- Students are able to demonstrate knowledge of governance theory, governance concepts and practices, and are able to map and analyze the functioning of governance arrangements within urban settings. (PAP, UG)
- Students are able to demonstrate knowledge of sustainable development goals (SDGs), how they differ from traditional economic strategy, and how they make demands on the governance and policies of city government. (UG)
- Students are able to demonstrate knowledge of ways in which technology, investments and other factors of production can be combined to pursue social inclusion, gender equality and ecologically-friendly development (UG, SC).
- Students are able to demonstrate knowledge of how cities deploy new technologies, programs, and policies in order to pursue their ambitions, sustainable or otherwise (SC).
- Students are able to demonstrate use of specific academic tools (poster, presentation, executive summaries) to demonstrate the validity of their governance analysis to an academic audience, and to public servants responsible for policy and governance (SCP).
- MST Students are able to use multiple regression analysis (DA2).
This module serves to study governance as a concept and a practice. We apply these to the urban setting, and the policies related to the United Nation’s 2015 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In this context we ask: how do governance arrangements impact the strategies and ability of cities to become more sustainable and resilient? What mixes of policy, governance and technology work well? What do sustainability and resilience mean to different societal stakeholders that want to have a say?|
Governance is all about steering. Who sits at the table when discussing priorities and benchmarks for public policy, urban planning, allocating resources or evaluating performance in preparation for policy assessment and change? What resources do they bring to the table? How do they interact with one another? What rights do they have to participate, advise and (co-)determine outcomes? How do they use data from technologically-equipped cities to inform the participants and the process? What biases do their governance arrangements have, how do they impact outcomes, and could they do better?
Traditional governance architectures tend to favour the input of business interests with established contacts to elected officials and city administrators, and focus on short-term, aggregate economic growth for the middle and upper classes. This is replicated in city policy, and sometimes leads to neglect of broader priorities or parts of the community. If governance arrangements led to balanced attention to various stakeholders and priorities, an important part of a city administrator’s job is to support economic development, infrastructure and job growth (in industrial, post-industrial, creative, cultural and hospitality sectors), a safe and suitable living environment (housing, daycare, health care, schools, waste management, policing) attractiveness (green spaces and the arts) for all residents (not just those in the ‘right’ neighbourhoods), on a long-term basis, even in the face of social, environmental and economic stress (sustainability and resilience).
Assumed previous knowledge
|Introduction to public administration and/or political science|
|Bachelor Management, Society and Technology||Required materials|
Recommended materials-Instructional modes
|de Vries, M.S. (2016) Understanding Public Administration. (Free digital version)|
|Matson, P., Clark, W.C, & Andersson, K. (2018) Pursuing Sustainability: A guide to the science and practice. Princeton University Press. ISBN 9780691157610|
|Project: The Sustainable City|
|Data Analysis II: Multivariate|