Local Platform Governance: Redefining Roles, Relations, and Responsibilities of the Key Actors

In recent decades, multi-sided digital platforms have become integral to contemporary economic systems and influential components of social and political structures. While the logic of platforms is well understood in the private sector, its potential in the public sector remains less explored. However, governance platforms – multi-sided digital platforms utilized by the public sector – have recently gained attention as tools for harnessing and orchestrating local communities’ resources for the co-creation of public value. These platforms introduce a novel organizing logic centered on distributed participation and resource mobilization, influencing the roles of the public sector, citizens, and communities. Known as platform governance, this approach is particularly relevant at the local level, where governments operate in close proximity to citizens and communities.

This dissertation explores the novel features that platform governance introduces to local governance and examines how it shapes the roles, relations, and responsibilities of key actors. This enquiry is pursued through two primary objectives. First, the dissertation aims to integrate the concept of local platform governance into the broader framework of governance theory, thereby contributing to academic discourse and discussions on the societal and ideological shifts likely to impact local governance in the future. Second, it seeks to enhance the understanding of local platform governance practices, offering practical insights into the opportunities and challenges that governance platforms present to local governments.

The research adopts an interpretive approach grounded in hermeneutic philosophy. Empirically, it draws on diverse data sources, including thematic interviews, document analysis, research literature, participant observation, and a user questionnaire. The dissertation comprises four research articles, including a literature review, a multiple case study, and two single-case studies.

The findings indicate that platform governance combines features of networks, markets, and hierarchies, with variations depending on the type, function, and societal context of the governance platform. Elements commonly associated with network governance – such as collaborative relationships, collective innovation, resource pooling, trust among actors, and dialogue – are prevalent in platform governance. Market mechanisms also play a significant role, particularly in platforms that serve businesses, where contracts and market-based governance are prominent. Although hierarchical structures play a lesser role in the coordination of governance platforms, local governments, as platform providers, retain centralized authority and responsibility, enabling them to impose rules for platform usage.

Importantly, platform governance also introduces several new features to local governance. First, it is characterized by radical openness and scalability, facilitated by digital architecture and multi-sided platform logic. Second, actors do not join governance platforms due to pre-existing interdependencies but are motivated by the search for new opportunities for value creation. Such ‘self-selection’ process fosters the assimilation of shared values and norms, which can help mitigate conflicts. Third, platform governance offers tools for effectively harnessing and reorganizing underutilized resources within local communities. Fourth, it enables local governments to orchestrate the resource flows of external actors, which can be understood as a form of indirect or soft centralization.

The study concludes that platform governance introduces innovative approaches to addressing resource scarcity within welfare state models by actively involving local communities in the co-creation of public value. This approach promotes resource- sharing, innovation, and value creation not only between citizens and the public sector but also within local communities themselves. Therefore, platform governance can be empowering, offering new avenues for citizen participation and strengthening local communities. However, it also presents potential risks, such as reduced inclusivity and representation, as participation is often based on individuals’ capabilities, knowledge, and other resources rather than their roles as representatives of specific societal groups. The study argues that platform governance represents an ideological shift towards evaluating citizen participation based on its instrumental value. This governance model involves an interesting ‘paradox of power’: it simultaneously 1) distributes control and responsibility for community well-being to local communities and the private sector, and 2) centralizes the authority to set rules and define conditions for collaboration and resource exchange to the platform provider. When local governments assume the role of platform providers, they must use this authority to ensure that public values, such as equality and democracy, are encouraged.