acting responsibly for present and future generations
Political and administrative decisions shape life today and for generations to come.
three questions for political leaders
- Are you certain that your structures avoid problems in advance and act effectively when an event occurs?
- Can you prove that sound concepts exist in your area that rule out organisational fault in complex situations?
- Are your systems able to respond to new, systemic developments?
Whoever can answer all three questions with an unhesitating yes does not need stewardship governance. Experience shows that hardly anyone can.
the problem
The political responsibility is often lost along the way: risks are assessed in parts, departments work in silos, and accountability breaks down between levels of government. Good indicators and plans exist, but they are optional and rarely followed through.
A drastic example
In September 2019, three months before the outbreak, the Global Preparedness Monitoring Board, co-convened by the WHO and the World Bank, warned in its report A World at Risk that the world was not prepared for a fast-moving respiratory pathogen. Every country could have been ready. None was.
We have an abundance of excellent knowledege.
But we have an implementation crisis.
the root of the problem
The root lies on both sides. Governments distribute money so that they are re-elected at the next election. Citizens make demands of politics from their own limited view and particular interests, and on the assumption that money and staff are available without limit.
At the same time, councils are overloaded. They are expected to decide on more and more complex questions, in less and less time, often without the expertise needed to weigh the options. Annual budgets and legislative periods are too short for decisions whose effects last for decades. And a decision won by a narrow majority is often fought for years afterwards, or overturned after the next election.
The pressure is growing. Climate-emergeny, disinformation and polarisation reinforce one another. Societies are ageing, while fewer and fewer people are available to carry public services, emergency organisations and volunteering. In a shrinking society, inefficiency becomes dangerous.
What is missing is the holistic view and a culture of using limited means with foresight and wisdom.
the answer: stewardship governance
turning responsibility into a binding duty of care
Stewardship governance gives councils what they lack most: time, well-prepared options and the certainty that what they decide is actually carried out. It creates no new tasks. It describes how existing tasks are carried out effectively and economically, and it documents every step, so that it can be shown at any time that the duty has been done, or that work on it is under way.
Rescuing babies from a river, day after day, takes great effort. Stewardship governance goes upstream, finds out why they fall in, and gets sure that it no longer happens.
who does what
Stewardship governance creates no new body and takes no decision away from anyone. Your council decides as it decides today just on a better basis, and with the certainty that what it decides is carried out.
| who | what it does | what it decides |
|---|---|---|
| your council | sets the aims and priorities, adopts the budget and the five-year development plan, takes the final decision | everything that matters: the what and the why |
| future forum | prepares the fundamental questions: residents drawn by lot, organisations and the administration work out a proposal, tested against the assessed developments and with its financing proven | nothing. It hands the council a proposal the council is free to reject |
| project teams | work out the concrete solutions and carry them through to implementation, with named responsibility and complete documentation | the how and the with what, within the frame the council has set |
The council keeps the last word. It adopts a proposal of the future forum, or rejects it with public reasons and a better, financed plan for the same aim. Because the administration takes part in the future forum, those who carry out a decision become part of it, instead of being the ones who bear the consequences at the end. The future forum and the project teams work by consent: no objection without an alternative. A council can adopt the same rule for these matters, but nothing in the model requires it.
the difference at a glance
| aspect | current practice | stewardship governance |
| approach | reactive: rescuing the child from the well | with foresight: making the well safe |
| focus | ‘running’ behind the problems trying to reduce the damage | systematic implementation of future proof solutions |
| means | high costs for repairing damage | lower costs for well-planned prevention |
| responsibility | diffuse, silo thinking, unclear responsibility | precise, named responsibility |
| decisions | narrow majorities, fought for years afterwards | prepared together, carried together |
| time horizon | the budget year and the legislative period | a five-year plan, rolled forward every year |
| role of the administration | driven and often overstretched | confident, competent, involved from the start |
an example
A telecommunications company opens a pavement for fibre optic cable and closes it again. Six months later, the same surface is opened for the water main, two years later for electricity. Three building sites, three closures, three reinstatements. At none of the three openings did anyone check whether the kerb could be lowered for barrerier free access at some points, a tree planted or rainwater allowed to seep away at the same time. Each decision was correct on its own. The result is three times the effort and a missed improvements.
Under stewardship governance, whoever opens a public surface opens it for all matters that lie within it. Before the first spade goes into the ground, it is checked what else is due at this spot: pipes to renew, barriers to remove, escape routes, safe routes for children, unsealing and planting. The holistic view costs nothing here. It only requires asking the question once.
from draft to implementation
The Stewardship Governance Act makes the model binding, while a large part of it can be applied before that, without any law. The first steps require no decision and no additional funds.
Mobility is the first field in which the model is goint to be worked out in detail, from the safe vehicle standard to the road user charge.
All content is a draft, open for review and piloting. Feedback is welcome from legal scholars, public safety experts and administrations, and above all from municipalities and regions willing to test it.