COLLABORATIVE GOVERNANCE Clause Samples

COLLABORATIVE GOVERNANCE a. Each Supplier shall, at Transport’s request: (1) attend governance meetings convened under any Agreement between Transport and another Supplier, where matters to be discussed in that meeting are relevant to the Services provided by the Supplier to Transport; (2) permit the other Supplier to attend governance meetings convened under an Agreement between Transport and the Supplier; and (3) attend other regular and ad hoc governance meetings convened by Transport for the purpose of facilitating collaboration between Suppliers. b. In the situation described in paragraph 21.a(2), the Supplier may request that the other Supplier be excluded from any part of the meeting in which confidential or commercially sensitive information relating to the Supplier is to be discussed. c. Transport will comply with a request under paragraph 21.b, provided that the Supplier making the request has given a reasonable justification for making the request. d. Suppliers accept that joint attendance at meetings is an essential part of collaboration between Suppliers, and accordingly shall not make requests under paragraph 21.b except where strictly necessary. e. Transport shall at all times facilitate the co-operation and interaction with other Suppliers in the manner envisaged under this rule. f. This rule does not in itself establish a contractual relationship between a Supplier and any other Supplier.

COLLABORATIVE GOVERNANCE. APPROACH 7.1 Collaborative Governance in the Establishment and Management of a MPA by the Parties is intended to support and advance the specific MPA Site Design, including: a) identifying appropriate designation, legislative and regulatory tools, for Establishment of the MPA; b) identifying relevant Network Goals and Design Elements; and c) coordinating with relevant Decision Makers, or other authorities and agencies, as required to advance the MPA Site Design and Network Goals and Design Elements, including as it relates to proposed prohibitions or restrictions on activities that impact or are incompatible with the MPA Site Design. 7.2 Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Parties acknowledge the site- specific commitments they have made in section 9.1 of the MPA Network Agreement. 7.3 The Parties acknowledge that Establishment and Management of the MPAs may require multiple legal, legislative, or regulatory tools, and coordination and engagement with authorities responsible for those tools. 7.4 When agreed, the Management Representatives, or Decision Makers will facilitate the identification of appropriate forums to bring strategic or policy issues for further discussion, including engaging the Network Committee, for guidance on how to proceed when strategic and policy issues arise in the Establishment or Management of a MPA. 7.5 As needed for the Establishment and Management of a specific MPA, the work of the Management Representatives includes: a) Strive to make Consensus recommendations to their respective Decision Makers on matters related to MPA Establishment including: i) the identification and Establishment of proposed MPAs within Category 1, Category 2 Zones and Category 3 Areas as those categories are described in the Network Action Plan; ii) relevant proposed Site Design and prohibited uses and activities therein, feasibility, designation tools, and options, including how such MPA contributes to relevant Network Goals and Design Elements; iii) the final design and legal designation tool for a MPA, in accordance with each Party’s relevant jurisdictions, laws, authorities, and customs including any relevant legislative and/or regulatory requirements; iv) the development and finalization of any Establishment Agreement; v) the development of annual or multiyear workplans for Establishment; and vi) consistent with principles in the Conservation Plan attached as schedule 4 to the MPA Network Agreement, the development and implementat...

COLLABORATIVE GOVERNANCE. Introduction and definition Recent trends Public Policy Application Inspiring cases of ICT applications to Collaborative Governance Key challenges and gaps Current research Future research: long term and short term issues

COLLABORATIVE GOVERNANCE. Due to complexity of the current problems that are faced by the different levels of governments, the decline in government efficacy and the scarcity of resources that forces them to “do more with less” a new form of governance have emerged called “collaborative governance” or “network governance” [86]. The literature defines collaborative governance as “the coordination of interdependent actors from public, private and societal sectors for the purposes of developing and implementing public policy” [97]. The model falls in the middle of the spectrum that comprises the different degrees of government involvement [98] The key factor of this model is the inclusion of non-governmental stakeholders in the decision making processes, including the tacit knowledge that these stakeholders can incorporate to the understanding of complex urban issues as NBS projects. ▇▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇ establish six criteria that define the collaborative governance [99]: 1. The model is initiated by the government side 2. They are included non-government stakeholders 3. Participants are included in decision making process and not merely “consulted” 4. The model is formally organized and meets collectively. 5. The aim of the decision making process is to seek the consensus (although not always is achieved) 6. The focus of the collaboration is public management issues Figure 25: Positive and negative partnership outcomes by stakeholder (source: [86]) KEY WORDS Collaborative, multi-level, polycentric HOW EMERGES Usually the model is initiated by the government side trying to incorporate new resources, efficiency, knowledge and competences to solve complex problems. INVOLVED ACTORS Involves a large group of governmental and non-governmental actors that engage in competitive and/or stimulating governing activities. GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT Medium. Government retains the formal authority for any decisions made (anyway non-government actors are expected to assume serious deliberative roles and often play a key role in implementing any decision taken) RULES - The actors are only loosely bound to one another, either organised in several relatively small coalitions that exist beside each other or operating on a more individualistic basis. - The model is formally organized and meets collectively. - Participants are included in decision making process and not merely “consulted”. The aim of the decision making process is to seek the consensus (although not always is achieved). - “Transaction costs” (co...