From partnerships to networks: New approaches for measuring U.S. national heritage area effectiveness

Evaluation Review

Volumn 34, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 271-298

  Laven, Daniel N ^a   Krymkowski, Daniel H ^b   Ventriss, Curtis L ^b   Manning, Robert E ^b   Mitchell, Nora J ^a  

^a NATIONAL PARK SERVICE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT   (United States)

Author keywords

Evaluation; Landscape scale conservation; National heritage areas; Protected area management; Social network analysis

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; COOPERATION; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; NONBIOLOGICAL MODEL; PROBABILITY; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; SOCIAL SUPPORT; TRUST; UNITED STATES;

ALGORITHMS; CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES; COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR; HUMANS; MARKOV CHAINS; MODELS, ORGANIZATIONAL; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; SOCIAL SUPPORT; TRUST; UNITED STATES;

EID: 77955025025     PISSN: 0193841X     EISSN: 15523926     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0193841X10370668     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Baldassarri, D., and M. Diani. 2007. The integrative power of civic networks. American Journal of Sociology 13:735-80.
2. Barrett, B. 2003. Roots for the family tree. The George Wright Forum 20:41-9.
3. Bickman, L. 2000. Summing up program theory. New Directions for Evaluation 87:103-12.
4. Bogason, P., and J. Musso. 2006. The democratic prospects of network governance. American Review of Public Administration 36:3-18.
5. Borgatti, S. 1995. Centrality and AIDS. Connections 18:112-14.
6. Borgatti, S. 2005. Centrality and network flow. Social Networks 27:55-71.
7. Coleman, J. 1990. Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
8. Copping, S., P. Huffman, D. Laven, N. Mitchell, and J. Tuxill. 2006. Connecting stories, landscapes, and people: Exploring the Delaware & Lehigh National Heritage Corridor partnership. Sustainability study Report. A technical assistance project for the Delaware & Lehigh National Heritage Corridor Commission and the Delaware & Lehigh National Heritage Corridor, Inc. Woodstock, VT: USNPS Conservation Study Institute.
9. Crew, R. and M. Anderson. 2003. Accountability and performance in charter schools in Florida: A theory-based evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation 24:189-213.
10. Derney, C., G. Eugster, and J. Wilson. 2005. Social system complexity. In New horizons in research on sustainable organizations, ed, M. S. Sharma, 99-124. Sheffield: Greenleaf.
11. De Rynck, F., and J. Voets. 2006. Democracy in area-based policy networks: The case of Ghent. American Review of Public Administration 36:58-78.
12. Donaldson, S., and L. Gooler. 2002. Theory-driven evaluation of the work and health initiative: A focus on winning new jobs. American Journal of Evaluation 23:341-7.
13. Durland, M., and K. Fredericks. 2005. An introduction to social network analysis. New Directions for Evaluation 107:5-13.
14. Eisingerich, A., S.J. Bell, and P. Tracey. 2005. Sustainable cluster performance: Managing intensity and openness of interorganizational linkages. PhD working paper series. Judge Business School, Cambridge University. URLhttp://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk/research/working_papers/2005/phd_wp0503.pdf.
15. Eugster, G. 2003. Evolution of the heritage areas movement. The George Wright Forum 20:41-9.
16. Fischer, F. 2006. Participatory governance as deliberative empowerment: The cultural politics of discursive space. American Review of Public Administration 36:19-40.
17. Freeman, L. 1979. Centrality in networks. I. Conceptual clarification. Social Networks 1:215-39.
18. Fürst, D., H. Schubert, A. Rudolph, and H. Spieckermann. 2001. Regional actor networks between social capital and regional governance. Connections 24: 42-67.
19. Goldsmith, S., and W. Eggers. 2004. Governing by network: The new shape of the public sector. Washington, DC: Brookings.
20. Hajer, M., and H. Wagenaar. eds. 2003. Deliberative policy analysis: Understanding governance in the network society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21. Hanneman, R., and M. Riddle. 2005. Introduction to social network methods. Riverside, CA: University of California, Riverside. URL http://faculty.ucr.edu/~hanneman/.
22. Hudson, B. 2004. Analysing network partnerships: Benson revisited. Public Management Review 6:75-94.
23. Jewiss, J., D. Laven, N. Mitchell, and P. Huffman. 2008. Development of a National Heritage Area evaluation strategy: Report on phase I: A technical assistance report for the NPS National Heritage Areas Office. Woodstock, VT: Conservation Study Institute in cooperation with the NPS National Heritage Areas Office and the Alliance of National Heritage Areas.
24. Jones, C., W. Hesterley, and S. Borgatti. 1997. A general theory of network governance exchange conditions and social mechanisms. Academy of Management Review 22:911-45.
25. Knoke, D., and S. Yang. 2008. Social network analysis Second edition. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
26. Koontz, T., T. Steelman, J. Carmin, K. Korfmacher, C. Moseley, and C. Thomas. 2004. Collaborative environmental management: What roles for government? Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
27. Krebs, V., and J. Holley. 2004. Building sustainable communities through social network development. The Nonprofit Quarterly, 11:46-53.
28. Kumar, N., J.C. Anderson, and L.W. Stern. 1993. Conducting organizational research using organizational key informants. Academy of Management Journal 363:1633-51.
29. Lawless, M., and R. Moore. 1989. Interorganizational systems in public service delivery: A new application of the dynamic network framework. Human Relations 42:1167-84.
30. Leeuw, F. 2003. Reconstructing program theories: Methods available and problems to be solved. American Journal of Evaluation 24:16-21.
31. Lubbers, M.J., and T.A.B. Snijders. 2007. A comparison of approaches to the exponential random graph model: A reanalysis of 102 student networks in school classes. Social Networks 29:489-507.
32. Mandell, M. 1984. Application of social network analysis to the implementation of a complex project. Human Relations 37:659-79.
33. McDavid, J., and L. Hawthorn. 2006. Program evaluation and performance management: An introduction to practice. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
34. Milward, B., and G. Wamsley. 1985. Policy subsystems, networks and the tools of public management. In Policy implementation in federal and unitary systems, eds. Kenneth I. Hanf and Theo A. Toonen, 105-30. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff.
35. Musso, J., C. Weare, N. Oztas, and W. Loges. 2006. Neighborhood governance reform and networks of community power in Los Angeles. American Review of Public Administration 36:79-97.
36. National Park System Advisory Board. 2006. Charting a future for national heritage areas. Washington, DC: National Park System Advisory Board.
37. Nohria, N., and R. Eccles. eds. 1992. Networks and organizations: Structure, form, & action. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
38. O'Toole, L. 1997. Treating networks seriously: Practical and research-based agendas in public administration. Public Administration Review 57:45-52.
39. Provan, K., and H.B. Milward. 1995. A preliminary theory of interorganizational network effectiveness: A comparative study of four community mental health systems. Administrative Science Quarterly 40:1-33.
40. Provan, K. 2001. Do networks really work: A framework for evaluating public-sector organizational networks. Public Administration Review 61:414-23.
41. Putnam, R. 2000. Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster.
42. Robins, G., T. Snijders, P. Wang, M. Handcock, and P. Pattison. 2007. Recent developments in exponential random graph (p*) models for social networks. Social Networks 29:192-215.
43. Sandström, A. 2008. Policy Networks: The relation between structure and performance. Doctoral Dissertation. Lulea University of Technology, Department of Business Administration and Social Sciences, Division of Political Science.
44. Sandström, A., and L. Carlsson. 2008. Policy Networks: The relation between structure and performance. Policy Studies Journal 36:497-524.
45. Snijders, T. 2002. Markov chain Monte Carlo estimation of exponential random graph models. Journal of Social Structure 3:1-40. http://www.2.heinz.cmu.edu/project/INSNA/joss/index1.html.
46. Snijders, T.A.B., P.E. Pattison, G.L. Robins, and M. Handcock. 2006. New specifications for exponential random graph models. Sociological Methodology 36:99-153.
47. Snijders, T., C. Steglich, M. Schweinberger, and M. Huisman. 2007. Manual for SIENA version 3. Groningen: University of Groningen, ICS. Oxford: University of Oxford, Department of Statistics. URL http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~snijders/siena/sie_man31.pdf (accessed June 8, 2007).
48. Sørensen, E. 2006. Metagovernance: The changing role of politicians in processes of democratic governance. American Review of Public Administration 36: 98-114.
49. Stoker, G. 2006. Public value management: A new narrative for networked governance? American Review of Public Administration 36:41-57.
50. Turnbull, B. 2002. Program theory building: A strategy for deriving cumulative evaluation knowledge. American Journal of Evaluation 23:16-20.
51. Tuxill, J., P. Huffman, D. Laven, and N. Mitchell. 2008. Shared legacies in Cane River National Heritage Area: Linking people, traditions, and culture. A technical assistance report for the Cane River National Heritage Area Corridor Commission. Woodstock, VT: USNPS Conservation Study Institute.
52. Tuxill, J., N. Mitchell, P. Huffman, D. Laven, S. Copping, and G. Gifford. 2005. Reflecting on the past, looking to the future: Sustainability study report. A technical assistance report to the John H. Chaffee Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor Commission. Woodstock, VT: USNPS Conservation Study Institute.
53. U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. 2003. National heritage areas. Hearing before the subcommittee on national parks of the committee on energy and natural resources. United States Senate. One hundred eighth congress. First Session. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
54. Ventriss, C., and M. Gurdon. 2006. Emerging issues in economic development policy and technology incubators: The Vermont center for emerging technologies experience. Comparative Technology Transfer and Society 4:22-52.
55. Weiss, C. 1998. Evaluation. 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
56. Weitzman, B., D. Silver, and K. Dillman. 2002. Integrating a comparison group design into a theory of change evaluation: The case of the urban health initiative. American Journal of Evaluatio n 23:371-86.
57. Wiewel, W., and A. Hunter. 1985. The interorganizational network as a resource: A comparative case study on organizational genesis. Administrative Science Quarterly 30:482-96.
58. Yampolskaya, S., T. Nesman, M. Hernandez, and D. Koche. 2004. Using concept mapping to develop a logic model and articulate a program theory: A case example. American Journal of Evaluation 25:191-207.