Networks have assumed a place of prominence in the literature on public and private governing structures. The many positive attributes of networks are often featured—the capacity to solve problems, govern shared resources, create learning opportunities, and address shared goals—and a literature focused on the challenges networks pose for managers seeking to realize these network attributes is developing. The authors share an interest in understanding the potential of networks to govern complex public, or “wicked,” problems. A fundamental challenge to effectively managing any public problem in a networked setting is the transfer, receipt and integration of knowledge across participants. When knowledge is viewed pragmatically, the challenge is particularly acute. This perspective, the authors argue, presents a challenge to the network literature to consider the mind‐set of the managers—or collaborative capacity‐builders—who are working to achieve solutions to wicked problems. This mind‐set guides network managers as they apply their skills, strategies, and tools in order to foster the transfer, receipt, and integration of knowledge across the network and, ultimately, to build long‐term collaborative problem‐solving capacity.
In recent years, a growing number of scholars have urged greater intellectual effort regarding the outcomes, or impacts, being produced, or not produced by collaborative governance arrangements. Some progress has been made with "process" and "social" outcomes, outcomes affecting systemic collaborative capacity, the identification of second-and third-order consequences, and in refining approaches to incorporating and measuring real world environmental improvements. But what about other creative, important, and potentially useful governance outcomes that may well be unique to collaborative governance arrangements? Are we measuring all of the important things? We put this hypothesis to the test by examining four successful cases of collaborative governance in four Western states. The research, by discovering and developing three new types of governance outcomes-enhancing agency resources, developing and transferring technology, and going beyond compliance-suggests that our current frameworks for thinking about and measuring outcomes produced by collaborative governance arrangements are necessarily incomplete.
Understanding the performance of collaborative governance regimes (CGRs) necessitates an understanding of how stakeholders and their interactions evolve over time. However, few studies assess the evolution of the structure or process dynamics of CGRs over time. This paper contributes to our understanding of the longitudinal dynamics of CGRs. We apply a modified grounded theory approach to a dataset of collaboration case studies to develop empirically-based theory about how often CGRs persist over time, how different components of CGRs evolve over time, what conditions support or hinder this evolution, and how different developmental trajectories lead to differences in the outputs and outcomes achieved by these groups. We find that CGRs follow a variety of trajectories, from failing to initiate, to achieving their work in a relatively quick time, to sustaining their operations for decades, to incurring slow or rapid declines in health. Additionally, many characteristics of CGRs, including leadership, collaborative process, accountability, and outputs/outcomes, peak at the midpoint of the observed time, suggesting that at some point, even stable and healthy collaborations incur some decline in their robustness. As an exploratory study, this work highlights the need for a better accounting of how CGRs develop, sustain, evolve, and decline over time.
Current theories of community‐based collaborative governance arrangements rely on the presence (or absence) of certain antecedent community conditions as well as incentives for institutional change deriving from the sociopolitical and economic environment. The combination of antecedent conditions and incentives is helpful in understanding why collaboratives emerge and succeed in “easy” cases (strong incentives, conducive antecedent conditions). Yet the combination is of little help in understanding the institutional change puzzle for collaboratives in “tough” cases (strong incentives, poor antecedent conditions). Examination of a “tough” case in the Blackfoot watershed (Montana), which eventually blossomed into a successful collaborative, shows the importance of a particular set of new ideas, or shared norms, around which participants coalesced. These new ideas for understanding public problems, the community itself, and the relationships among stakeholders, became a broad conceptual framework for guiding stakeholder interaction as they attempted to manage the many public problems facing the watershed.
This study examined the process of information exchange between natural resource management professionals and forest owners to determine whether and how professionals could improve their ability to persuade forest owners to adopt recommended stewardship practices. Using the inductive 'grounded theory' method of qualitative research, 109 stakeholders throughout the State of Washington, USA were interviewed and asked to discuss their information sources and preferences. The study findings reveal that many natural resource management professionals may not correctly anticipate how forest owners evaluate new forest management information. Professionals in the study typically chose and evaluated new information on the basis An earlier version of this paper was presented at of established standards of scientific credibility, including peer review or the professional reputation of the individuals and institutions conducting the research or publishing the information. Most professionals expected forest owners would do the same. Forest owners with non-professional backgrounds, however, were often unfamiliar with or unimpressed by such credentials, and often used a very different evaluative screen. Willingness to adopt information was greatly influenced by their social impressions of the individuals delivering it. When a professional pressed for an 'expert to non-expert' relationship or did not establish a mutually respectful interpersonal learning atmosphere, non-professional forest owners frequently resisted not only that individual, but also the information they provided. This paper links these findings to androgogy (adult learning theory), and demonstrates that the natural resource professionals most effective with forest owners are those providing what the established literature describes as classic elements of a good adult learning environment. These elements include empathy, mutual respect, non-hierarchical information exchange, praxis, emphasis on experiential rather than passive learning, and evidence that tangible results may be expected. An improved understanding of the fundamentals of the adult learning process can be expected to enhance the effectiveness of natural resource professionals in information exchange with forest owners.
Collaborative capacity is central to long-term problem-solving success and poses a challenge for public management scholars—How does one measure collaborative capacity? The authors treat collaborative capacity as an outcome and develop a multidimensional collaborative capacity assessment framework that measures whether capacity is enhanced, stays the same, or is diminished. The framework is applied to two collaborations involving endangered species in the United States. Although traditional measures of compliance show little difference, the full framework finds a stark contrast in long-term problem-solving capacity. One case evinces high overall capacity, whereas the second case registers low, even diminished, capacity.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.