Student ID 20254988

If power is now more diffuse and there are more centres of power
and many more actors how has this impacted on the governance of the
UK in the last 25 years?

There are now many more centres of power and many more actors in the world than ever before, the causes of
which include, none governmental organisations, multinational companies, the European Union, devolution, and
globalisation, meaning that power is now more diffused than ever before. This has led to British politics becoming
much more than political institutions located in London and a process of governing at multiple levels, and the differing
power centres and actors having a greater influence on the governance of the United Kingdom. How has this
impacted on the ability of the UK government to govern? This essay will attempt to establish how this has impacted
on the governance of the United Kingdom over the last 25 years. This will be achieved by examining a number of key
points, the meaning of governance and government, how the UK was governed, the external challenges to
governance that has been brought about by these other centres of power and actors together with how this has
impacted on the governance of the UK today.
Governance compared to government, governance is the range of new arrangements and practices which include
the fragmentation and sharing of public power, thus encouraging policies to be formulated and implemented away
from the centre, this is distinct from the traditional form of public power, in which authority was centralised and
exercised in a hierarchical manner (Meehan, 2003). Whereas government is for the most part concerned with the
institutions of the state and is characterised by clear lines of bureaucratic hierarchies, authority and accountability
(Wilson & Game, 2011).
Where British politics is concerned, this form of government can best be described as the Westminster model, which
is traditionally how the political system in the UK worked for most of the 20 th century, in this model power is
concentrated at the political centre. Parliamentary sovereignty is the fundamental basis of this model which locates
supreme political authority at Westminster, meaning that Parliament can make any law it so wishes, and no other
agency can over turn such laws. Britain as a Parliamentary democracy is one in which Ministers are supposed to be
accountable to Parliament and the government is ultimately accountable to the people. According to Garnett & Lynch
this model no longer provides an effective illustration of the political system in the United Kingdom. Garnett & Lynch
state that Rhodes (1994) argues that the autonomy of the government has been significantly eroded due to its
functions been dispersed to supranational agencies, sub national institutions and a vast array of specialist agencies
which has resulted in the hierarchical form of government being replaced by a less rigid type of governance in which
there is no sovereign actor, this has led to government functions being transferred away from the centre, resulting in
a lack of co-ordination in policy making and implementation reducing the ability of government to steer, which has led
to serious failings in the policy making process, for example the problems with the Child Support Agency, the
Millennium Dome and the sequence of events leading to the credit crunch demonstrates the dangers of insufficient
regulation and lack of accountability, for Garnett & Lynch this as resulted in governance becoming governing without
government (Garnett & Lynch, 2012).
A classic example of how the diffusion of power impacts on governance is the European Union. According to
Richards & Smith (2008) power has shifted upwards from the national level to the, inter and or the transnational
arena. The consequence of this shift is that the state has become only one actor among many in the policy making

Student ID 20254988

process and in certain areas such as trade and agriculture domestic policy as disappeared, with decisions being
made outside of the nation state and instead being made in the commission and the council of ministers, this
suggests that the autonomy of the British state is greatly restricted and that policy making has become more of a
partnership between the British government and other member states and institutions of the European Union,
although it can be argued that, although the EU has changed the way in which policy is made in Britain, it has not
replaced the state as the main determinant in the policy making process, governments can and do subvert EU
directives through none compliance , gate keeping and ensuring certain policy areas remain outside the competence
of the EU. It is possible to suggest that the EU has not replaced state structures but overlays them creating a multilayered governance, the benefits of which are that the EU has important resources in terms of information, formal
powers and political alliances. What all of this means is that although the EU has changed the patterns of
dependency in each policy area, who has the power depends on the circumstances at a given time and that decision
making at the EU level insulates policy makers from domestic pressures (Richards & Smith, 2008).
Having explored the impact of the EU on the governance of the UK this essay will now explore the impact of
devolution and regionalisation on governance in the UK. Devolution, is a form of decentralisation, it is the statutory
granting of powers from the central government of a sovereign state to govern at a subnational level, such as
regional or local or state level (Stevenson, 2015).
Due to devolution the UK has moved from being a unitary state to a more pluralistic form of governance
(Atkins, et al., 2014). The post devolution UK no longer fits into the homogenous form of a unitary state, although
Westminster still remains the sovereign power because it limits the powers of the devolved bodies and can overrule
and or abolish them (Garnett & Lynch, 2012). According to a report by the Institute for Government, devolution has
radically changed the UK constitution and created multiple centres of power and a complex division of responsibilities
and resources, making governing a difficult task, important decisions are been made in response to political
pressures in each territory without consideration of the implications to the rest of the country, with evidence of
significant variables in practices and signs of weaknesses, strains and fragmentation (Paun & Munro, 2015).
Yet according to Moran (2005), the impact of devolution has been the creation of distinct government networks, or
the strengthening of existing ones, departments in the devolved governments with substantial decision making
authority have developed the same type of networks that exist in Westminster, interest representation via lobbying
has developed around these new institutions, demonstrating that devolved government has resulted in the devolved
activity of interest groups, meaning that important decision making has shifted from Westminster to the devolved
regions, thus reshaping political action and the policy making process. Different arrangements have been established
in which governing institutions are dispersed at different levels of the political system, with policy and control being
shared at these levels, thus the UK government once focused on a centralised set of institutions around London is
being stretched outwards and downwards (Moran, 2005).
Although a major consequence of devolution may be a greater fragmentation and conflict within the British state
which exacerbates the problems associated with governance. The policy arena has been extended to include a
variety of new terrains with a number of different actors located in each one, with central government being only one
amongst many when it comes to policy making, to the extent that it has lost the power and ability to control a
fragmented and disaggregated policy making process (Richards & Smith, 2008).
Another factor which has impacted on the governance of the UK is globalisation. The process of globalisation entails
computers, telecommunications and transport, this has led to a rise in the growth and liberalisation of capital and
multinational companies, multinational companies have become major global major players, as of 1998 they
accounted for 75% of the world manufacturing trade. Multinational companies are very difficult for governments to
control, their importance in terms of employment, investment together with economic growth means that nation states
are dependent on them rather than them being dependent on nation states, these companies are largely mobile and

Student ID 20254988

can move their operations to cheaper labour markets, meaning they have a major impact, not only on peoples lives
but on the taxation, employment and industrial policies of the government as it seeks to attract inward investment. It
can be seen that globalisation has changed the options and degree of choice that the government has, this is not to
say the government is no longer important, but rather the things it is able to do are different and are done through a
different array of institutions and relationships (Richards & Smith, 2008).
The economic aspects of globalisation have an impact on none economic policies, an example of which is that many
British policy makers have accepted that the welfare state is no longer viable due to the high level of taxes required
to fund it, which is assumed to deter investment in Britain. According to Higgot (1998) the reconfiguration of UK
politics, especially the management of the functions of the state is greatly determined and influenced by the
perceptions of globalisation. According to Dorey (2014) globalisation places limits and constraint on the autonomy of
British policy makers, in so much as they have to secure international cooperation to implement certain policies, or
they are required to adopt certain policies that they would prefer not to adopt, although it can be argued that
globalisation offers new opportunities to British policy makers, international cooperation and agreements enable
policy makers to address problems that they could not address in isolation, such as, climate change, international
crime and tax evasion (Dorey, 2014).
The final section will examine the impact of non-governmental organisations, such has the voluntary sector, the
private sector and other agencies on governance in the UK. These sectors have taken on increasing levels of
delivering public goods, it is reasonable to state that NGO`s are now actually carrying out government policy and
delivering services that were directly supplied by the government. This has resulted in power being dispersed and the
state becoming fragmented with networks replacing the hierarchical model. The consequence of this is, the loss of
the legal and administrative order due to managerialism and contracts which diversify the mechanism for delivering
public goods. The result of which is that policy decisions involve the public and private sector, different actors and
agencies, privatised industries, regulators, officials and ministers, which has led to the policy making and delivery
process becoming more complex (Richards & Smith, 2008).
Or has Rhodes puts it, government policy has fragmented service delivery systems, the shift from line bureaucracy to
a fragmented service delivery system has multiplied the number and types of organisations that need to coordinate in
delivering services, thus increasing the centres dependence on this network of organisations which has resulted in a
differentiated polity, resulting in the boundaries between the public, private and voluntary sector becoming blurred,
with a loss of accountability, this limits the centres ability to command and coordinate (Rhodes, 2000).
To conclude the diffusion of power and the increase in the number of actors has impacted significantly on the
governance of the UK. A large number of government functions have been transferred upwards, outwards and
downwards from the centre, this has led to power becoming dispersed and the state becoming fragmented, with the
boundaries between the public, private and voluntary sectors becoming blurred, leading to a lack of accountability.
The different actors and agencies involved in governance has led to the policy making process becoming more
complex, the consequences of which has been a restriction on the centres ability to command and coordinate
resulting in a number of serious policy failures. Yet it can be seen that in certain circumstances, this diffusion of
power and the increase in actors has enabled policy makers to address problems that they would not be able to
address in isolation, demonstrating that this diffusion of powers and the increase in actors has had both a positive
and a negative impact on the governance of the UK.

Student ID 20254988

Bibliography
Atkins, J., Finlayson, A., Martin, J. & Turnbull, N., 2014. RHETORIC IN BRITISH POLITICS AND
SOCIETY. 1st ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Dorey, P., 2014. POLICY MAKING IN BRITAIN. 2nd ed. London: Sage Publications Limited.
Garnett, M. & Lynch, P., 2012. EXPLORING BRITISH POLITICS. 3rd ed. Harlow: Pearson
Education Limited.
Meehan, E., 2003. From Government to Governance, Civic Participation and New Politics;
the Context of Potential Opportunities for the Better Representation of Women. Belfast:
Centre for Advancement of Women in Politics School of Politics and International Studies,
Queen's University Belfast .
Moran, M., 2005. Politics and Governance in the UK. Basingstoke: PALGRAVE MACMILLAN.
Paun, A. & Munro, R., 2015. Governing in an Ever Looser Union How the four governments
of the UK co, London: Institute for Government.
Rhodes, R. A. W., 2000. TRANSFORMING BRITISH GOVERNMENT Volume1:Changing
Institutions. 1st ed. Basingstoke: PALGRAVE MACMILLAN.
Richards, D. & Smith, M. J., 2008. Governance and Public Policy in the UK. 1st ed. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Stevenson, J., 2015. City University London. [Online]
Available at: http://www.city.ac.uk/news/2015/september/scottish-independence-anddevolution-difficult-times-for-central-government
[Accessed 29 2 2016].
Wilson, D. & Game, C., 2011. LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN THE UNITED KINGDOM. 5th ed.
Basingstoke: PALGRAVE MACMILLAN.