Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine the enactment of collaborative governance as a policy strategy in healthcare – in particular its effects in coordinating multiple collaborative initiatives dedicated to improve the performance of health organizations. It studies overarching governance mechanisms that serve as platforms at a meta-level between policy and frontline practice.

Four collaborative governance arrangements dedicated to improve health outcomes in the Netherlands are analyzed in a comparative case-study design, based on extensive document analysis (n=121) and interviews (n=56) with key stakeholders in the field, including the Dutch Ministry of Health, health organizations and other actors.

The studied policy-based governance mechanisms for the coordination of multiple micro-level collaborative initiatives function partly as platforms in bringing actors and resources together successfully. They do so, by fostering evolvability (the capacity to generate diversity in emergent ways) in relation to goal-setting and intermediation between actors. Yet, they marginalize open access to participants through high selectivity and deliberate exclusion strategies for certain actors, contrary to a platform logic of action.

While the collaborative governance literature focuses on these dimensions as independent elements, findings reveal both trade-offs and interdependencies between studied dimensions of coordination associated with platforms, that need to be negotiated and managed.

Selectivity and exclusion in collaborative arrangements may negatively affect relational bonds and ties between actors, which challenges the application of collaborative governance as a policy strategy in pursuit of health objectives.

Responding to recent calls in the literature, this study applies ideas from public administration to the field of health organization and management to avert failures in the translation of policy ambitions into health practice.

The paper illustrates how accountability of collaborative governance was constituted in the context of disaster managerial work carried out by the Government, local authorities, and Maori community organisations, after the 2010–2011 Canterbury earthquakes in New Zealand.

A case study detailing the communitarian approach to disaster recovery management by a nationalised Maori earthquake response network is contrasted with the formal emergency management infrastructure's response to the Canterbury earthquakes.

Critical analysis of the effectiveness and failures of these approaches highlights the institutional and cultural political issues that hinder the institutionalization of collaborative and accountable governance in the fields of disaster risk reduction and emergency management.

The paper contributes to the accountability research and practice in general and disaster accountability in particular by addressing a more multifaceted model of ‘accountability combined with collaborative governance’ as a way to build on and critique some of the seemingly more narrow views of accountability.

The study presents rare insights on the interactions between formal and community level accountability and collaborative governance in the context of New Public Governance (NPG).

This paper aims to examine through a case study how the creation of collaborative spaces between local stakeholders can foster decision-making and collective development of projects that improve the governance of tourism destinations and their sustainability.

The paper focuses on the analysis of a case study based on the Etorkizuna Eraikiz (Building the Future) programme developed in the Gipuzkoa region located in the Basque Country, Spain. The programme is based on a strategy that seeks to institutionalize a new model of collaborative governance in the long term through the co-design of public policies involving stakeholders of the territory. Through the description and analysis of the results achieved so far, the paper presents the implications of this public programme for the design of policies.

Etorkizuna Eraikiz emerges as a model to develop an exercise of active experimentation. The analysis of this collaborative governance process has derived in practices and agendas promoted by a variety of agents within the region. The programme has important implications for the formulation of public policies in the field of tourism through the creation of formal interaction spaces and the implementation of projects in support of tourism development (Tourist Eco-tax and information and communication technology tools).

This paper provides a contemporary approach to the practices in governance within the context of tourism. This case study may be of interest to practitioners and researchers to adopt destination governance practices through the creation of collaborative spaces between local stakeholders. These practices can foster decision-making and the collective development of projects that impact and lead to better governance of tourism destinations and their sustainability.

Emerging collaborative arrangements between public and private institutions provide the potential for novel ways of enhancing the provision of public goods. This paper aims to explore the question whether formal mechanics rooted in complex institutional alliances are today's prototype of tomorrow's mainstream approaches to governance, or such mechanics are transitory stages or symptoms of governance challenges that will eventually be resolved through more traditional means.

The paper focus on the role of business in these governance micro‐climates, although the analysis carries implications for public institutions and civil society organizations, and the final sections extend the country case analysis to related public policy strategies.

Collaborative governance could be the common currency of decision making in the future and is preferable if it provides a means to overcome existing institutional constraints to effectively addressing social and environmental challenges.

The paper brings together the phenomena of collaborative governance and corporate responsibility.

Governance network managers are charged with triggering and sustaining collaborative dynamics, but often struggle to do so because they come from and interact with hierarchical and competitive organizations and systems. Thus, an important step toward effectively managing governance networks is to clarify collaborative dynamics. While the recently proposed collaborative governance regime (CGR) model provides a good start, it lacks both the conceptual clarity and parsimony needed in a useful analytical tool. This theoretical chapter uses the logic model framework to assess and reorganize the CGR model and then amends it using Follett’s theory of integrative process to provide a parsimonious understanding of collaborative dynamics, as opposed to authoritative coordination or negotiated cooperation. Uniquely, Follett draws from political and organizational theory practically grounded in the study of civic and business groups to frame the manner in which integrative process permeates collaboration. We argue that the disposition, style of relating, and mode of association in her integrative method foster collaborative dynamics while avoiding the counterproductive characteristics of hierarchy and competition. We develop an alternative logic model for studying collaborative dynamics that clarifies and defines these dynamics for future operationalization and empirical study.

To address the growing pressure to foster effectiveness, sustainability and quality of life, local governments have focused on developing policies and initiatives designed to make their cities smarter. Despite the growing attention paid to this issue, an important but under-investigated issue is represented by the smart city governance. In this regard, in light of the claimed need for collaboration, the purpose of this paper is to investigate why and how different institutional works carried out by multiple actors may explain the way in which collaborative governance can be constructed in the context of a smart city.

A rich in-depth case study has been carried out exploring the experience of a smart city in the north of Italy. The study explores the institutional works done by multiple actors (Lawrence et al., 2013) and their influence on the governance of the smart city.

Collaboration is perceived to be instrumental in making a city smart, during the design and implementation phase, while generating new challenges that must be overcome by an integration of the political, technical and, especially, cultural work of the collective actors involved.

Despite governance is recognized as a crucial factor for realizing a smartness-orientation, it is scarcely investigated. The main value of the current research is thus its contribution to overcome this gap providing new empirical evidence on the role of multiple actors in the smart city context.

Inter-organisational collaboration is becoming increasingly important in complex projects; some project customers even formally require evidence of collaborative competence from potential providers. The purpose of this paper is to explore the governance of collaboration and the ways in which it is enacted in practice for complex projects.

The study is based on a qualitative analysis of 29 semi-structured interviews, primary data from meetings and events supported by secondary data, including standards and industry-specific contract templates.

The paper identifies how collaboration can be effectively governed in complex projects through the emerging role of the collaboration standard and its impact on contractual and relational governance mechanisms. The standard sets higher-level institutional guidelines that affect the way in which collaboration is governed in complex projects. It helps formalise informal relational practices whilst also providing guidelines for building flexibility in contracts by including coordination- and adaptation-oriented provisions conducive to collaboration.

The paper demonstrates the emerging role of the collaboration standard and its influence on contractual and relational mechanisms deployed in complex projects. It shows how the standard can formalise and codify informal collaborative practices and help transfer related learning across projects, thereby contributing towards the dual requirement for standardisation and flexibility in project settings.

This study investigates how organizations in Brazil address sustainability concerns through collaborative governance efforts with strategic stakeholders. Organizations from New Zealand were considered as benchmarks for comparison.

This study is based on a qualitative exploratory research, supported by semistructured interviews. Ten organizations are interviewed, five from each country. Thematic analysis is used to analyze the interview data. Central management practices adopted by organizations are presented, and the goals, benefits, and limitations associated with collaborative initiatives are investigated.

The findings reveal that organizations in Brazil and in New Zealand are employing similar management and sustainability practices. Companies in both countries observe that collaborative efforts with strategic stakeholders improve their ability to meet market demands and jointly develop innovative solutions toward sustainability goals while exchanging knowledge and enhancing their operational effectiveness. Organizations perceive a number of tangible and nontangible value creation outcomes from sustainability practices, such as brand and reputational gains, improved supply chain management, and risk management attainments. The results also present limitations, such as internal limitations of organizations concerning how their executives and general staff incorporate sustainability issues into their organizations’ strategic planning and operational decisions.

Market pressures toward greener and more responsible operations equally affected organizations in both countries, without differentiation in operation between an emerging country such as Brazil and a developed country such as New Zealand. Directions for future research are presented. These are based on how organizations measure sustainability outcomes of management practices and collaborative alliances, and how organizations map upcoming market demands and opportunities to deliver more value to society as the sustainable development debate continues to evolve.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the management strategy changes of a government-hosted festival from the government’s perspective based on Ansell and Gash’s (2008) definitive criteria of collaborative governance.

This is a longitudinal case study of Hi Seoul Festival (HSF) in South Korea from 2003 to 2013. First, a detailed description of HSF management strategy change over time is presented through an analysis of internal government documents. Then, factors influencing management strategy changes are investigated through interviews with governmental and professional stakeholders.

The content analysis of the internal government documents reveals that HSF’s management strategy changed between collaborative governance and contracting out multiple times. The follow-up interviews then found that the prehistory experiences in managing festivals, the change of festival goals, and political leverages influenced the management strategy changes.

The government is one of the key stakeholders of festivals, which sometimes hosts and manages its own festivals. However, how a government manages its own festival is rarely studied. This study would add new insights into the studies of government-hosted festivals.

This paper aims to explore how existing collaborative governance arrangements in the context of corporate responsibility (e.g. the Global Reporting Initiative and Social Accountability 8000) need to collaborate more directly in order to enhance their impact. The objective of this paper is twofold: primarily, to explore existing and potential linkages between multi‐stakeholder standards; but, at the same time, to explore the potential for standard convergence.

The paper follows a conceptual approach that is supported by a variety of case examples. First, the nature and benefits as well as shortcomings of multi‐stakeholder standards are explored. Second, a categorization scheme for the availability of such standards is developed. Third, linkages between the different standard categories are explored and discussed. Last but not least, the paper outlines practical implications.

A variety of linkages between existing multi‐stakeholder standards exist. These linkages need to be strengthened, as the market for corporate responsibility is unlikely to support a great variety of partly competing and overlapping initiatives.

The paper offers a structured discussion of potential linkages between multi‐stakeholder standards and thus complements the literature where such initiatives are discussed (usually without much mention of linkages). Practitioners will find the discussion useful to explore how their participation in a variety of initiatives can be better coordinated.