new official posts, structural reforms with new kind of resource allocation.

As a process politicisation is a way by which it is possible to try to cross prevailing boundaries and to look at the future. In other words, during budget conversations local coun-cillors talk about their future expectations based on forecasts and statistic, prognosis and mu-nicipal strategies and plans as well as their own experience. It is in connection to forms of po-litical action. Arguments for politicisation are often found both from the past and future; espe-cially smaller parties offer alternative information for the basis of decisions. They can be quite critically against dominant understanding of the duties or municipal operation models. Some-times representatives of these groups express frustration in front of the majority. There is an implicit presupposition that new investments are connected to image and by improving image it is possible to get more tax revenues if new inhabitants are interested in moving into the mu-nicipality. On the other hand, aspects of political become visible especially when councillors compare issues between different municipal sectors. They pay attention to arguments and they might present some new ideas but usually they do not make any new openings concerning the administrative operations and they do not talk about boundaries between expenditures and investments either. They just make proposals. Actually, the main content of the budget con-versation concerns the question of how to allocate resources between different municipal sec-tors although borders between them are determined in advance mostly because of a structure of municipal revenues and expenditures.

Politicking and politicisation are often entangled, and separation is not always necessary. However, it is possible to look at some lines of budget conversation according to ideas of poli-ticking and politicisation. At first, local councillors talk about more details of budget content when issues are familiar and they concerns prevailing operations and structures i.e. how to organise public services inefficiently. There are lot of ideas to improve existing with new products like to build new school or daily care houses, libraries or support home care of rela-tives by establishment new officials’ posts. When talking about more abstract ideas like needs to reform social service organisations or housing and building policies in general the speeches concentrate in a more general level. Party politicking is more common if it is talked just nor-mal–developmental ideas but they do politicise question which concern resource allocation between different municipal sectors or the investments for the co-operations with business enterprises.

Speaking just with arguments without details is usual when local councillors discuss new ideas by which is possible to open dominant procedures in the future. Usually those ideas are

11

written in part of budget proposal’s arguments and strategies behind the budget. Then, under politicisation are just ideas like to increase innovative action by co-operation with private, public and the third sector as well as new forms of action like municipal marketing . In some cases local councillors nominate some products as novelties or even innovations. Secondly, when local councillors dispute some issues they argue their statements often with statistics and their own experimental knowledge. On the contrary, when they talk about novelties at com-mon level they based on their opinions special information produced by experts, and some-times they mention also the support of their group.

The third interest viewpoint is that the local councillors concentrate on more the arguments in the financial and operational plans as well as strategy texts than the budget proposal itself. This is connected to their attitudes: when there are some novelties with positive expectations they just recommend it but if there are no novelties or they do not recognise them they present critique against choices made by other council groups and parties or municipal officials. Fourthly, the main disputes concern divisions between public and private. If some positive economical or financial results are expected, most of the councillors support this kind of ideas or novelties. But if the future with renewals is really uncertain and if there are some financial difficulties in a municipality, especially members of smaller parties are often quite critical.

Which ideas, products or forms of action are, then, nominated as innovations or at least as new openings by local councillors? Table 1 shows with examples the differences between the reforms of purposing to improve public service in prevailed policies and the new attempts to open prevailed polity by innovative action. In Tampere the city council names some new ideas, novelties, openings to innovations like the eTampere project or the centre for environ-mental knowledge. Besides speeches concerning the future there exist some named operational improvements in different municipal sectors. There the conversation mostly concerns the fu-ture . Vision and strategy management is typical for councillors because of the structure of the budget proposal. Councillors do not discuss details when they are talking about starting or ongoing projects. Instead, when talking about reforms in prevailing municipal structure han-dling is more concretely. In Jyväskylä, the word innovation is known when speaking about co-operation with the third sector or business life. Also in Jyväskylä, city councillors try to look at the future after a few years when they are doing their solutions. There unemployment and creation of new working places are in centre of discussion. Unemployment is an argument by which it is possible to demand investments for new projects and programmes. Co-operation with business life and the third sector has seen opportunities to improve citizens’ (and cities’) life condition in the future. These are main argument also then when disputes focus on re-source allocation between different municipal sectors.

In the other municipalities the word ’innovation’ was unknown at the time of recording budget conversations (during 1998-2002). Instead of innovation, these councillors use words ’new’, ’reforms’, ’ideas’. Speeches do not explicitly concern the future so often as in the cities. Especially in rural areas councillors concentrate on their own local issues besides of relations between state and municipality. In rural areas (especially in Iitti and Tuupovaara) a relation between a municipality and the state is common i.e. councillors discuss how it is possible to implement states’ commands if they cause some financial difficulties for municipalities i.e. there are some (rhetorical) disputes concerning the order of importance of public service pro-vision. Arguments for innovations are connected with the aims to safeguard a vital existence of municipality in by providing high-level public services for citizens in the future. More ur-banised rural municipalities like in Hollola and in Lempäälä the contents of budget conversa-tions concern mostly reforms connecting the advantages and problems which are caused quick growth of their area.

12

Table 1. Some examples of reforms and novelties which have been under conversation in annual budget meetings of local councils 1998-2002. Some examples of reforms supporting prevailing public service policies: New ideas without concretion: • concentrating on basic investments • new lines in social services • Better facilities for cultural recreation,

sports, and traffic communication • support for unemployment persons • improve working conditions of school

teachers New products: • Building: e.g. new schools, libraries,

swimming halls, daily care houses, • afternoon clubs for school ages • afternoon clubs for teenagers • provide public services with NGOs by

purchase contracts

Forms of operations i.e. how to improve public services:

• home care services • support for home care of relatives • technique of the budget meeting • support for children’s home care • housing and building policies • new services in new building areas • revenues from forests • new loans for living and for investments • new working places offered by enterprises • land selling for new houses • Operations must be measured by the

evaluation criteria

Some examples of new attempts to open prevailing polity: New ideas without concretion or nomina-tion:

• attractions for new enterprises • attraction’s for families with children • co-operation with business life • no boundaries between public and private • new alternatives for service production and

development

• improve image of a municipality • new ideas of business policy (no details) • demands for effectiveness • utilisation of information technology • utilisation of public property; forests Products:

• Establishments new co-operation organisa-tions e.g. international upper secondary school, advised centre for enterprises; guidance of prosperity policy; afternoon clubs for young; purchased welfare ser-vices with control

Forms of function

• co-operation with the companies for the development of industrial and commerce life

• public economy into part of markets • Co-operation with private, public and third

sector • projects with the third sector • new division of work • no competition between public and private • a strategy working which aim is to increase

innovative action • strategy work: strategies for rural areas • development programmes for rural areas • municipal marketing • new living areas will be build together with

other municipalities • programmes and projects (e.g. from Tam-

pere): BioNext-Tampere: co-operation with the highest welfare technology, high-level research and international markets; eTam-pere-project (communication technology)

Actually this is typical for all these budget conversations. If they are talking about reforms in the prevailing municipal structure there are more details and also arguments based on coun-cillors own experiences. But when real new ideas are sometimes discussed, it seems impossi-ble to turn them into a more concrete form. As to structural reforms are more familiar for the councillors with their contents (working at schools, hospitals, old people care organisations etc.) than the new projects and programmes which are situated to the future and for the reason estimating of their forthcoming impacts is more difficult. In these cases, actually, councillors talk only about those arguments behind the new ideas because they have not that kind of know-how that it would be possible to discuss with details. And because of the special knowl-edge it is possible to try convince audience of necessities of new openings with financial in-vestment.

In this way a municipality seems to be a promoter both for new ideas and in implementing innovative action. It seems also to be connected in which area municipality situate in eye of councillors. Tampere puts itself in global networks at first, then via USA economy entity to part of Europe. At the national level Tampere make a comparison between it and other Finnish cities and demands direct negotiations with the state. Placing between local and global is a way to convince audiences of the significance of Tampere as a powerful Finnish city. Jy-väskylä proportions to other bigger Finnish cities. It does not want to imitate bigger ones but in its own area it wants be a centre of expertises. Its goals are strongly in the future as Tam-pere’s aims. Lempäälä and Hollola are situated next to big cities. They enjoy cities’ success although they sometimes suffer problems of growth centre. They are rural areas which are fast becoming more urbanised and they are very autonomous both in relation to the state and cities in their neighbourhood. Iitti and Tuupovaara are rural areas. They compare their circumstances in regard to the whole sub-region and region. They focus their attention to plans of becoming the centre city of the region but they compare with other same size municipalities in their re-gion. They are independent but worried about future because of plans of the state.

In all cases above both geography and size (number of inhabitants) is significant when mu-nicipalities estimate risks and possibilities in their area. They also put attention to relations between the state and municipalities. In a case viewpoints are neutral or negative, positive issues are not mentioned. Bigger cities seek direct negotiation and interaction with the state and particularly with the State government and ministries. In smaller municipalities both ur-banised and rural areas the state-commands are taken as a given even though there exists lot of criticism against statual operations and legislative orders. However, if the budget proposal does not include new openings or the budget does not improve service, councillors are not so satisfied but they cannot do anything by themselves because usually the concrete reforms are not done by councillors. They are created by them who have prepared the budget proposal and the main lines of strategies. In other words, councillors just recommend new openings via budget proposal. In the heart of innovative action are those, who have special knowledge: ex-perts are not only officials or representatives of industry and commerce but also groups and individuals in the field of NGOs.

It is typical also for the annual budget conversation that municipality is to understand mu-nicipalities or towns mainly as economic institutions or as service organisations. Instead, a view of municipality as a political institution - as a community where political decisions concerning political issues are made – has often been lost despite the fact that the multiple publicly paid projects have been launched for the purpose of improving democratic procedures such as citizen’s possibilities to be involved in public affairs and to participate better in the municipal decision-making processes. Seeking for technological innovation is more common with enterprises and social innovations are more common when co-operation with the third sector. Aspirations to reform structures of municipal personnel or municipal sectors have

14

sometimes seen as part of seeking for organisational innovations/novelties and political inno-vations are seeking when there exist some efforts towards citizen’s participation.

Efforts to increase citizen’s involvement, participation, and activities concern their own life and living environment. This is a positive tendency, of course. But, it seems that local politicians generally support idea of enhanced participation, but practical steps towards im-plementation of enhanced participation are lacking (Kettunen 2003). All of these changes and reforms have happened, however, in the existing representative political system without questioning or paying attention to those prevailing power relationships and interaction models within, behind, and beyond decision-making processes. The ability to understand novelties is a powerful resource for local decision-makers because the ability to seek and recognise novelties and even innovations is part of the political competition which is going on both in localities, and beyond and between them. This is connected in both the trends of globalisation and glocalisation. For the local decision-makers the networking or the seeking of innovations may be one aspiration by which they try to estimate forthcoming global and local risks and possibilities in their municipalities, and by this estimating they also try to minimise the risks and maximise the possibilities. Briefly, the seeking for innovation could be interpreted as one model of governance. Concretely this is done by local decision-makers especially during the annual strategy and budget processes.

5 Who is a politician?

When networking has become more common as a political and administrative way to govern, the municipal leaders should act more as mediators and introducers of new ideas, not only as decision-makers. In this sense it is interesting to ask who is a politician.

Traditionally, politicians are defined as persons who are elected by citizens, and by this delegated power they should be supreme in their own area. In the Finnish municipalities the local council is the supreme authority and the local councillors use the power as politicians. Correspondingly, the municipal officeholders are like civil servants who prepare matters for discussion and refer them to the local council, municipal executive committee or municipal boards. This division also includes the idea of subjective and objective power; politicians are seen as more partial than the officials who should be very objective. In practise, these roles are confused in many ways and not least in the municipal decision-making processes where a city manager with the other municipal professionals of the various administrative lines are often on the top of power and in the heart of decision-making.

There are several reasons for this. First, instead of formal decision-making the preparation processes of decisions are highlighted when talking about power over issues. This is because the issues have become more and more complicated and entangled. Therefore, solutions are found only by making estimates which requires professional knowledge, special skills, and time. Lay representatives like local councillors do not have enough time because they also have to take care of their own personal life including their businesses and family. In that kind of situation lay representatives have no other choice than just to trust the professional local officials whose formal duty is, indeed, to know special contents with details.

Secondly, in the preparation of decisions, mostly trusted professional information such as statistics and studies is used, and by expertises in professional issues it is possible to evaluate this kind of knowledge. It is quite common that quantitative information is estimated as more qualified than knowledge based on only qualitative criteria. This is so, despite aspirations to improve the role of citizens’ activities in decision-making processes. Besides

15

expertise, the roles of the leading municipal officials as decision-makers are emphasised when municipalities are regarded mainly as economic organisations whose main duty is to provide welfare services for the residents in exchange for their taxes.

Thirdly, seeking for economic effectiveness has also caused the fact that decision-making power has been delegated to a greater extent from the local council to lower organisations like municipal executive committees and municipal boards but also to the administrative staff, especially to the city managers and the other leading officials. When wide power delegation was allowed (since the newest Local Government Act (1995)), the purpose was to strengthen the position and power of the local councils as the supreme strategic decision-makers in their municipalities. For that reason all operational duties and routines were moved to the administrative staff. The idea was good from the point of view of the classic ideal democratic model but reality is another matter. These changes have just strengthened the positions of the local officials, not only as subjects of preparations but also as actual municipal decision-makers who have quite a lot of autonomous power to decide the lines and contents in the municipal decision-making processes.

As summarised: the power of the leading local officials has strengthened because they are professionals in the production of knowledge, information mediating and interaction in general. They are experts in their own environments. Their main duty is to get and select information, mediate and adapt knowledge in practise. They have good facilities for their work and they have time to look for information even when they are busy. Namely, they have the paid time to improve the level of their knowledge of the whole organisation, not only of some groups or at an individual level. The work with information and knowledge forms the base of the work of the local officials and therefore, as a professional expert, a municipal officeholder can be the subject of decision-making both the political and administrative action. The dynamics of decision-making is presented in figure 2 which illustrates the structure of the decision-making process and the aspect of politics at length. It shows how time and knowledge relate to decision-making procedures. This connected to decision-makers’ competence. They need competence in identifying, analysing and processing the information related to environmental changes. For them competence it is an ability to find new ways of adapting to changing circumstances and developing innovation which is crucial for adjustment (Haveri 1994, 142).

This tendency is also connected with the idea of new public management which became very popular also in Finland in the beginning of the 1990s. Over time these demands for economic and effective local government have become more sophisticated and they have been adapted to local conditions. However, these new models of governing with other changes and alterations, like the legislative reforms concerning the allocation of resources to the municipalities through the state subsidy system, and memories of the events which took place during the deep eco-nomic recession ten years ago, have caused all together remarkable structural and political changes in the municipalities. Some of these changes are possible to see at the moment, some of them can be found out by observation and some of them might be read out after years. However, some powerful trends are obvious: both the internal and the external changes in mu-nicipal structures, the networking and seeking for innovations, and the reaching for more ef-fective economic practices. In the last case it seems the idea of effectiveness means the same as speed.

16

IDEAS OPENINGS

INITIATIONS

CITIZENS GROUPS BLOCKS COALITIONS

bureaucracies hierarchies organisations

institutions

DECISION

recognizing -> transforming -> confessing

-> introduction of novelty -> adapting

POLITICAL ACTION POLITICAL ACTORS

POLITICIANS

17

If we are living in the risk society in Beck’s way, even simple issues require strong arguments. Therefore the preparation of decisions is essential also from the point of view of results. During preparation of decisions the municipal officeholder is the main person. His/her duty is to recognise new ideas and issues to make some first decisions in relation to these offered novelties. The local officer’s own attitudes and positions might influence the destinies of novelties. For that reason all those who want to influence public issues or their details, must be in contact with the local officials from the beginning. When processes are going, it is easier to get new ideas on the agenda of decision-making processes. In other words, it is more difficult to try to change pre-existing contracts or to change official proposals during the formal collective decision-making situation like the meeting of the local council. In some cases it is almost impossible without a consensus which is achieved by the main parties and the city manager in advance.

Innovation capacity and local initiatives are essential for municipal ability to develop functions important in the adjustment to the changing environment. For innovative and action, a key prerequisite for innovative action is intensive interaction, information exchange and cooperation between local actors. (Haveri 1994, 73) Both in the conventional decision-making situations like in the meetings of local council and in the networks the essential things are always linked to each other and they are often behind and beyond formal proposals. At the same time the administrative boundaries and various kinds of contradictions – like borders between private and public - are obscured by networking and new subjects are coming to the heart of political action. In this way the political aspects of decision-making activities are moving from traditional arenas into networks even though the decisions are always made by estimating opportunities, in these new decision-making situations the arguments behind official proposals and decisions have become more relevant than earlier. That is, although the networks are often quite independent, they are controlled by the official municipal decision-making system which is ultimately based on the idea of representative democracy.

In practice, networking within and between municipalities can take place in many ways and the responsibility for control is moving from the council towards the professional officials, and sometimes also to the municipal boards. When the overall budgeting has become more common, in many cases the municipal boards – which are elected by local councillors – have started to get into the heart of local political action. Let us me take some examples.

When there are efforts to affect the contents of an agenda for decision-making from outside of formal municipal decision-making structure, particularly the representatives of citizens’ voluntary groups and the other NGOs have taken a new place in municipalities via the municipal boards especially as initiative subjects who offer alternative ideas to arrange welfare services. For the municipal boards, co-operation with citizen’s activity groups at the root level is more natural when compared with the roles of the municipal executive committee or the local council which both are more concentrated on governing larger entireties. Besides co-operation with novelties, NGOs become part of the public when they concretely implement the results of municipal decisions (purchase contracts between municipality and some voluntary association concerning social welfare services, for example). (cf. Helander 2003)

On the other hand, it seems that the representatives of industry and commerce are more often in connection with the local municipal committee and especially with the municipal manager and the other leading local officials than with the local councillors. The special networks with development programmes are important in the interaction with enterprises. And yet, the local authorities are more often in connection with the other municipal or regional officers and professionals, especially via different kinds of co-operation programmes and

18

projects. In other words, the municipal officers and their organisations are networking with each other according to both the hierarchical level of their jobs and the level of their own expertise.

In all this interaction it seems that the traditional political actors like local councillors are just in a reactive role. And even though the role of the members of the municipal boards has strengthened, they do not necessarily have an entire view of issues unless they are members of both the board and the council and if they are active by themselves or there is a big party behind them. Indeed, the parties and their representatives have power over designing official politics and they still have a special role in the official decision-making as decision-makers. However, it seems that as initiators and innovators their role is not so powerful. When producing new ideas and novelties the lay representatives are staying in the background and at the same time the new actors like representatives of industry and commerce as well as NGOs with the other professionals and the municipal officeholders are becoming more remarkable in the role of innovators. On the other hand, the role of the leading municipal officeholders is highlighted also by lay representatives themselves. The local officers are one of the main source of knowledge for local councillors and the other laymen. In some cases the local councillors and the members of municipal boards prefer to situate themselves more as mediators than as municipal-decision makers. (Luomala 2003; Helander 2003)

6 New places for political decision-making

These notions of municipal decision-making raise the question of the dominant practices in local democracies and how residents’ and their representatives’ ideas and wishes are actually mediated into municipal and public decision-making. From this point of view it does matter who the subjects of political action are when implementing the municipal democratic system. Under circumstances of the new model of political action it seems that the key actors are those who have both time and ability to adapt new information according to local conditions. By special knowledge and correct timing it is possible to make proposals in a real time, to do surprising counterproposals, quick solutions and decisions. Notwithstanding these preconditions the actors should be able to be in flexible interaction in the multiple networks. One reason why the municipal officeholders are coming into the centre of municipal decision-making is that interaction and participation in networks is a part of their official duties.

It would be quite conventional if only those who are actors in the certain organisations and in a certain way were politicians or political subjects. From the standpoint of this paper also the preparation of decisions can be interpreted as disputes and therefore as political action. In the same way the persons who are responsible for the preparations can be – at least temporarily – truly political actors. As mentioned above, nowadays the leading municipal officials are not only administrative or objective staff but, at least temporarily, professional politicians. As temporary politicians their main duty is to recognise and decide the destiny of new ideas and novelties which are trying to get onto the municipal decision-making agenda, and when the municipal officials are negotiating or making pre-contracts with partners – who are estimated as good partners in advance – they are the subjects of political action in the same way as when they are fighting for advantages on behalf of their own organisations or municipalities. And yet, it is symptomatic, at least in the Finnish municipalities and cities, that the city managers act more like politicians in certain situations and the traditional politicians like local councillors are often the objects of measures and engagements instead of subjects of local political action (cf. Möttönen 2002). Nowadays, municipal elected officials often deal with tricky economic decisions and may sometimes feel that citizen’s participation is

19

something of hindrance in the process (Kettunen 2003, 276) and yet, at the same time municipal officeholders haven subjected to a variety of management reforms, productivity expectations, savings and other change when public participation has risen very high in their agenda (ibid.). When acting as representatives of their own institution, the leading local officials are in the role of political subjects i.e. politicians whose duty it is to be strongly partial. However, there are certain differences between politicians who live for politics than from politics (look at more about the concept of politician Weber 1994).

The introduction of new ways of working like complex networking and strategy-based action have transformed both the relations between the municipal decision-makers and the prevailing political and administrative practices. Furthermore, new kinds of meaning and significance have been assigned to communicative interaction and the production of new information and knowledge. From the point of view of the decision-makers, knowledge is also one of the main elements by which municipal decision-making and preparation for it is prescribed, reworked and directed in the districts. It is important, then, to understand what kind of knowledge municipal decision-making is based on and by whom that knowledge is produced.

More practically, there are many aspirations to make municipal organisational systems and practices more flexible, effective and economic in the Finnish municipalities. Under governing by governance the networking strengthens special knowledge instead of general information. The special associations and organisations in the fields of NGOs, enterprises, and high-level research centres might seem more interesting as partners in the eyes of municipal decision-makers than traditional political actors like parties or trade unions. It is especially so because of their expected ability to invent and present new ideas and novelties which might be useful for the local government, not forgetting that the more conventional organisations might produce novelties and even innovations, too.

Alternative information and lay knowledge gets into municipal decision-making by mediating interest groups and other citizens’ networks. More formal coalitions like associations and other non-governmental organisations can also be members of the official networks with the representatives of industry and commerce, and municipalities and research centres, for instance. Citizens’ coalitions might have their own representatives also in local councils or municipal boards. They can also be directly in contact with leading local officials or politicians. However, as initiative actors, both the volunteer groups and representatives of trade and industry might truly challenge the existing decision-making structure and its contents, not least because this model of interaction might produce innovation or be innovative in itself.

Because of these notions it would be important to understand a municipality more as a political and democratic community than merely as a welfare service organisation, particularly if the municipalities want to be or want to become innovative districts because developing innovations requires a multicultural environment and a wide-ranging exchange of information. For innovations the circumstances can be politically stable but not blocked. Concentrating only on some organisational and administrative improvements or some technical and economic inventions cannot be considered innovative action in itself. Innovation always includes some surprising elements, it is contingent in nature and in this way closely similar to political action. Innovation as an empirical concept will always be determined after it happens.

The situation described above i.e. the local officers considered politicians does not necessary fit some conventional conceptions according to which only the parties and party politicians are situated in the centre of political action. When looking only at results it does not

20

matter so much who is a politician in the municipalities or who is the subject of decision-making. However, if we are interested in how the decisions are made it is more important to understand this and to notice the places where there are aspirations to create something new. Efforts to open the prevailing polities are political action in themselves.

Literature: Beck, Ulrich (1995): Politiikan uudelleen keksiminen: kohti refleksiivisen modernisaation teo-riaa. Teoksessa Ulrich Beck, Anthony Giddens & Scott Lash: Nykyajan jäljillä. Reflek-siivinen modernisaatio. Englanninkielisestä alkuteoksesta ‘Reflexive Modernization, Politics, Tradition and Aesthetics in the Modern Social Order’ suomentanut Leevi Lehto. Tampere, Vastapaino. Sivut Pages 11-82.

Dean, Mitchell (1997): Critical and Effective Histories. Foucault’s Methods and Historical Sociology. Routledge, London 1994.

Dean, Mitchell (1999): Governmentality. Power and rule in modern society. Sage, London.

Foucault, Michel (1980) Power/Knowledge. Selected interviews and other writings 1972-1977. Edited by Colin Gordon.The Harvester Press, Brighton, Sussex.

Freeman, Christopher (1982): The Economics of Industrial Innovation. 2nd edition. Frances Printer (Publishers), London.

Haveri, Arto (1994): On adaptive and strategic behaviour of local level communities. The per-spective of specialization and cooperation. Acta Universitatis Tamprensis ser A vol 393.University of Tampere.

Helander, Voitto (2003): Public sector reforms and the Third sector. Finnish Local Government Studies 4/2003, pages 290-297.

Hietala, Marjatta: An Innovative City. Challenges for the Future. Futura 1999:3, 57–63.

Häkli, Jouni (2002): Kansalaisosallistuminen ja kaupunkisuunnittelun tiedonpolitiikka. In Bäcklund Pia & Häkli Jouni & Schulman Harry (eds.): Osalliset ja osaajat. Kansalaiset kaupungin suunnittelussa. Gaudeamus, Tampere. Pages 110-124.

Hänninen, Sakari (2002): Yhdistykset uuden aloittajina. In Hänninen Sakari & Kangas Anita & Siisiäinen, Martti (eds.): Mitä yhdistykset välittävät. Tutkimuskohteena kolmas sektori. Atena, Jyväskylä. Pages 228-246.

Kettunen, Pekka (2003): How democratic are the Finnish Local Governments? Finnish Local Government Studies 4/2003, pages 271-278.

Luomala, Anne (2003): Päätöksenteko liikkeessä. In Hänninen Sakari & Kangas Anita & Siisiäinen Martti (eds.): Mitä yhdistykset välittävät. Tutkimuskohteena kolmas sektori. Atena, Jyväskylä. Pages 190-227.

Möttönen, Sakari (2002): Henkilöstön edustajien vaikutus kunnallisen organisaation managerialistiseen kehittämiseen. Kunnallistieteellinen aikakauskirja 2002/4. Sivut 357-374.

Niskanen, William Jr.(1971): Bureaucracy and Representative Government. Aldine Atherton, Chicago, Illinois.

21

Palonen, Kari (1993): Introduction: from policy and polity to politicking an politicization. Teoksessa Parvikko, Tuija & Palonen,Kari (toim.): Reading the Political. Exploring the Margins of Politics. The Finnish Political Science Association, Helsinki.

Rättilä, Tiina (2001): Kansalaistuva politiikka? Huomioita kuntalaisaktiivisuudesta poliittisena toimijuutena. Politiikka 43:3. Sivut 190–207.

Saari, Juho: Sosiaalipoliittinen innovaatiotutkimus. Teoksessa Heikki Niemelä, Juho Saari & Kari Salminen (toim.): Innovatiivinen sosiaalipolitiikka. Sosiaali- ja terveysturvan katsauksia. Helsinki. KELA 1998.

Schumpeter, Joseph A.: The Economics and Sociology of Capitalism. Edited by Richard Swedberg. New Jersey. Princeton University Press. Princeton 1991,

Sotarauta Markku: Kohti epäselvyyden hallintaa. Pehmeä strategia 2000-luvun alun suunnittelun lähtökohtana. Tulevaisuuden tutkimuksen seura. Finnpublishers.

Wildavsky, Aaron (1974): The Politics of the Budgetary Process. “.ed. Little Brown, Boston.

Weber, Max (1994): The Profession and Vocation of Politics. In ‘Weber, Max: Political Writings’, edited by Peter Lassman and Ronald Speirs. Cambridge University Press. Alkuteos Weber, Max: Politik als Beruf 1919.

Material: Budget conversations of local councils during annual budget meeting in the next Finnish municipalities and cities (Redords; written by Anne Luomala): Hollola: the budget proposal for 1999. Iitti: the budget proposal for 1999. Jyväskylä: the budget proposal for 2000. Lempäälä: the budget proposal for 2003. Tampere: the budget proposal for 2003. Tuupovaara: the budget proposal for 2003.

Strategies:

Tampere - Working towards excellence. The balanced city strategy of Tampere 2001–2012. www.tampere.fi/english Jyväskylän kaupunkistrategia 2004. www.jyvaskyla.fi/tiedotus