Conclusions
Moving from the recognition that MLG entails a new set of interrelations that affect the realms of polity, politics and policy (Piattoni, 2010) by widening the variety of actors involved in the policy domains (Noferini, 2010), this chapter has framed MLG within an SHD perspective at the local level.
Without intending to provide standardized expectations about actors' mobilization (e.g. which, why, how and with what consequences), it has been emphasized that the value of multilevel articulation is in its capacity to foster the valorization of endogenous resources through local stakeholders participation, inclusion and agency, as well as to integrate them with resources, competences and initiatives coming from other territories and upward levels.In order to valorize the diversity of development visions, interests, competencies and capacities, political culture and so on, and to avoid the uniformity of modern societies (EU, 2009), it is necessary to take two steps. Firstly, we need to reinforce and institutionalize MLG coordination mechanisms for economic animation, social inclusion, gender and ethnic equity, and conflict prevention or management.23 Secondly, we should promote tailored and gradual reforms regarding devolutionary arrangements and stable institutional environments.
Nonetheless, issues regarding increased coordination efforts and costs, weak concertation capacities, misallocation of competencies, fragmentation of responsibilities, protection of local vested interests and accountability remain controversial, but appear to be strengthened within an MLG perspective on SHD. For instance, identifying the policy areas in which concerted trans-territorial action may be more effective than the sum of individual interventions in different communities or territories (Noferini, 2012) requires detailed analytical accounts on local and national institutional architecture, on a specific policy sector and, as already stressed, on contextual socio-economic features.
In other words, ‘the dialogue, synergy and coordination between bottom- up policy assertion and national and supranational policy frameworks and institutional structures become a critical dimension' (Sepulveda and Amin, 2006, pp. 325-326).
However, MLG is not a form of governance that can be applied and operates per se. Efforts to strengthen a political culture of MLG at all levels and the creation of open spaces and occasions of multilevel dialogue and articulation appears to contribute to fostering institutional reflexivity, political mobilization and social creativity in the pursuit of SHD trajectories.