Multilevel Governance in North America: The Case of the Detroit River International Crossing

Although the notion of multilevel governance stems from research on the process of European integration, in recent years, scholars have applied this notion to a variety of places and contexts, diminishing the theoretical utility of the concept. In order to address recent criticisms, this article lends support to a recently revised conception of multilevel governance and explores the recent case of the Detroit River International Crossing, and the efforts to build a new bridge between Detroit and Windsor, Ontario. As part of this confirmatory case study, this article includes a close examination of the coordinated lobbying campaign that sought to defeat a ballot proposal in the state of Michigan (Proposition 6) that could have blocked the initiative. It will be shown that this case exhibits multilevel policy coordination across an international border and at various levels of government in both Canada and the United States. Moreover, public and private policy actors both played a substantial role, indicating that "Type II" best characterizes the mode of multilevel governance. In addition, this case also demonstrates the crucial role that effective public management plays in ensuring the success of these complex modes of policy formulation and implementation. Finally, the paper concludes with speculation about whether these types of multilevel governance arrangements promote or inhibit democratic accountability.