ABSTRACT
The increased plurality of governance practices and the associated rise of multiple theories have created a wide range of possible governance approaches to choose from. While a wide range of approaches poses interesting opportunities for coping with different and often changing societal conditions, it also reduces clarity when choosing between these practices and theories. Rather, as we noted in Chapter 2, we seem to be faced with a ‘restless search’ (Offe 1977), ‘trial and error operations’ (De Roo 2002) and ‘pick and mix’ approaches (Allmendinger 2002b) while we try to navigate the ‘theoretical plurality’ (Healey et al. 1979). The objective of this chapter is not to ‘resolve’ this theoretical plurality, as I argue that there are viable arguments supporting different theories that suggest that there simply is no ‘single best approach’. Instead, the objective of this chapter is to propose a series of arguments that can help navigate this plurality. To this end, I will propose what I call a ‘post-contingency approach’.
