The line of inquiry

The notion of ‘multi-stakeholdism’ is a fashionable one. ‘Partnership’ is a new mantra in the vocabulary of global politics. In the past ten years, a fast-growing array of multi-stakeholder initiatives (MSIs) was created as a ‘means of filling “governance gaps” where existing national legislation and/or enforcement were not enough to prevent corruption or human rights abuses’. At their high water mark, MSIs represent an alternative governance model and a possible platform for building democratic accountability in places where traditional democratic institutions and processes are weak. The trend reflects both frustration with progress at intergovernmental level and, perhaps, a more pragmatic approach on the part of some of the key actors, especially in the private and non-governmental sectors. It seems that ‘multi-stakeholdism’ has a ‘feel-good’ aspect to it. But do MSIs do any good? And, in order to evaluate the question of whether MSIs deliver on their promise, how does one go about measuring their performance? Given the apparently enduring support for the idea of MSIs, it would be valuable for policy makers, activists and academics alike to establish a model for evaluating their efficacy and impact.

The spectrum of so-called multi-stakeholder processes is extremely broad, given the wide range of functions and forms operating in very different contexts. Some of the best-known ones have become increasingly present and visible in areas of weak and complex governance, addressing regulatory problems that are beyond the capacity of the individual governments to develop or enforce, such as ecological regimes or resource management.