Governance informatics: Managing the performance of inter-organizational governance networks

Innovation Journal

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 2011, Pages

  Koliba, Christopher ^a   Zia, Asim ^a   Lee, Brian H Y ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT   (United States)

Author keywords

Complex systems; Governance networks; Network management; Performance management; Situational awareness

Indexed keywords

EID: 79956204868     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17153816     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Agarwal, C., Green, G. M., Grove, J. M., Evans, T. P., & Schweik, C. M. (2002). A review and assessment of land-use change models: Dynamics of space, time, and human Choice. Bloomington IN, CIPEC Collaborative Report Series No. 1, Center for the Study of Institutions, Population, and Environmental Change, Indiana University.
2. Agranoff, R. (2007). Managing within networks: Adding value to public organizations. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
3. Agranoff, R., & McGuire, M. (2003). Collaborative public management: New strategies for local governments. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
4. Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2007). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. 18(4): 543-571.
5. Bankes, S. (2002). Tools and techniques for developing policies for complex and uncertain systems. PNAS. 99(3): 7263-7266.
6. Baumgartner, F. R., & Jones, B. D. (1993). Agendas and instability in American politics. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
7. Cleveland, H. (1972). The Future Executive. New York: Harper & Row.
8. Comfort, L. (2007). Crisis management in hindsight: Cognition, communication, coordination, and control. Public Administration Review, 67(Supplement): 189-197.
9. DeVita, C. (1998). Nonprofits and devolutions: What do we know? In E.T. Borris & C.E. Steurle (Eds.), Nonprofits and governments: Collaboration and conflict. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute: 213-233.
10. Durant, R. F. (2001). A way out of no way? Strategy, structure, and the 'new governance'. In R. T. Golembiewski (Ed.), Handbook of organizational behavior: Second edition. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc.: 689-723.
11. Frederickson, H. G. (1999). The repositioning of American public administration. Political Science and Politics, 32(4): 701.
12. Frederickson, D., & Frederickson, H. G. (2006). Measuring the performance of the hollow state. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
13. Gammack, J., Hobbs, V. & Pigott, D. (2007). The book of informatics. South Melbourne, Australia: Thomson.
14. Government Accountability Office (GAO) (2009). Metropolitan transportation planning organizations: Options exist to enhance transportation planning capacity and federal oversight. GAO-09-868.
15. Goldsmith, S., & Eggers, W. (2004). Governing by network. Washington D.C: Brookings.
16. Goetz, A.R., Dempsey, P.S. & Larson, C. (2002). Metropolitan planning organizations: Findings and recommendations for improving transportation planning. Publius. 32(1): 87-105.
17. Guney, S. & Cresswell, A. M. (2010). IT governance as organizing: Playing the game. Paper presented at the 43rd Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Kona, HI.
18. Heclo, H. (1978). Issue networks and the executive establishment. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.
19. Hirst, P. (1997). From statism to pluralism. London: UCL Press.
20. Imperial, M. T. (2005). Using collaboration as a governance strategy. Administration & Society, 37(3): 281-320.
21. Kettl, D. (2006). Managing boundaries in American administration: The collaborative imperative. Public Administration Review, 66(6): 10-19.
22. Kickert, W. J. M., Klijn, E.-H., & Koppenjan, J. F. M. (Eds.). (1997). Managing complex networks: strategies for the public sector. London: Sage Publications.
23. Kingdon, J. (1984). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. New York: Harper Collins.
24. Koliba, C., Campbell, E. & Zia, A. (Accepted for publication) Performance measurement considerations in congestion management networks: Evidence from four cases. Public Performance Management Review.
25. Koliba, C., & Gajda, R. (2009). Communities of practice as an empirical construct: Implications for theory and practice. International Journal of Public Administration, 32: 97-135.
26. Koliba, C. & Meek, J. (2009). =Mixed-form' governance structures: An analytical turn. Public. Institute of Public Governance and Management. 47(19). http://www.esade.edu/public/modules.php?name=news&idnew=521&idissue=47
27. Koliba, C., Meek, J. & Zia, A. (2010). Governance networks in public administration and public policy. New York: CRC Press/Taylor & Francis.
28. Koliba, C., Mills, R. & Zia, A (In press). Accountability in governance networks: Implications drawn from studies of response and recovery efforts following Hurricane Katrina. Public Administration Review.
29. Koliba, C. & Zia, A. (2011). Theory testing using complex systems modeling in public administration and policy studies: Challenges and opportunities for a meta-theoretical research program. COMPACT Conference. Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
30. Kolmogorov, A. (1968), Three approaches to the quantitative definition of information. International Journal of Computer Mathematics. 2(1-4): 157-168.
31. Koontz, T., Steelman, T., Carmin, J., Korfmarcher, K., Moseley, C., & Thomas., C. (2004). Collaborative environmental management: What roles for government?. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
32. Koppell, J. G. S. (2003). The politics of quasi-government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
33. Lasswell, H. & Lerner, D. (1951). The policy sciences: Recent developments in scope and method. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
34. Lynn, L. E., Heinrich, Carolyn, J., & Hill, Carolyn, J. (2000). Studying governance and public management: Why? How? In C. Heinrich, J. and Lynn, Laurence, E. (Ed.), Governance and performance: New perspectives. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press. 1-33.
35. Manson, S. & Evans, T. (2007). Agent-based modeling of deforestation in southern Yucatan, Mexico, and reforestation in the Midwest United States. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), 104(52): 20678-20683.
36. Mashaw, J. L. (2006). Accountability and institutional design: Some thoughts on the grammar of governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
37. McNabb, D. E. (Ed.). (2007). Knowledge management in the public sector: A blueprint for innovation in government. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
38. Meadows, D. H. (2008). Thinking in systems. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing.
39. Meyer, M. (1999). Demand Management as an element of transportation policy: using Carrots and sticks to influence behavior. Transportation Research Part A 33: 575-599.
40. Milward, H., & Provan, K. (2006). A manager's guide to choosing and using collaborative networks. Washington, DC: IBM Center for the Business of Government.
41. Mitroff, I. I., Betz, F., Pondy, L. R., & Sagasti, F. (1974). On managing science in the systems age: Two schemes for the study of science as a whole systems phenomenon. Interfaces, 4(3): 46-58.
42. Moynihan, D. P. (2008). The dynamics of performance management: Constructing information and reform. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
43. North, M. & Macal, C. (2007) Managing business complexity: Discovering strategic solutions with agent-based modeling and simulation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
44. OECD. (2009).Applications of complexity science for public policy: New tools for finding unanticipated consequences and unrealized opportunities. Global Science Forum. Retrieved: 7/15/10: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/44/41/43891980.pdf
45. Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
46. O'Toole, L. J. (1990). Multiorganizational implementation: Comparative analysis for wastewater treatment. In R. W. Gage & M. P. Mandell (Eds.), Strategies for managing policies and networks. New York: Praeger Publishers.
47. Page, S. (2004). Measuring accountability for results in interagency collaboratives. Public Administration Review, 64(5): 591-606.
48. Parker, D. C., & Manson, S. M. (2003). Multi-agent systems for the simulation of land-use and land cover change: A review. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 93(2): 314-337.
49. Parsons, W. (1999). Public policy: An introduction to the theory and practice of policy analysis. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
50. Pierre, J. (Ed.). (2000). Debating governance: Authority, steering, and democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
51. Pierre, J., & Peters, B. G. (2005). Governing complex societies: Trajectories and scenarios. New York: Palgrove Macmillan.
52. Poister, T.H. (2003). Measuring performance in public and non-profit organizations. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
53. Provan, K. G., & Kenis, P. (2007). Modes of network governance: Structure, management and effective. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18: 229-252.
54. Rhodes, R. (1997). Understanding governance: Policy networks, governance, reflexivity and accountability. Buckingham: Open University Press.
55. Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Planning problems are wicked problems. In N. Cross (Ed.), Developments in design methodology. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons. 135- 144
56. Romzek, B., & Dubnick., M. (1987). Accountability in the public sector: Lessons from the Challenger tragedy. Boulder: Westview Press.
57. Sabatier, P. A. (Ed.). (2007). Theories of the policy process (Second ed.). Boulder: Westview Press.
58. Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins-Smith, H.C. (1993). The advocacy coalition framework: An assessment. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
59. Salamon, L. (Ed.)(2002). The new governance and the tools of public action The tools of government: A guide to the new governance. New York: Oxford University Press: 1-47.
60. Shannon, C.E. & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Chicago: Univ of Illinois Press.
61. Sorensen, E. (2006). Metagovernance: The changing role of politicians in processes of democratic governance. American Review of Public Administration, 36(1): 98-114.
62. Sorensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2005). The democratic anchorage of governance networks. Scandinavian Political Studies, 28(3): 195-218.
63. Sorensen, E., & Torfing, J. (Eds.). (2008). Theories of democratic network governance. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
64. Squazzoni, F. & Boero, R. (2010). Complexity-friendly policy modeling. In Ahrweiler, P. (ed.) Innovation in complex systems. London: Routledge.
65. Stone, M. M., & Ostrower, F. (2007). Acting in the public interest? Another look at research on nonprofit governance. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 36(3): 416-438.
66. Van den Belt, M. (2004). Mediated Modeling: A system dynamics approach to environmental consensus building. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
67. Vogel, R.K. & Nezelkewicz, N. (2002). Metropolitan planning organizations and the new regionalism: The case of Louisville. Publius. 32(1): 107-129.
68. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
69. Wright, D. S. (2000). Models of national, state, and local relationships. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.
70. Zachary, W. (1986). A cognitively based functional taxonomy of decision support techniques. Human-Computer Interaction. 2: 25-63.
71. Zia, A., Metcalf, S., Koliba, C. & Widner, M. (2010). Management of complex governance networks: Opportunities and challenges for agent based models of policy analysis. American Society of Public Administration Annual Conference. San Jose, CA.