Search results

To date, low-cost housing held under the common-property regime is faced with various collective action or management issues in relation to common facilities. Understanding and unpacking key collective action components in a multi-dimensional and systematic fashion that help explain the status quo of the complex low-cost housing management is crucial, particularly in identifying potential factors contributing to the suboptimal self-governing outcome. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to investigate the collective action of low-cost housing in Malaysia using Ostrom's institutional analysis development and social-ecological system framework (IAD-SES framework) as a theoretical framework.

First, a mixed-method research design was adopted where issues relating to the management of common properties of low-cost housing were identified in the Malaysian context. Second, the components of Ostrom's IAD framework relevant to collective action were identified. Third, after interviewing six experts in the housing industry via semi-structured interviews, two more components (historical development/adaptability to new environment and ethnicity) were added to the questionnaire survey. From here, 633 respondents who lived in four low-cost housings in Kuala Lumpur from 1,598 households were surveyed in 2012. We then merged the IAD framework with the SES framework. Factor analysis and Cronbach's alpha analysis were conducted to uncover the underlying variables and the social ecological clusters that they belonged.

With average Cronbach's alpha of 0.83, the seven key SES components identified are able to cumulatively explain 71% variance of local collective action components. Based on the cumulative percentage explained, the top five key SES components are as follows: context (social, economic and political settings); ethnicity; outcome; resource system; and users characteristics.

This study identifies key components related to the collective action issues of low-cost housing management, where two additional components were also suggested to be added to the SES framework. Apart from the theoretical contribution, the study, serving as insights and potential solutions, is also of practical significance to the existing management practices of low-cost housing in Malaysia where policymakers and management corporations may prioritize primary SES components, helping them govern common properties more efficiently.

This paper aims to contribute to adaptation research by devising a systematic method for examining the challenges in mainstreaming climate change adaptation (CCA) into local land use planning. It argues that mainstreaming operationalization necessitates a methodology that focuses on the challenges in applying the approach and an analytical framework that can examine the mainstreaming process from an institutional perspective.

This paper applied triangulation by data method (i.e. document review, interview, survey and key informant consultations) and incorporated the scorecard approach in developing the four-stage mixed methodology. It used a modified Institutional Analysis and Development framework as primary analytical guide and applied the case study methodology for structure and focus in relation to data collection activities.

This paper devised the four-stage mixed methodology and successfully applied it in examining the challenges in mainstreaming CCA into local land use planning in Albay, Philippines. Using the methodology, this paper developed 20 quantitative “mainstreaming indicators” and generated qualitative analyses to assess the state of play of the challenges in local mainstreaming of CCA. Results suggest that mainstreaming challenges exist within a certain spectrum, with one end composed of barriers to, and the other, opportunities for CCA. Furthermore, the challenges occur at varying degrees of severity depending on the conditions that surround them.

This paper is limited to illustrating the process involved in developing the four-stage mixed methodology and presents only a brief discussion of the quantitative and qualitative results.

Although the methodology is at its initial stages of development, it generated results that can help analysts, planners and decision-makers: determine the nature of the challenges in mainstreaming CCA, thereby understand the mainstreaming process; prioritize the mainstreaming challenges to address; and design strategies that will maximize the use of limited resources (i.e. utilizing the opportunities to overcome the existing barriers), among others.

The four-stage mixed methodology was developed to aid analysts, planners and decision-makers determine the state-of-play of the challenges in mainstreaming CCA and make informed decisions in overcoming these challenges. Thus, the mixed method can be a useful tool in advancing the operationalization of the mainstreaming approach.

Surging global natural disasters provide incentive for risk-reducing policies and strategies. In this light, the African Union (AU) engaged a multi-stakeholder policy formulation process between 2002 and 2006, to develop a continent-wide disaster risk reduction (DRR) strategy. Drawing from secondary data, this chapter assesses the process and applies qualitative analysis instruments to critically assess the AU’s disaster policy. Linkages to the 2005 international Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) are also highlighted. The analysis reveals that Africa’s policy formulation process was belated for over a decade, with respect to international expectations. The formulation process was however largely African owned and led, culminating in a strategy document that reflected African contextual reality at the time, and aligned well with HFA fundamental goals. The applied multi-stakeholder approach enhanced a spirit of participation across levels and was central to the largely successful policy formulation process. However, targeted policy outcomes were not explicit, and poorly formulated indicators marred short- and long-term policy evaluation. Based on these results, we conclude that the African-wide DRR policy formulation processes were belated but participatory, systematic and very successful. Belated policy formulation reflects an initial inertia on the African continent, justified by past negative policy experiences and the desire to succeed. A replication of this policy formulation approach in Africa is recommended, albeit exercising more caution on policy timing, the elaboration of better monitoring and evaluation instruments and criteria. Participation should further embrace modern, risk-free (anti-COVID-19-friendly) information and communication technologies.

This paper provides an overview of a form of factor analysis, Q Methodology, and suggests how it might be applied in an institutional analysis setting. Q Methodology provides for a middle ground between positivist and phenomenological methods, and that its usage will not necessarily result in overly contextualized findings that render generalization impossible. The paperʼs primary focus is to suggest several uses of Q Methodology within different established policy studies frameworks, namely the Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) Framework, the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF), and the policy process as conceptualized by Lasswellʼs Policy Sciences approach.

The purpose of this paper is to present a new learning and growth perspective for the balanced scorecard (BSC) that includes more specific measures of integrated thinking and value creation to help improve integrated reporting (<IR>). Practical, relevant definitions of these historically vague concepts may improve intangible asset disclosures (IAD) and increase uptake of the<IR> framework.

The paper is conceptual. The authors use organisational learning to theorise about the learning and growth perspective of the BSC, within the context of the practice of IAD.

Several criticisms of IAD, the<IR>framework and the BSC have acted as barriers to implementing the<IR>framework. The improved version of the BSC’s learning and growth perspective, presented in this paper, addresses those criticisms by redefining the concept of integrated thinking (learning) and more fully connecting that learning to future value creation (growth). The model is designed to be used in tandem with the<IR>framework to operationalise integrated thinking. A new BSC strategy map illustrates how this revised learning and growth perspective interacts with the other three BSC perspectives to create long-term shareholder value through the management and growth of knowledge within an organisation.

Organisational learning is an important source of competitive advantage in the modern knowledge economy. Here, the authors encourage further debate on how to report and disclose information on intangible assets, driven by a new conceptual strategy for organisational learning that fully supports the BSC’s capacity to help integrated thinking and future value creation for the<IR>framework.

From its roots as a performance measurement system, the BSC has become a widely used strategy execution tool. The<IR>framework has struggled to gain traction, but still has value in exploring intangible assets and its disclosure from a systems thinking perspective. The model is designed to bring an explicit understanding of how to improve integrated thinking for the<IR>framework facilitating better measurement, management and reporting of human and structural capital. By doing so, the new model enables a firm to use the BSC to engage with<IR>more effectively, which should also be useful for practitioners given the widespread use of the BSC.

The analysis of the BSC’s learning and growth perspective reveals two dichotomies – one between resources and growth, and another between systems and capability. The revised perspective resolves these dichotomies with clear, forward-focused measures of learning and intangible asset growth, and multiple vertical and horizontal connections between the perspective’s four constructs. The authors demonstrate practical paths to value creation through a range of strategic impacts.

Within a gated community, management of common property presents great challenges. Therefore, the diagnostic social ecological system (SES) framework proposed by Elinor Ostrom providing a holistic understanding of complex collective action problems in terms of management of commons is used to investigate key institutional-social-ecological factors influencing collective action in the context of gated communities.

In this paper, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was used to systematically screen and review the relevant literature from 2000 to 2022, where 28 papers were selected for further analysis.

The study systematically identifies and categorises a series of variables related to self-organizing management in the gated community, and consequently a SES-based gated community management framework is developed. Based on the conceptual framework, the paper discusses logical interrelationships of institutional-social-ecological factors and their impacts on collective action performance of gated communities.

Apart from requiring empirical validation, the conceptual SES-based gated community management framework is certainly subject to continuous improvement in terms of refinement and addition of other potential determinants of gated community collective action.

Not only the review paper provides updates on the latest gated-community collective action research, it also contributes theoretically by conceptualizing the SES framework and its institutional–social–ecological design principles in gated community management. Studying these factors should also be of practical significance because the findings ultimately offer policy insights and management strategies that help policy-makers, property developers and local communities to govern such neighbourhood common resources efficiently and sustainably.

This paper adopts the conceptual framework of institutional analysis and development (IAD). The main focus is on the “commons,” a general term referring to a resource shared by a group of people or a community who are possibly vulnerable to social dilemmas. In this paper, the vulnerable are communities in developing countries; the resource is economic and social wellbeing; the dilemma is how this wellbeing can be shared. Social finance, among others actions, might be a means of reaching a favorable outcome. The purpose of this paper is to identify institutions in the developing world where a commons approach is attempted.

A major part of the research consists of examining knowledge, specifically digital knowledge, as a commons, and then looking at situations in developing countries where information and communication technology plays a prominent role. The spotlight is on the widespread use of cell phones to meet social, business, and service needs. The paper is designed to observe and report on the competing or converging concerns of profit‐making enterprises and impoverished communities. The role of social finance in promoting prosperity and higher living standards lies at the heart of social finance. At once, a conceptual and empirical issue, a case study of mobile banking in sub‐Saharan Africa is presented to achieve an understanding of a commons dependent on digital knowledge.

While the data generally revealed that telecom's technical innovation results in an overall economic and social gain for developing countries, the precise financial effect of mobile telephony is less‐easily demonstrated, as might be expected with so many variables to be considered.

The value of IAD is uniquely manifest in the institutional analysis of mobile telephony in a developing region, namely, sub‐Saharan Africa. The knowledge commons of shared ownership and self‐governance is shown to benefit all parties without hindering financial gain or the common good.

This study was aimed to examine emerging knowledge commons in the public libraries in the Thabo Mofutsanyane District in Free State, South Africa.

A triangulated sample survey was adopted to collect data from the users of the commons using a questionnaire, and data of community member and the library officers were collected using an interview schedule. The study was guided by Hess and Ostrom's Institutional Analysis and Development framework.

The librarians and the commons users recognise the changing nature, roles and services of the libraries without necessarily attributing the changes to the emergence of knowledge commons. Users viewed the commons by the learning opportunities offered by information and communication technologies. They were, however, willing to contribute their resources to boost and enrich the commons; their contributions presently take the forms of volunteering of their knowledge and skill through offering of training sessions to users of the commons. A critical aspect of the commons, namely, participation in the governance and management of the commons resources appears not to be occurring.

To adequately build knowledge commons in the libraries will require formally introducing knowledge commons in the libraries, doing a systems analysis, deciding on the content and their sources, drawing up a programme for nurturing the system including training of relevant staff and then providing basic infrastructures.

This study used quantitative approach to deploy the institutional analysis development Institutional Analysis and Development framework in the study of public library institution. Studies on knowledge commons in public libraries have not been found.

Over the 30 years, public management and administration scholars have crossed disciplinary boundaries to build a body of scholarship on collaboration for public good, services, and values. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Public management and administration researchers need to integrate the scholarship on collaboration through systems thinking. How do we define collaboration? How do we distinguish among the categories of collaborative public management (CPM), collaborative governance (CG), and networks? How do systems and institutional context shape collaboration in these categories? Within these categories, what are our units of analysis: individual leadership, organizations, or groups in collaboration processes? How do we apply what we know to practice and design?

The work requires that the authors examine CPM, CG, and networks in their larger and nested institutional contexts to determine how they are related to and shape each other. The Institutional Analysis and Development framework may inform this work. CPM or networks may be nested in CG processes and structures in inter-governmental contexts.

Researchers need more clarity as to the context within which CPM, CG, and networks occur, and in units of analysis and the roles of individual people as managers and as agents of organizations, as distinguished from organizations as constructs.

Scholars need to apply research to practice related to designing systems and structures in which collaboration occurs.

As humankind faces increasingly complex and multifaceted policy problems that cross inter-governmental and international boundaries and require inter-sectoral work, managers and organizations must improve both the design of collaboration in governance and management and mastery of essential skills to participate in collaboration.

CPM, CG, and network research does not sufficiently incorporate or control for institutional context into research design.