Performative governance is when governments focus more on appearing to take action instead of actually making real changes.

It has become more noticeable in today’s media-driven politics, where the performance of governance can sometimes seem more important than the actual outcomes.

The idea of performative governance builds on Edelman’s work on symbolic politics (1964), where politics can be also seen as a series of symbols and appearances. However it extends this idea further through Schill (2006) who argued that political figures, like Ronald Reagan, perfected the blending of stagecraft (event staging) with statecraft (governing the country), turning political leadership into a form of performance.

The problem with performative governance is that it can often lead to policies that are more about creating a public image rather than addressing real issues. Hood and Dixon (2015) describe how policy-making sometimes becomes theatrical, where reforms appear to make progress but, in reality, only increase costs and complexity. Their study of UK government reforms found that many high-profile initiatives were designed to look like progress, but they didn’t lead to substantial changes in outcomes. Instead, they focused on managing impressions, which created the appearance of improvement without addressing the core problems.

One of the key consequences of this is what’s known as the cascade effect. The cascade effect happens when one jurisdiction adopts performative policies and other jurisdictions follows suit – regardless of whether the original policy worked.

This can be seen in the adoption of public management innovations in the anglo traditions. For example, Aotearoa New Zealand’s adoption of the UK’s capability review tool, which performatively disconnected institutional capability from outcomes. The key to these reforms is that they look good on the surface, but they never achieve their intended goals.

The rise of social media has further amplified the focus on performance in politics. Schmuhl (1990) explains how, during the Reagan era, the relationship between statecraft and stagecraft became even more pronounced, with media playing a key role in shaping public perceptions of leadership. Similarly, Futrell (1999) showed how governance can be seen as a performance, using tools like impression management, scripting, and conflict containment to create the image of effective leadership. This focus on performance can divert attention away from the actual work that needs to be done, and policies can become more about the announcement than the implementation.

However, not all performative policies are simply about creating a show. Some performative policies can drive real change, as seen with Aotearoa New Zealand’s 1984 Nuclear Free Zone. Initially symbolic, this policy made a powerful political statement against nuclear weapons and power. Although Aotearoa New Zealand had little direct involvement with nuclear weapons, this performative policy led to significant changes, including the suspension of Aotearoa New Zealand from the ANZUS treaty and the introduction of the New Zealand Nuclear Free Zone, Disarmament, and Arms Control Act 1987. Over time, the policy became a central part of Aotearoa New Zealand’s national identity and foreign policy, demonstrating how even symbolic actions can have lasting real-world effects.

While the Nuclear Free Zone was a success story, not all performative policies lead to such transformation. The key challenge is to know when performance serves as a bridge to real action and when it becomes an end in itself. In some cases, the performative aspect of governance may help create public buy-in and generate international attention, as was the case with the nuclear-free example above. But for other policies, performance alone does not lead to substantial change.

Looking ahead, democratic societies face the challenge of balancing the need for governments to engage with citizens through communication and media, while avoiding the temptation to reduce governance to a series of performative acts. This is particularly crucial when addressing complex issues like climate change and economic inequality, which require sustained, substantive policy responses rather than just political theatre. Governments must focus on real, long-term solutions, rather than relying on performance for the sake of appearances.

References
Edelman, M. (1964). The symbolic uses of politics. University of Illinois Press.
Schill, D. (2006). Reagan’s legacy and the stagecraft of statecraft. Journal of Political Communication.
Hood, C., & Dixon, R. (2015). A study of UK government reforms: Managing impressions through administrative change. Public Administration Review.
Schmuhl, R. (1990). The Reagan years: Statecraft and stagecraft in the media age. Political Studies Journal.
Futrell, R. (1999). Governance as performance: Tools for democratic participation. Journal of Governance Studies.