Collaborative Governance in the United States and Korea: Cases in Negotiated Policymaking and Service Delivery

Jung, Yong-duck; Mazmanian, Daniel A.; Tang, Shui‐Yan

doi:10.1080/12294659.2009.10805136

Cited by 32 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Providing incentives fosters inter-organisational communication and trust that enables accelerating inter-organisational network coordination in emergency management response operations (Ansell & Gash 2008 ; Kapucu 2006 ; Tang & Tang 2014 ). Building interdependencies among agencies and organisations through interactive processes increases trust, builds social capital and can develop into collaborative culture which can substantially increase the speed of decision-making and can lead to successful collaborations (Ansell & Gash 2008 ; Emerson, Nabatchi & Balogh 2012 ; Jung, Mazmanian & Tang 2009 ; Kapucu, Arslan & Demiroz 2010 ; Paraskevopoulos 2010 ; Shaw & Goda 2004 ; Shimada 2015 ). Meanwhile, networks with low density and highly centralised nature are effective conditions for network effectiveness (Raab et al 2013 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hence, the structure of the network provides a glimpse of how it is governed and predicts the possible output of the collaboration. Jung, Mazmanian and Tang ( 2009 ) posited that one of the main functions of managers is to build networks and employ effective strategies and mechanisms to ensure the sustainability and success of the network.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Why does network governance fail in managing post-disaster conditions in the Philippines?

Jovita

Nurmandi

Mutiarin

et al. 2018

Jàmbá

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Disasters are the litmus test of governance. The inherent complexity of disasters places government agencies and societies in vulnerable situations. This study uses the mixed-method approach to social network analysis in evaluating the network structure of the Philippine disaster management and its implications for disaster governance. A survey was conducted among the target 56 identified disaster response-related agencies and organisations from the disaster management networks of the most susceptible areas in the Philippines – Cities of Cagayan de Oro and Iligan, Province of Misamis Oriental and the overall Region 10 disaster response network, aimed at measuring the existing relationships among member agencies. Forty-four agencies and organisations were able to participate in the survey. Also, key informant interviews were conducted among the representatives of the lead agencies, non-government organisations and survivors of Typhoon Washi. The findings revealed that the mandated tall structure and the lead organisation form of network governance as stipulated in Republic Act 10121 does not work in the regional and local disaster management networks in Region 10, particularly during Typhoon Washi in 2010. At the regional level, such structure does not build interdependencies among agencies, while at the local level, disaster response operations are constrained by bureaucratic protocols making disaster management networks ineffective. At the regional level, where many agencies and organisations are involved, the existing less centralised structure of decision-making should be transformed into a highly centralised structure, while disaster operations should be improved through coordination at all levels of disaster operations and intensified collaboration with non-government agencies.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why does network governance fail in managing post-disaster conditions in the Philippines?

Jovita

Nurmandi

Mutiarin

et al. 2018

Jàmbá

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…By linking social structure to preferences and biases, CT provides a natural platform for theorizing about collaborative dynamics. Existing literature has emphasized the challenges of balancing the need for unity and diversity with managing the conflicting goals and contributions of members that bring different resources, power, and work styles to collaborations (Huxham, ; Ospina & Saz‐Carranza, ; Jung, Mazmanian, & Tang, ). Herranz (), in particular, has provided insight into the multiple methods of addressing these tensions.…”

Section: Toward a Ct Of The Dynamics Of Collaborative Policy Networkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collaboration and Culture: Organizational Culture and the Dynamics of Collaborative Policy Networks

Weare¹,

Lichterman²,

Esparza³

2014

Policy Studies Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a theory of the role of culture in collaborative policy networks. It builds on the literature that analyzes the factors related to the formation, maintenance, and dissolution of collaborative arrangements by demonstrating the importance of hitherto undertheorized cultural factors. Cultural theory indicates that actors with different cultural viewpoints have distinct and predictable biases in terms of their expectations of collaboration and their preferences concerning how collaborative policy networks are structured. These biases, in turn, shape how collaborative partners are chosen and how collaborative relationships are maintained over time. The theory is illustrated with a case study of the rise and dissolution of a coalition within a housing policy network in Los Angeles. The case illustrates that cultural differences can impede collaboration even when organizations share similar policy goals.

show abstract

“…Jung et al (2009) study collaborative governance cases in United States and Korea, pertaining to negotiated policymaking and service delivery, and conclude that collaborative governance is more effective when it is applied to negotiation, consensus-building and the policy planning phase when its focus is to bring conflicting stakeholders to the same table in an informally structured way. What may work in one contextual setting in a country, may not necessarily work in another.…”

Section: Public Policy Tools In Collaborative Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Risk Governance

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Collaborative Governance in the United States and Korea: Cases in Negotiated Policymaking and Service Delivery

Cited by 32 publications

References 5 publications

Why does network governance fail in managing post-disaster conditions in the Philippines?

Why does network governance fail in managing post-disaster conditions in the Philippines?

Collaboration and Culture: Organizational Culture and the Dynamics of Collaborative Policy Networks

Risk Governance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About