Two logics of democracy in collaborative governance: a mapping of clashes and compromises

Collaborative governance is a promising supplement to traditional Weberian bureaucracy and New Public Management. However, the legitimacy and accountability of collaborative governance processes and outcomes is questionable. Based on a comprehensive mapping of the scholarly literature, we show that the sweeping multiplicity of accountability and legitimacy conceptions, types and critiques is structured by two democratic logics: an electoral one revolving around the territorial state and a stakeholder one focused on the collaborative network. The article provides the first attempt to position the conceptions, types and critiques of the accountability and legitimacy of collaborative governance in one map.