Critical actors in urban governance are stakeholders whose resources are irreplaceable and hard to replace. They influence decision making through production means, authority, legitimacy, relations, and media access. Non-critical actors also play important roles that the municipality cannot fulfill alone, such as citizens contributing €20 million to the Delft Railway tunnel project. Conflicting interests between actors like the Dutch railway and local government must be managed throughout the decision making process. The network governance model can be applied in Ghana given its decentralized system where districts generate revenue, obtain funds from the central government, and make infrastructure decisions involving public and private stakeholders.

1. Essay 2: (URBAN GOVERNANCE)
442450
Critical actors are regarded as stakeholders whose resources are irreplaceable, that is very hard to
replace them. They are defined by the extent to which they possess these indicators of the
decision making process namely: Production means, Authority, Legitimacy, Relation and media
access. Non critical actor’s role may be important because the Municipality cannot realize task
by itself. In the Delft Railway case, the Tunnel project saw a substantial effort on the part of the
citizens by giving almost 20million guilders (Klijn, 2005 and Scholten, 2014). Furthermore, a
non-critical actor’s role may be vital; the decision making process may require a degree of
expertise to produce an expected outcome. This situation is also evident in the engagement of the
Municipality and the private developer Ballast Nedam who provided the Municipality with
possible opportunities and to the extent of updating the plans of the Tunnel project.
In complex network system, there exist conflicting perceptions, urgencies, strategies (Klijn and
Koppenjan, 2007) to the extent that interest on the issue reduced on the part of certain actors like
the Dutch railway (NS) who opted for an overhead rather than the Tunnel. Local government are
required to manage the conflicting interest at all levels by making sure that the commitment of
the critical actors are held consistent throughout the decision making process. The Second
Chamber wanted to push for the tunnel but the Ministry of Transportation refused that project
since it required a lot of resources to accomplish that. Local government are commended to
measure and define the conflicting powers and functions of critical actors before arriving at an
agreed consensus. Also there is the need to share funding, responsibilities as well as risk in
managing a complex network system of governance. This in effect will ensure a win-win
situation so as not to leave every task in the hands of single actor.
The Delft project when reduced would not be successful in the long term due to the existence of
conflicting interest emanating from the various critical actors. The Municipality did not agree to
the overhead railway which was on a smaller scale as compared to the Tunnel. Furthermore,
when the project was reduced to the overpass as in line with Dutch Railway (NS) option, the
noise pollution would have militated the feasibility of the project. Also, when the project is
reduced to smaller scale the cost effectiveness of the project would be compromised in the long
term since expansion in future may be required, rebuilding to meet future needs may be costly.
The Network Model can also be applied in other countries. This is due to the fact that, in Ghana
the system of governance is a decentralized presidential/parliamentary system. In view of this
system of governance, every District is declared a Statutory Planning area according to the Local
Government Act, Act 462, hence Districts are allowed to generate revenue and spend based on
the capacity of their resources (Internally Generated Fund).Notwithstanding, resources are
obtained from the central government to fund District Infrastructural projects (Intergovernmental
Transfers).

2. This Network governance when applied in Ghana will help facilitate the process of decision
making in the various Districts of the country. It encourages democratic governance which
respect the ideas of all stakeholders even the private sector. Since the inception of this system of
governance enormous of successes has been achieved in urban infrastructure investment. The
Network model of governance also enhances entrepreneurial skills and initiative. This is clearly
evident in the private sector involvement in public infrastructure provision through Public
Private Partnership agreement. (587 words).
Reference List
Klijn, E., 2005. Delft Central: A Complex Dance around a Rail Tunnel, unpublished paper.
Updated by Scholten, P and C Pennink (2014).
Note: The main focus of this paper is to lay emphasis on the new approach to network
governance. Although,the acutalization of the railway project delayed, it was worth it; in the
sense that the consequences of involving all stakeholders at all levels, ensured that various roles
were well defined; interest, influence and power were also critically assessed through the
degree of interactions critical actors and even non critical actors had during the entire decision
making process. As in the case of the municipality and Dutch Railways.
Klijn, E. and Koppenjan, J., 2007.Governing Policy Networks: a Network Perspective on
Decision Making in Network Society. In: G. Morcul, ed.2007. Handbook of Decision Making.
New York: CRC Press, Taylor and Francis, pp.169-187.
Note: The paper elucidates the difference between the governace and public management,
thereby laying emphasis of the various approach to governance ranging from the rational model,
new public management model and network governance model. From the paper it is realised that
government is not the only channel fromwhich society is governed and that decision making
processes involves constant and persistent interactions between actors.