The importance of multilevel governance participation in the “great lakes areas of concern”

Making Multilevel Public Management Work: Stories of Success and Failure from Europe and North America

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 159-182

  Greitens, Thomas J ^a   Strachan, J Cherie ^a   Welton, Craig S ^a  

^a CENTRAL MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85061949858     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1201/b14752     Document Type: Chapter

References (20)

1. Beierle, Thomas C., and Jerry Cayford. 2002. Democracy in Practice: Public Participation in Environmental Decisions. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future Press.
2. Beierle, Thomas C., and David M. Konisky. 2001. What are we gaining from stakeholder involvement? Observations from environmental planning in the Great Lakes. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 19 (4): 515-527.
3. Box, Richard C. 1998. Citizen Governance: Leading American Communities into the 21st Century. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
4. Boyte, Harry C. 2011. We the People Politics: The Populist Promise of Deliberative Work. Dayton, OH: The Kettering Foundation.
5. Frederickson, H. George. 1997. The Spirit of Public Administration. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
6. Great Lakes Commission. 2002. An Overview of U.S. Great Lakes Areas of Concern: Summaries of the 31 U.S. and Binational Areas of Concern, Including the Status of Remedial Action Plans, Scheduled Meetings, Progress and Achievements, Beneficial Use Impairments, Research, Publications, Community Involvement, and Partner Agencies and Organizations. Ann Arbor, MI: Great Lakes Commission.
7. Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. 1994. Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, Annex 2 (2a). Windsor: International Joint Commission.
8. International Joint Commission. 2006. 13th Biennial Report on Great Lakes Water Quality. Washington, DC: International Joint Commission.
9. Kettl, Donald F. 1997. The global revolution in public management: Driving themes, miss­ing links. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 16 (3): 446-462.
10. Kovalick Jr., Walter W., and Margaret M. Kelly. 1998. The EPA seeks its voice and role with citizens: Evolutionary engagement. In Government Is Us: Public Administration in an Anti-Government Era, edited by Cheryl S. King and Camilla Stivers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp 122-139.
11. MacKenzie, Susan H. 1996. Integrated Resource Planning and Management: The Ecosystem Approach in the Great Lakes Basin. Washington, DC: Island Press.
12. New York State. Department of Environmental Conservation. 2006. Oswego River Remedial Action Plan State 3-Delisting. Albany, NY: New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Division of Water.
13. O’Flynn, Ian. 2010. Deliberative democracy, the public interest and the consociational model. Political Studies 58 (3): 572-589.
14. Rabe, Barry G. 1999. Sustainability in a regional context: The case of the Great Lakes Basin. In Toward Sustainable Communities: Transition and Transformations in Environmental Policy, edited by Daniel A. Mazmanian and Michael E. Kraft. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp 247-281.
15. Roberts, Nancy C. 2008. The Age of Direct Citizen Participation. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
16. Scott, Graham, Ian Ball, and Tony Dale. 1997. New Zealand’s public sector management reform: Implications for the United States. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 16 (3): 357-381.
17. Sproule-Jones, Mark. 2002. Institutional experiments in the restoration of the North American Great Lakes environment. Canadian Journal of Political Science 35 (4): 835-857.
18. Wang, Xiaohu. 2001. Assessing public participation in U.S. cities. Public Performance & Management Review 24 (4): 322-336.
19. Weber, Max. 1922-1968. Economy and Society. Translated by Guenther Roth and Claus Wittich. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. (Original work published 1922)
20. Yang, Kaifeng, and Kathe Callahan. 2007. Citizen involvement efforts and bureaucratic responsiveness: Participatory values, stakeholder pressures, and administrative practicality. Public Administration Review 67 (2): 249-264.