Understanding Collective Decision Making

Administration & Society

Marks

2022

Self Cite

We assess to what extent a (co)evolutionary macro level approach enhances our understanding of learning in governance processes. We ask the question: in what ways do actors learn to improve their chances of long-term survival in complex governance processes? We deploy a model of collective decision making moulded upon fitness landscapes to analyze a longitudinal case study of collective (political and administrative) decision making, namely the process of developing and acquiring the F35 Lightning II fighter jet. The study demonstrates that actors learn how to ensure survival over time but create a failing megaproject in the process.

Section: Fitness Landscapes As Mapping Devicementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Learning In Coevolutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learn and Adapt, or Perish: The Case of the F35 Lightning II

Administration & Society

Marks

2022

Self Cite

“…Theories as provisional causal statements that can be falsified are but one type of theory. Following Althusser, one can classify theories into three distinct categories (O'Boyle and McDonough 2016;Gerrits and Marks 2017). The first category concerns the raw materials and grand ideas that define a research program.…”

Section: The Emergence Of Social Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The second category concerns theories as conceptual approaches that suggest novel ways of looking at reality within the boundaries of the research program. The third category concerns theories as discussed above: provisional causal statements that can be tested (Gerrits and Marks 2017). The three types of theory inform each other: while the second may be seen as a kind of dictionary providing concepts that shape the way we see the world, the third generates empirical evidence that allows one to define, redefine or reject those concepts.…”

Section: The Emergence Of Social Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Traveling between worlds: repositioning methods and theory for research into coupled socio-ecological systems

2021

Landsc Ecol

Self Cite

Context This paper engages with the question of how one can arrive at more coherent explanations of social behavior in coupled socio-ecological systems. Objectives The paper aims to give a counterargument to the assumption that social theory in coupled socio-ecological systems can only be developed in one way, as such showing that the premise of the special issue deserves further scrutiny. Methods Current issues are identified and categorized based on a literature survey; likewise, the solutions derive from methodological literature, in particular from the realm of critical realism. Results The paper shows how a set of assumptions about the nature of socio-ecological systems and about the nature of theory derived from observations prohibit a deeper understanding of how social theory may be developed at the nexus of coupled socio-ecological systems. Researchers should engage more clearly with movements between theories, models and data, and movements between ontology, epistemology and data. Conclusions Landscape ecology can—and should—accommodate social theory in its analysis but from a different premise than is currently often the case. The proposed operations will contribute to a complexity-informed understanding of human behavior in coupled socio-ecological systems.

“…Duit and Galaz 2008;Pierson 2000) have pointed to tensions in pursuing durable transformations of institutions through adaptive governance. With institutionalization and materialization, there is a chance of lock-in consequent to the development of solidified institutions and highly durable physical structures (Gerrits and Marks 2017). The flexibility essential to adaptive governance may be inimical to materialization and institutionalization (see Zijderveld 2000), raising the question of whether adaptive governance can actually institutionalize and materialize without losing its core features.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The limited transformational power of adaptive governance: a study of institutionalization and materialization of adaptive governance

Eshuis

Public Management Review

2019

Self Cite

Following the economic crisis in 2007-2008, many urban regeneration programmes were replaced with forms of adaptive governance (e.g. slow urbanism). This paper maps and analyses transformational effects of such adaptive governance initiatives through a case of neighbourhood restructuring. It studies whether adaptive governance institutionalizesi.e. transforms the existing governance systemand whether it materializes in the built environment. It shows how the adaptive governance initiatives in this case failed to diffuse and endure, and, therefore, the transformational effect on both the existing governance system and the area has been limited. The reasons for this are discussed.