By Cheng Zhou and Clare Richardson-Barlow
This article develops a new framework for understanding how collaboration between governments and enterprises evolves in climate governance. The analysis connects two processes that are often studied separately: the development of consensus among stakeholders and the emergence of collective action to address climate change.
Collaborative governance has become an increasingly important approach to addressing complex policy challenges such as climate change. These issues typically require cooperation between multiple actors, including governments, firms, and other organisations. While existing frameworks explain many institutional features of collaboration, they often pay less attention to how collaborative behaviour develops between participants over time.
Consensus-building in collaborative climate governance
Zhou and Richardson-Barlow argue that collaborative climate governance often begins with consensus-building. In this stage, stakeholders work to develop shared understandings, mutual trust, and agreement around policy goals.
In climate governance, governments frequently seek to build consensus with enterprises that will be directly affected by environmental regulations. Firms may face significant costs in adopting low-carbon technologies or changing production processes. Governments therefore often use dialogue, policy signals, and incentives such as subsidies to encourage enterprises to support climate objectives and reduce uncertainty about future policy directions.
From consensus to collective climate action
Consensus alone does not ensure that meaningful collaboration will occur. The authors therefore emphasise a second stage: collective action, in which shared commitments are translated into coordinated behaviour and policy implementation.
At this stage, enterprises may actively participate in decarbonisation efforts, invest in cleaner technologies, or align their strategies with government climate goals. To explore how these dynamics unfold, the authors combine field research with evolutionary game modelling, which allows them to examine how strategic interactions between governments and enterprises evolve over time.
Four patterns of collaborative governance
Linking consensus-building and collective action allows the authors to identify four possible patterns of collaborative governance.
The most effective outcome is productive collaboration, where governments invest in consensus-building and enterprises participate in collective climate action. At the opposite extreme is symbolic collaboration, where neither meaningful consensus nor substantive action develops.
Two intermediate patterns can also emerge. Unproductive collaboration occurs when consensus is achieved but does not translate into concrete action. Independent action arises when enterprises pursue climate initiatives without strong consensus or coordination with government actors.
A framework for analysing collaborative governance
For scholars of collaborative governance, the article provides a framework that highlights how collaborative arrangements evolve through interactions between key actors. By linking consensus-building with collective action, the authors show how different patterns of collaboration may emerge across policy contexts.
More broadly, the framework helps explain why some collaborative climate initiatives generate sustained collective action while others remain largely symbolic.
You can read the original research in Policy & Politics at
Zhou, C., & Richardson-Barlow, C. (2026). A new framework for collaborative climate governance: linking consensus building and collective action. Policy & Politics (published online ahead of print 2026) from https://doi.org/10.1332/03055736Y2026D000000089
If you enjoyed this blog post, you may also be interested in reading:
Cordoncillo Acosta, C., & Borrell-Porta, M. (2026). Fostering innovation through collaboration: a comparison of collaborative approaches to policy design. Policy & Politics, 54(1), 47-69. Retrieved Apr 1, 2026, from https://doi.org/10.1332/03055736Y2024D000000058
Torfing, J., Payandeh, R., Jalili, S. M., & Banafi, M. (2026). A systematic review of conflict within collaborative governance. Policy & Politics, 54(1), 2-25 from https://doi.org/10.1332/03055736Y2025D000000070
Policy & Politics Journal Blog 