What drives the perceived legitimacy of collaborative governance? An experimental study

Lee, Seulki; Estève, Marc

doi:10.1080/14719037.2022.2026692

Cited by 14 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 75 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Diverse actors may also contribute resources, whether financial, informational, human, or otherwise, to develop or achieve something beyond what a single organization or agency could do alone (Huxham & Macdonald, 1992; Lasker & Weiss, 2003; Silvia, 2011). In addition to supporting democratic policy making by including multiple perspectives (Dupuy & Defacqz, 2022; Leach, 2006; Michels, 2011), involving diverse actors may increase participants' perceptions of the process's legitimacy and fairness, as well as their support for policy outputs (Berardo, 2013; Donahue & Zeckhauser, 2011; Hui & Smith, 2022; Lee & Esteve, 2022; Söderberg et al, 2021). Finally, engaging diverse actors can help overcome challenges with managing boundary‐spanning issues by increasing coordination and improving the “fit” of governance (Angst et al, 2018; Guerrero et al, 2015; Ingold et al, 2019; Lee & Baggio, 2021).…”

Section: Designing Equitable Collaborative Water Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond engagement: Enhancing equity in collaborative water governance

Koebele,

Méndez‐Barrientos,

Nadeau

et al. 2023

WIREs Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Collaborative governance has emerged as a promising approach for addressing complex water sustainability issues, with purported benefits from enhanced democracy to improved environmental outcomes. Collaborative processes are often assumed to be inherently more equitable than traditional governance approaches due to their goal of engaging diverse actors in the development of policy and management solutions. However, when collaborative water governance processes ignore issues of politics and power in their design, they risk creating or even exacerbating existing inequities. How, then, can collaborative water governance processes be designed to enhance, rather than undermine, equity? To answer this question, we first conduct an extensive review of the collaborative governance literature to identify common design features of collaborative processes, which each present potential benefits and challenges for actualizing equitable collaborative water governance. After critically discussing these design features, we explore how they are executed through two case studies of collaborative water governance in western North America: groundwater governance reform in California and transnational Colorado River Delta governance. In reflecting on these cases, we chart an agenda for future collaborative water governance research and practice that moves beyond engaging diverse actors to promoting equity among them.This article is categorized under: Human Water > Water Governance Science of Water > Water and Environmental Change Engineering Water > Planning Water

show abstract

Section: Designing Equitable Collaborative Water Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond engagement: Enhancing equity in collaborative water governance

Koebele,

Méndez‐Barrientos,

Nadeau

et al. 2023

WIREs Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Less work has examined how the managers actually perceive or feel about these collaborations or their negative implications (Costumato, 2021;Esteve et al, 2013;McGuire, 2006;Olszewski & Siebeneck, 2021). However, some scholars such as Mitchell et al (2015), Prentice and Brudney (2016), Lee andEsteve (2022), andVivona et al (2022) have begun examining manager perceptions of collaboration and the possibility of negative attitudes and outcomes. While we are unable to measure their perceptions of success explicitly, we do examine the individual-level factors associated with more positive or more negative sentiments toward collaborating with health and public health agencies.…”

Section: Collaboration Collaborative Public Management and Public Healthmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining factors associated with emergency managers' collaborative planning with health departments prior to and during the COVID‐19 pandemic

Hildebrand

Wehde

2023

Public Administration Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We contribute to the growing body of research on COVID‐19 and pandemic response by connecting two bodies of existing but disparate research. Specifically, we examine how professionalization in emergency management is associated with collaborative outcomes. Using three unique surveys of local emergency managers (EMs) and convergent mixed methods, we find that more appropriate types of professionalization are more strongly associated with collaborative planning outcomes. EMs who completed pandemic‐related exercises were much more likely to report a collaborative plan with public health being in place prior to the COVID‐19 pandemic. These EMs were also potentially less negative in their opinions about collaboration. Other measures of professionalization were less strongly associated with collaborative planning outcomes. These results shed light on the importance of appropriate forms of professionalization in public and emergency management in improving collaboration and potential performance.

show abstract

“…Subsequently, governments have included diverse sector actors, such as public, nonprofit, and for-profit organizations, and they have managed the mix of bureaucracy, markets, and networks accordingly (Rhodes, 2015). At the same time, substantial attention has been devoted to how an emerging collaborative decision-making process operates from a citizens’ perspective (Lee & Esteve, 2022; Jo, 2023).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Citizen Sector-based Preference Relate to Citizen Satisfaction with Public Service Organizations?

Lee

2024

Administration & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scholarly attention has predominantly focused on citizens’ evaluations of public service organizations that deliver government-funded services, particularly in a single-sector public service provision. As a result, we have limited understanding of how multisectoral provision operates from a citizens’ perspective. Against this backdrop, this study explores how citizens disparately evaluate their providers, which varies according to their preferred sector in multisectoral public service provision. Using a nationwide observational survey on Korean public childcare, where citizens’ sector-based preferences have long been recognized, the findings reveal that parents’ evaluations of providers were contingent on their preferred sector types. The evidence contributes to a more nuanced understanding of citizens’ evaluations of services in multisectoral public service provision.

show abstract

What drives the perceived legitimacy of collaborative governance? An experimental study

Cited by 14 publications

References 75 publications

Beyond engagement: Enhancing equity in collaborative water governance

Beyond engagement: Enhancing equity in collaborative water governance

Examining factors associated with emergency managers' collaborative planning with health departments prior to and during the COVID‐19 pandemic

Does Citizen Sector-based Preference Relate to Citizen Satisfaction with Public Service Organizations?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About