Strategies for megaregion governance: Collaborative dialogue, networks, and self-organization

Journal of the American Planning Association

Volumn 77, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 55-67

  Innes, Judith E ^a   Booher, David E ^b   Di Vittorio, Sarah ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

collaboration; complexity; governance; megaregion; networks

Indexed keywords

GOVERNANCE APPROACH; METROPOLITAN AREA; PRIVATE SECTOR; PUBLIC SECTOR; SELF ORGANIZATION; SOCIAL CAPITAL; STRATEGIC APPROACH; URBAN DEVELOPMENT;

CALIFORNIA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 78650913128     PISSN: 01944363     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01944363.2011.533640     Document Type: Article

References (84)

1. Abbott, C. (1997). The Portland region: Where city and suburbs talk to each other and often agree. Housing Policy Debate, 8(1), 65-73.
2. Aldrich, H. (1979). Organizations and environments. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
3. Altshuler, A., Morrill, W., Wolman, H., & Mitchell, F. (Eds.). (1999). Governance and opportunity in metropolitan America. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
4. Amin, A. (2004). Regions unbound: Toward a new politics of place. Geografisker Annaler, 86B(1), 33-44.
5. Axelrod, R., & Cohen, M. D. (1999). Harnessing complexity: Organizational implications of a scientific frontier. New York, NY: Free Press.
6. Benner, C, & Pastor, M. (2008, March). Fractures and fault lines: Growth and equity in California's megaregions. Paper presented at the America 2050 research seminar on megaregions, Healdsburg, CA.
7. Berkes, F., Colding, J., & Folke, C. (2003). Introduction. In F. Berkes, J. Colding, & C. Folke (Eds.), Navigating social-ecological systems: Building resilience for complexity and change (pp. 1-29). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
8. Bogason, P., & Musso, J. A. (2006). The democratic prospects of network governance. The American Review of Public Administration, 36(1), 3-18.
9. Booher, D. E., & Innes, J. E. (2002). Network power in collaborative planning. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 21(3), 221-236.
10. Booher, D. E., & Innes, J. E. (2010). Governance for resilience: CALFED as a complex adaptive network for resource management. Ecology and Society, 15(3), article 35. Retrieved November 19, 2010, from http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss3/art35/
11. Brenner, N. (2002). Decoding the newest "metropolitan regionalism" in the USA: A critical overview. Cities, 19(1), 3-21.
12. Bryson, J. M., & Crosby, B. C. (1993). Policy planning and the design and use of forums, arenas, and courts. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 20(2), 175-194.
13. California Global Warming Solutions Act. California Assembly Bill 32. (2006).
14. California State University, Sacramento. (n.d.-a) Sacramento State Center for Collaborative Policy. Retrieved March 14, 2010, from http://www.csus.edu/ ccp/
15. California State University, Sacramento. (n.d.-b) South Bay Salt Ponds Restoration Project. Retrieved October 4, 2010, from http://www.csus. edu/ccp/Salt-Ponds/index.stm
16. California Sustainable Communities Strategy. California Senate Bill 375. (2008).
17. Capra, F. (2004). Hidden connections: A science for sustainable living. New York, NY: Doubleday.
18. Connick, S. (2006). The Sacramento Area Water Forum: A case study (Working Paper 2006-06). Berkeley, CA: Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California, Berkeley. Retrieved October 5, 2010, from http://escholarship.org/uc/item/8fn9d21c
19. Connick, S., & Innes, J. E. (2003). Outcomes of collaborative water policy making: Applying complexity thinking to evaluation. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 46(2), 177-197.
20. De Rynck, F., & Voets, J. (2006). Democracy in area-based policy networks: The case of Ghent. The American Review of Public Administration, 36(1), 58-78.
21. Delgado, E., Epstein, D., Joo, Y, Mann, R, Moon, S., Raleigh, C, & Rutzick, D. (2006). Methods for planning the Great Lakes megaregion. Ann Arbor, MI: Urban and Regional Planning Program, University of Michigan.
22. Dewar, M., & Epstein, D. (2007). Planning for "megaregions" in the United States. Journal of Planning Literature, 22(2), 108-124.
23. Ewing, R., Bartholomew, K., Winkelman, S., Walters, J., & Chen, D. (2008). Growing cooler: The evidence on urban development and climate change. Washington, DC: Urban Land Institute.
24. Florida, R. (2008, April 12). The rise of the mega-region, Opinion. The Wall St. Journal, p. 8.
25. Frisken, F. (2001). The Toronto story: Sober reflections on fifty years of experiments with regional governance. Journal of Urban Affairs, 23(5), 513-541.
26. Glaeser, E. (2007). Do regional economies need regional coordination? In K. Goldfeld (Ed.), The economic geography of megaregions (pp. 11-57). Princeton, NJ: Policy Research Institute for the Region.
27. Gleick, J. (1987). Chaos: The making of a new science. New York, NY: Penguin Viking.
28. Gottmann, J. (1961). Megalopolis: The urbanized northeastern seaboard of the United States: New York, NY: Twentieth Century Fund.
29. Hajer, M. A., & Wagenaar, H. (2003). Deliberative policy analysis: Understanding governance in the network society. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
30. Healey, P. (1997). Collaborative planning: Shaping places in fragmented societies. London, UK: Macmillan Press.
31. Healey, P. (2007). Urban complexity and spatial strategies: Towards a relational planning for our times. London, UK: Routledge.
32. Healey, P. (2010). Making better places: The planning project in the 21st century. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
33. Herrschel, T., & Newman, P. (2002). Governance of Europe's city regions: Planning, policy and politics. London, UK: Routledge.
34. Innes, J. E., & Booher, D. E. (1999). Metropolitan development as a complex system: A new approach to sustainability. Economic Development Quarterly 13(2), 141-156
35. Innes, J. E. & Booher, D. E. (2000). Indicators for sustainable communities: A strategy building on complexity theory and distributed intelligence. Planning Theory and Practice, 1(2), 173-186.
36. Innes, J. E., & Booher, D. E. (2003). The impact of collaborative planning on governance capacity. (Working paper WP-2003-03). Berkeley, CA: Institute of Urban and Regional Development University of California, Berkeley. Retrieved October 5, 2010, from http://reposi-tories.cdlib.org/iurd/wps/WP-2003- 03
37. Innes, J. E., & Booher, D. E. (2010). Planning with complexity: An introduction to collaborative rationality for public policy. London, UK: Routledge/Taylor and Francis.
38. Innes, J. E., Connick, S., & Booher, D. (2007). Informality as a planning strategy: Collaborative water management in the CALFED Bay-Delta program. Journal of the American Planning Association, 73(2), 195-210.
39. Innes, J. E., Connick, S., Kaplan, L., & Booher, D. E. (2006). Collaborative governance in the CALFED program: Adaptive policy making for California water (Working paper WP-2006-01). Berkeley, CA: Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California, Berkeley. Retrieved March 14, 2010, from http://repositories.cdlib. org/iurd/wps/WP-2006-01
40. Innes, J. E., & Rongerude, J. (2006). Collaborative regional initiatives: Civic entrepreneurs work to fill the governance gap (Working paper WP-2006-04). Berkeley, CA: Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California, Berkeley. Retrieved March, 14, 2010, from http://escholarship.org/uc/item/48p87363
41. Innes, J. E., & Sandoval, G. (2004). Turning business people into environmentalists: The Sierra Business Council. (Working paper WP-2004-06). Berkeley, CA: Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California, Berkeley. Retrieved October 5, 2010, from http://repositories.cdlib. org/iurd/wps/WP-2004-06
42. Institute of Governmental Studies University of California, Berkeley. (2010). Building resilient regions. Retrieved October 5 2010, from http://brr.berkeley.edu/.
43. John, P., Tickell, A., & Musson, S. (2005). Governing the mega-region: Governance and networks across London and the South East of England. New Political Economy, 10(1), 91-106.
44. Joint Policy Committee of the Association of Bay Area Governments, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, the Bay Conservation and Development Commission and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. (2010). Joint Policy Committee. Retrieved October 3, 2010, from http://www.abag.ca. gov/jointpolicy/
45. Joint Venture: Silicon Valley Network. (2009). Joint Venture: Silicon Valley Network. Retrieved June 29, 2010, from http://www.jointventure.org/
46. Joint Venture: Silicon Valley Network & Silicon Valley Community Foundation. (2010). Index of Silicon Valley (Vol. 2010). San Jose, CA: Author. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from http://www.jointventure.org/images/stories/pdf/ 2010%20Index-final.pdf
47. Jones, V., & Rothblatt, D. (1993). Governance of the San Francisco Bay Area. In D. N. Rothblatt & A. Sancton (Eds.), Metropolitan governance: American/Canadian intergovernmental perspectives (pp. 375-431). Berkeley, CA: Institute of Governmental Studies Press, University of California.
48. Kettl, D. F. (2000). The transformation of governance: Globalization, devolution, and the role of government. Public Administration Review, 60(6), 488-497.
49. Kettl, D. F. (2005). The next government of the United States: Challenges for performance in the 21st century. Washington, DC: IBM Center for the Business of Government.
50. Klijn, E. H., & Koppenjan, J. F. M. (2000). Public management and policy networks: Foundations of a network approach to governance. Public Management, 2(2), 135-158.
51. Klijn, E. H., & Skelcher, C. (2007). Democracy and governance networks: Compatible or not? Public Administration, 85(3), 587-608.
52. Lang, R. E., & Dhavale, D. (2005). Beyond megalopolis: Exploring America's new 'megapolitan' geography (Vol. 5, No. 1, Metropolitan Institute Census Report Series). Alexandria, VA: Metropolitan Institute at Virginia Tech.
53. Lang, R. E., & Nelson, A. C. (2009). Megalopolitan America: Defining and applying a new geography. In C. L. Ross (Ed.), Megaregions: Planning for global competitiveness (pp. 107-126). Washington, DC: Island Press.
54. Laquian, A. (2005). Beyond metropolis: The planning and governance of Asia's mega-urban regions. Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Center Press.
55. Lynch, K. (1976). Managing the sense of a region. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
56. McGee, T. G., & Robinson, I. M. (1995). The mega-urban regions of Southeast Asia. Vancouver, BC: UBC Press.
57. Metcalf, G., & Terplan, E. (2007, November). The Northern California megaregion. The Urbanist, 446.
58. Nyseth, T. (2008). Network governance in contested urban landscapes. Planning Theory & Practice, 9(4), 497-514.
59. Ocampo, R. B. (1995). The metro Manila mega-region. In T. G. McGee & I. M. Robinson (Eds.), The mega-urban regions of Southeast Asia (pp. 282-295). Vancouver, BC: UBC Press.
60. Osborne, S. (Ed.) (2010). The new public governance: Emerging perspectives on the theory and practice of public governance. London, UK: Routledge/Taylor & Francis.
61. Pell, C. (1966). Megalopolis unbound: The supercity and the transportation of tomorrow. New York, NY: Praeger.
62. Regional Plan Association. (1967). The region's growth: A report of the second regional plan. New York, NY: Author.
63. Regional Plan Association. (2010). Megaregions. Retrieved March 14, 2010, from http://www.america2050.org/megaregions.html
64. Rhodes, R. A. W. (1996). The new governance: Governing without government. Political Studies, 44(4), 652-667.
65. Ross, C. L. (Ed.). (2009). Megaregions: Planning for global competitiveness. Washington, DC: Island Press.
66. Salet, W., Thornley, A., & Kreukels, A. (Eds.). (2003). Metropolitan governance and spatial planning: Comparative case studies of European city-regions. London: Spon Press.
67. Sassen, S. (2007). Megaregions: Benefits beyond sharing trains and parking lots? In K. Goldfeld (Ed.), The economic geography of megaregions (pp. 59-83). Princeton, NJ: Policy Research Institute for the Region.
68. Saxenian, A. (1996) Regional advantage: Culture and competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
69. Saxenian, A., & Chinoy Dabby, N. (2004). Creating and sustaining regional collaboration in Silicon Valley? The case of Joint Venture: Silicon Valley. (Working paper WP-2004-05). Berkeley, CA: Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California, Berkeley. Retrieved October 5, 2010, from http://escholarship.org/uc/item/87d05794
70. Scharpf, F. W. (1978). Interorganizational policy studies: Issues, concepts and perspectives. London, UK: Sage Publications.
71. Schneider, M., Scholz, J., Lubell, M., Mindruta, D., & Edwardsen, M. (2003). Building consensual institutions: Networks and the national estuary program. American Journal of Political Science, 47(1), 143-158.
72. Sehested, K. (2009). Urban planners as network managers and metagovernors. Planning Theory & Practice, 10(2), 245-263.
73. Sierra Business Council. (2006). Sierra Nevada Wealth Index (3rd ed.). Retrieved September 26, 2008, from http://www.sbcouncil.org/Publica-tions/2006- Wealth-Index
74. Sierra Business Council. (2010). Sierra Business Council. Retrieved October 4, 2010, from http://www.sbcouncil.org/
75. Sørensen, E. (2006). Metagovernance: The changing role of politicians in processes of democratic governance. American Review of Public Administration, 36(1), 98-114.
76. Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2007). Theories of democratic network governance. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
77. Stephens, G. R., & Wickstrom, N. (2002). Metropolitan government and governance: Theoretical perspectives, empirical analysis and the future. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
78. Stowers, G. (1996). Miami: Experiences in regional government. In H. V. Savitch & R. K. Vogel (Eds.), Regional politics: America in a post-city age (pp. 185-205). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
79. Teitz, M. B., & Barbour, E. (2007). Megaregions in California: Challenges to planning and policy. Retrieved March 5, 2010, from http://www.america2050.org/Healdsburg-California-pp-7-19.pdf
80. Torfing, J., Sørensen, E., & Fotel, T. (2009). Democratic anchorage of infrastructural governance networks: The case of the Femern Belt Forum. Planning Theory, 8(3), 282-308.
81. Waldrop, M. M. (1992). Complexity: The emerging science at the edge of order and chaos. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
82. Weir, M., Rongerude, J., & Ansell, C. K. (2009). Collaboration is not enough: Virtuous cycles of reform in transportation policy. Urban Affairs Review, 44(4), 455-489.
83. Zeigler, E. H. (2008). The case for megalopolitan growth management in the 21st century: Regional urban planning and sustainable development in the United States (Legal Research Paper 08-24). Denver, CO: University of Denver Sturm College of Law.
84. Zhang, T. (2006). Beyond metropolis: The planning and governance of Asia's mega-urban regions. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 25(3), 333-334.