Advertisement

Abstract

How can public-sector activities be coordinated internally and externally if hierarchy, with its dependence on clear boundaries, has weakened? How can public managers be prevented from becoming confused about their roles and intervention capacity? These questions are dealt with under the banner of ‘governance’. Governance has become a buzzword, not only among public-administration scholars, but also among practitioners. The term even risks becoming so general that it becomes meaningless and, as Peters warns, “a tautology: something happened, and therefore governance occurred”.26 Governance “has become a rather fuzzy term that can be applied to almost everything and therefore describes and explains nothing”.27

Keywords

Public Sector Public Administration Network Society Network Governance Adaptive Governance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 26.
    Peters (2000: 35): Globalisation, institutions and governance.Google Scholar
  2. 27.
    Jessop (2002: 4): Governance, governance failure and metagovernance.Google Scholar
  3. 28.
    Kettl (2002: xi): The transformation of governance.Google Scholar
  4. 29.
    Rhodes (1997: 47–53): Understanding governance.Google Scholar
  5. 30.
    Stoker (1998): Governance as theory: five propositions.Google Scholar
  6. 31.
    Farazmand (2004: 6): Sound governance in the age of globalization: a conceptual framework.Google Scholar
  7. 32.
    Kooiman (ed.) (1993): Modern governance.Google Scholar
  8. 33.
    Lowndes and Skelcher (1998: 318): The dynamics of Multi-Organizational Partnerships: an Analysis of Changing Styles of Governance.Google Scholar
  9. 34.
    Frederickson and Smith (2003: 226): The public administration theory primer.Google Scholar
  10. 35.
    Also called ‘New Governance’: Social coordination based on the logic of co-steering and network. See also Lee (2003: 2, Conceptualizing the New Governance: A new institution of social coordination), and Voss (2007: 36) where governance is’ societal self-regulation’, in contrast to hierarchy (ibid., p.18).Google Scholar
  11. 36.
    Schuppert (2007: 8): Was ist und wozu governance?Google Scholar
  12. 37.
    Wolf (2007: 691): Trends in public administration.Google Scholar
  13. 38.
    Mayntz (2004: 66): Governance im modernen Staat. (translated from German by the author).Google Scholar
  14. 39.
    Kooiman (2003: 182): Governing as governance.Google Scholar
  15. 40.
    Meuleman (2003): The Pegasus Principle: reinventing a credible public sector.Google Scholar
  16. 41.
    Van Kersbergen and van Waarden (2004: 143): ‘Governance’ as a bridge between disciplines.Google Scholar
  17. 42.
    Kaufman et al. (1986: Guidance, control and evaluation in the public sector); Thorelli (1986: Networks: Between markets and hierarchies); Peters (1998: Managing Horizontal Government); Lowndes and Skelcher (1998: The dynamics of Multi-Organisational Partnerships); Thompson et al. (1991: Markets, hierarchies and networks); Thompson (2003: Between hierarchies and markets); Powell (1991: Neither market nor hierarchy: network forms of organisation); Kooiman (2003: Governing as governance), Considine and Lewis (2003: Bureaucracy, Network or Enterprise?); Kickert (2003: Beneath consensual corporatism); Schout and Jordan (2005: Coordinated European governance).Google Scholar
  18. 43.
    Thompson (2003: 37) makes a useful distinction between ‘coordination’ (alignment of the elements in a system) and ‘governance’ (the regulation of their alignment). He places them on a continuum: coordination simply brings together elements in an ordered pattern, and governance does this by direction and design. Hierarchies, networks and markets can be used as coordination mechanisms and as governance structures as well.Google Scholar
  19. 44.
    Ruys et al. (2007): Modes of governance in the Dutch social housing sector.Google Scholar
  20. 45.
    E. g. Powell (1991: Neither market nor hierarchy: Network forms of organization), Thompson (2003: Between hierarchies and markets: The Logic and Limits of Network Forms of Organization).Google Scholar
  21. 46.
    Thorelli (1986): Networks: Between markets and hierarchies.Google Scholar
  22. 47.
    Roobeek (2007): The networking landscape. Navigation for the route to networking organisations.Google Scholar
  23. 48.
    E. g. Assens and Baroncelli (2004, Marché, Réseau, Hiérarchie: à la recherche de l’organisation idéale) and Larson (1992, Network dyads in entrepreneurial setting).Google Scholar
  24. 49.
    E. g. Koffijberg (2005: Getijden van beleid: omslagpunten in de volkshuisvesting), Kalders et al. (2004: Overheid in spagaat. Over spanningen tussen verticale en horizontale sturing).Google Scholar
  25. 50.
    E.g. European Commission (2002: 7): Report from the Commission on European Governance. Rhodes is ambivalent too: he defines hierarchy as one of the governance structures besides market and network (Rhodes, 1997: 47, Understanding Governance) and elsewhere in the same book defines governance in a network connotation, as an alternative to markets and hierarchies (Rhodes, 1997: 53).Google Scholar
  26. 51.
    Peters (2005: 1): Forms of informal governance: Searching for efficiency and democracy.Google Scholar
  27. 52.
    In ‘t Veld (2005): Spelen met vuur. Over hybride organisaties.Google Scholar
  28. 53.
    Jörgensen (1999: 570): The public sector in an in-between time: Searching for new public values.Google Scholar
  29. 54.
    Ruys et al. (2007): Modes of governance in the Dutch social housing sector.Google Scholar
  30. 55.
    In ‘t Veld (1997: 148): Noorderlicht. Over scheiding en samenballing.Google Scholar
  31. 56.
    Wettenhall (2003: 237): Exploring types of public sector organizations.Google Scholar
  32. 59.
    Börzel and Risse (2002): Public-Private Partnerships: Effective and legitimate tools of international governance?Google Scholar
  33. 60.
    Teisman and Klijn (2002: 197): Partnership arrangements: Governmental rhetoric or governance scheme?Google Scholar
  34. 61.
    Kort, van Twist and in ‘t Veld (2000: 30): Over ontwerp en management van processen in ketens.Google Scholar
  35. 62.
    Kort, van Twist and in ‘t Veld (2000: 38): Over ontwerp en management van processen in ketens.Google Scholar
  36. 63.
    Laffan and Shaw (2005): New modes of governance. Classifying and mapping OMC in different policy arenas.Google Scholar
  37. 64.
    European Council (2000): Presidency Conclusions of the European Council in Lisbon, 23 an 24 March 2000.Google Scholar
  38. 65.
    Héritier (2002): New modes of governance in Europe: policymaking without legislation?Google Scholar
  39. 66.
    Hodson and Maher (2001: 719): The Open Method as a new mode of governance.Google Scholar
  40. 67.
    Peters (2005: 8): Forms of informal governance: Searching for efficiency and democracy.Google Scholar
  41. 68.
    E.g. Smismans (2006: 18): New modes of governance and the participatory myth.Google Scholar
  42. 69.
    Puppis et al. (2004: 9): Selbstregulierung und organisation. Schlussbericht.Google Scholar
  43. 70.
    Klijn and Koppenjan (2004: 219): Managing uncertainties in networks.Google Scholar
  44. 71.
    Fuchs (2002: 63): Concepts of social self-organization.Google Scholar
  45. 72.
    Mayntz (2003:4): From government to governance: Political steering in modern societies.Google Scholar
  46. 73.
    Brans and Rossbach (1997: 425, 435): The autopoiesis of administrative systems.Google Scholar
  47. 74.
    Kickert (1991): Autopoiesis and the Science of Administration: Essence, Sense and Nonsense.Google Scholar
  48. 75.
    See also: In ‘t Veld et al. (eds.) (1991): Autopoiesis and configuration theory: new approaches to societal steeringGoogle Scholar
  49. 76.
    Demil and Lecocq (2006): Neither market nor hierarchy nor network: The emergence of bazaar governance.Google Scholar
  50. 77.
    Benz (2006: 35): Eigendynamik von Governance in der Verwaltung.Google Scholar
  51. 78.
    Considine (2006: 7): The power of networks: Institutional transformations in the global era?Google Scholar
  52. 79.
    Rhodes (1997: 47–53): Understanding governance.Google Scholar
  53. 80.
    Shell (2005: 42): The Shell Global Scenarios to 2025.Google Scholar
  54. 81.
    Kickert (1997: 744): Public governance in the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  55. 82.
    Considine and Lewis (2003): Bureaucracy, network or enterprise? Comparing models of governance in Australia, Britain, the Netherlands and New Zealand.Google Scholar
  56. 83.
    Weber (1952): The essentials of bureaucratic organization: An ideal-type construction.Google Scholar
  57. 84.
    Van Gunsteren (1976: preface): The quest for control.Google Scholar
  58. 85.
    Parris (1969: 22): Constitutional bureaucracy. The development of British central administration since the eighteenth century.Google Scholar
  59. 86.
    Heywood (1997: 220): Politics.Google Scholar
  60. 87.
    Morgan (1986: 21–22): Images of organization.Google Scholar
  61. 88.
    Heywood (1997:347): Politics.Google Scholar
  62. 89.
    Herbst (1976: 16): Alternatives to hierarchies.Google Scholar
  63. 90.
    Herbst (1976: 16): Alternatives to hierarchies.Google Scholar
  64. 91.
    Mintzberg (1993): Structures in Fives: Designing Effective Organizations.Google Scholar
  65. 92.
    Schutter (2007: 40): Was ist und wozu Governance?Google Scholar
  66. 93.
    Cleveland (1972: 13): The Future Executive: A Guide For Tomorrow’s Managers. Cited in Frederickson (2004: 2).Google Scholar
  67. 94.
    Morgan and Perry (1988): Re-orienting the comparative study of civil service systems. Cited in Bekke et al. (1996: 2).Google Scholar
  68. 95.
    Hanf and Scharpf (1978): Interorganizational policy-making; limits to central coordination and control. Cited by Toonen (1993: 253): Bestuur en beleid.Google Scholar
  69. 96.
    Herbst (1976: 23–28): Alternatives to hierarchy.Google Scholar
  70. 97.
    Kickert and Stillman (2005: 657): The future of European Public Administration Sciences. Part III: Germany.Google Scholar
  71. 98.
    Naschold et al. (1994): Neue Städte braucht das Land. (cited by Pollit and Bouckaert (2003: 238).Google Scholar
  72. 99.
    E.g. Bovaird (2005): Public governance: balancing stakeholder power in a network society. Kickert (1997): Public Governance in the Netherlands: An Alternative to Anglo-American ‘Managerialism’.Google Scholar
  73. 100.
    E.g. Bossert (2003: 14): Public Governance. Leidraad voor goed bestuur en management.Google Scholar
  74. 101.
    Ministry of Finance of the Netherlands (2000: 8): Government Governance. Corporate governance in the public sector, why and how?Google Scholar
  75. 103.
    Van den Berg et al. (2001: 11): Professional Judgement. Handen en Voeten. Vormgeving van public governance in de praktijk van de gemeentelijke overheid.Google Scholar
  76. 104.
    Sol (2003: 2): Government governance and beyond. Reconciling flexibility and accountability in labour market policy in the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  77. 105.
    Van den Berg et al. (2001: 13): Professional Judgement.Google Scholar
  78. 106.
    Bossert (2003: 16): Public Governance. Leidraad voor goed bestuur en management.Google Scholar
  79. 107.
    Ministry of Finance of the Netherlands (2000: 6): Government Governance.Google Scholar
  80. 108.
    Hajer et al (2004: 14): Nieuwe vormen van Governance. Een essay over nieuwe vormen van bestuur.Google Scholar
  81. 109.
    Peters (1998: 301): Managing horizontal government: The politics of coordination.Google Scholar
  82. 110.
    Davies (2002: 301): The governance of urban regeneration: a critique of the ‘governing without government’ thesis.Google Scholar
  83. 112.
    Bovaird and Löffler (2001: 5): Emerging trends in public management and governance.Google Scholar
  84. 113.
    Hernes (2005: 5): Four ideal-type organizational responses to New Public Management reforms and some consequences.Google Scholar
  85. 114.
    Levy (2003): Critical success factors in public management reform: the case of the European Commission.Google Scholar
  86. 115.
    Kickert (2001: 136): Public management of hybrid organizations.Google Scholar
  87. 116.
    Haque (2007: 180): Revisiting the New public Management.Google Scholar
  88. 118.
    Kettl (2002: 21): The transformation of governance.Google Scholar
  89. 119.
    Hood (2003: 269): From public bureaucracy state to re-regulated public service: The paradox of British public sector reform.Google Scholar
  90. 120.
    Osborne and Gaebler (1992): Reinventing government.Google Scholar
  91. 121.
    Kettl (2002: 21): The transformation of governance.Google Scholar
  92. 122.
    Hood (1996: 269): Exploring variations in public management reform of the 1980s.Google Scholar
  93. 123.
    Ingraham (1996: 247): The reform agenda for national civil service systems: external stress and internal strains.Google Scholar
  94. 124.
    Wollman (2003): Public-sector reform in Germany: between continuity and change; Oppen (2002): From ‘New public management’ to ‘New public governance’. Restructuring the public administration of tasks in Germany.Google Scholar
  95. 125.
    Bundesregierung (1999): ‘Moderner Staat — moderne Verwaltung’.Google Scholar
  96. 126.
    Wollmann (2003): Public-sector reform in Germany, between continuity and change — in international perspective.Google Scholar
  97. 127.
  98. 128.
    Osborne and Gaebler (1992: 328): Reinventing government.Google Scholar
  99. 129.
    Hood (1996: 270): Exploring variations in public management reform in the 1980s.Google Scholar
  100. 131.
    Hood (1996: 274, 272): Exploring variations in public management reform in the 1980s.Google Scholar
  101. 132.
    Kickert (2005): Distinctiveness in the Study of Public Management in Europe.Google Scholar
  102. 133.
    Bundesregierung (2005): Entwurf Strukturreformgesetz.Google Scholar
  103. 134.
    Hood (1996: 280): Exploring variations in public management reform in the 1980s.Google Scholar
  104. 135.
    Ingraham (1996: 262–263): The reform agenda for national civil service systems: external stress and internal strains.Google Scholar
  105. 136.
    Naschold et al. (1997): International trend of local government modernisation. An assessment for the mid-1990s.Google Scholar
  106. 137.
    Savoie (2000: 8–9): Governance in the twenty-first century: introducing the topic.Google Scholar
  107. 138.
    Perry (2007): Democracy and the new public service.Google Scholar
  108. 139.
    Ringeling (2001: 34): Rare klanten hoor, die klanten van de overhead.Google Scholar
  109. 140.
    Verhoest et al. (2004: 116, The study of organisational autonomy: A conceptual review) distinguish six dimensions of autonomy in market governance: managerial autonomy, policy autonomy, structural autonomy, financial autonomy, legal autonomy and interventional autonomy.Google Scholar
  110. 141.
    Raadschelders and Rutgers (1996: 92): The evolution of civil service systems.Google Scholar
  111. 142.
    Hanf and Scharpf (1978): Interorganizational policy-making; limits to central coordination and control. Kickert (1980): Organization of decision-making (cited in Kickert (1991)).Google Scholar
  112. 143.
    Castells (1996): The rise of the network society.Google Scholar
  113. 144.
    Dirven et al. (1998: 14–15): Stuur of overstuur: Over bestuurlijke wisselwerkingen tussen overheid en samenleving.Google Scholar
  114. 145.
    E.g. Ringeling (1997: 16–17): Sturing van het milieubeleid.Google Scholar
  115. 146.
    Börzel (1998: 264): Organizing Babylon — on the different conceptions of policy networks.Google Scholar
  116. 147.
    Jessop (2002: 8): Governance, governance failure and metagovernance.Google Scholar
  117. 148.
    Powell (1991: 269): Neither market nor hierarchy: network forms of organization.Google Scholar
  118. 149.
    Kickert (1997: 735): Public governance in the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  119. 150.
    High et al. (2005, Understanding informal institutions) argue that ‘network management’ is contains a contradiction: networks are characterised by personal and informal relationships, which makes them in to a certain extent resistant to ‘management’.Google Scholar
  120. 151.
    Eggers and Goldsmith (2004): Government by network. The new public management imperative.Google Scholar
  121. 153.
    Hesse (2003: 199): Stability Turned Rigidity. Paradoxes in German Public Sector Development.Google Scholar
  122. 154.
    Mayer et al. (2005: 197): Interactive policy development: Undermining or sustaining democracy?Google Scholar
  123. 155.
    E.g. Héritier (2002): New modes of governance in Europe: Policy making without legislating?Google Scholar
  124. 156.
    Meuleman (2003: 19): The Pegasus Principle.Google Scholar
  125. 157.
    Meyer (2003), cited in W. Meyer and Baltes (2004: 37): Network failures — How realistic is durable cooperation in global governance?Google Scholar
  126. 158.
    Adler (2001: 215): Market, hierarchy, and trust: The knowledge economy and the future of capitalism.Google Scholar
  127. 159.
    Thorelli (1986: 38): Networks: between markets and hierarchies.Google Scholar
  128. 160.
    Based on Klijn and Koppenjan (2000: 142): Public management and policy networks. Foundations of a network approach to governance.Google Scholar
  129. 161.
    Considine (2002: 7): Joined at the lip? What does network research tell us about governance?Google Scholar
  130. 163.
    Achrol and Kotler (1999: 146–147): Marketing in the network economy.Google Scholar
  131. 164.
    Derix (2000): The Vision Web. Op reis naar’ s werelds spannendste ondernemingsvorm.Google Scholar
  132. 165.
    Meyer and Baltes (2004: 42): Network failures — How realistic is durable cooperation in global governance?Google Scholar
  133. 166.
    Sørensen (2006): Meta-governance: The changing roles of politicians in processes of democratic governance.Google Scholar
  134. 167.
    Bogason and Musso (2006: 3): The democratic prospects of network governance.Google Scholar
  135. 168.
    Klijn and Koppenjan (2000: 376–377): Politicians and interactive decision making: Spoilsports or playmakers.Google Scholar
  136. 169.
    Barabási (2003): Linked. How everything is connected to everything else and what it means for business, science and everyday life.Google Scholar
  137. 170.
    Thompson (2004: 413): Is all the world a complex network?Google Scholar
  138. 171.
    Von Blumenthal (2005: 1165): Governance — eine kritische Zwissenbilanz.Google Scholar
  139. 172.
    Evans (2007): Methodological problems in evaluating democratic participation in local politics.Google Scholar
  140. 173.
    E.g. Lovan et al. (eds.)(2004): Participatory governance: Planning, conflict mediation and public decision-making in civil society. Laws et al. (2001, Public Entrepreneurship Networks) argue that policy development “increasingly occurs in an intermediate arena that is neither governmental nor private”.Google Scholar
  141. 174.
    See for example Pröpper and Steenbreek (1998): Interactieve beleidsvoering. Typering, ervaringen en dilemma’s.Google Scholar
  142. 175.
    Van der Arend (2007): Pleitbezorgers, procesmanagers en participanten.Google Scholar
  143. 176.
    Meuleman (2003): The Pegasus Principle.Google Scholar
  144. 177.
    Shearing (2001): A nodal conception of governance.Google Scholar
  145. 178.
    Froestad and Shearing (2004): Contested authorities, mobilizing local knowledge and capacity for nodal governance participation.Google Scholar
  146. 179.
    Bang (2004): Culture governance: Governing self-reflexive modernity.Google Scholar
  147. 180.
    Schedler (2006: 121): Networked policing: Towards a public marketing approach to urban safety.Google Scholar
  148. 181.
    Hajer et al. (2003): Deliberative policy analysis: understanding governance in the network society.Google Scholar
  149. 182.
    Beck (1994): The reinvention of politics: towards a theory of reflexive modernisation.Google Scholar
  150. 183.
    E.g. Voss et al. (eds) (2006): Reflexive governance for sustainable development.Google Scholar
  151. 184.
    Description retrieved on 9 September 2007 from http://www.ias.unu.edu/sub_page.aspx?catID=155&ddlID=299 (The adaptive governance project, UNU-IAS). See also Nooteboom (2006): Adaptive governance for sustainable development.Google Scholar
  152. 185.
    Sendzimir et al.(2006): Adaptive management to restore ecological and economic resilience in the Tisza river basin.Google Scholar
  153. 186.
    Bouckaert (2004: 27): Die Dynamik von Verwaltungsreformen.Google Scholar
  154. 187.
    Sol (2000): Government governance and beyond. Reconciling flexibility and accountability in labour market policy in the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  155. 188.
    Hesse (2003: 199): Stability Turned Rigidity. Paradoxes in German Public Sector Development.Google Scholar
  156. 189.
    European Commission (2001: 18): European Governance. A white Paper.Google Scholar
  157. 190.
    In ′t Veld (2003: 52): Governance: A new concept leading to policy innovation?Google Scholar
  158. 191.
    Emery, Wyser and Sanchez (2006): Working in a post bureaucratic context: civil servants’ perceptions of the main challenges involved and their coping strategies.Google Scholar
  159. 192.
    König (2003: 450): On the typology of public administration.Google Scholar
  160. 193.
    Heckscher (1994): Defining the post-bureaucratic type.Google Scholar
  161. 194.
    Castells (1996): The rise of the network society.Google Scholar
  162. 195.
    Peters (1981: 82): The problem of bureaucratic government.Google Scholar
  163. 196.
    Frissen (1999): De lege staat.Google Scholar
  164. 197.
    Bogason and Toonen (1998: 224): Introduction: Networks in Public Administration.Google Scholar
  165. 198.
    Klijn and Koppenjan (2000a: 154): Public management and policy networks.Google Scholar
  166. 199.
    Kettl (2002: 26–49): The transformation of governance.Google Scholar
  167. 201.
    Kettl (2002: 74): The transformation of governance.Google Scholar
  168. 202.
    Hajer and Wagenaar (2003): Deliberative policy analysis: understanding governance in the network society.Google Scholar
  169. 203.
    Kickert et al. (1997: 2): Public Management and Administrative Reform in Western Europe.Google Scholar
  170. 204.
    Kickert (1997: 737): Public Governance in the Netherlands: An Alternative to Anglo-American ‘Managerialism’.Google Scholar
  171. 205.
    Kickert (2003: 127): Beneath consensual corporatism: Traditions of governance in the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  172. 206.
    Bouckaert (2004: 22): Die Dynamik von Verwaltungsreformen.Google Scholar
  173. 207.
    Bouckaert (2003): La réforme de la gestion publique change-t-elle les systèmes administratifs?Google Scholar
  174. 208.
    Hill and Lynn (2005): Is Hierarchical governance in decline? Evidence from empirical research.Google Scholar
  175. 209.
    Parker and Bradley (2004: 197): Bureaucracy or post-bureaucracy? Public sector organizations in a changing context.Google Scholar
  176. 210.
    Schofield (2001: 91): The old ways are the best?Google Scholar
  177. 211.
    Schuppert (2007: 8): Was ist und wozu Governance?Google Scholar
  178. 212.
    Hill and Lynn (2005): Is Hierarchical governance in decline? Evidence from empirical research. The authors synthesized 70 journals and 800 articles on governance and public management over a 12 year period.Google Scholar
  179. 213.
    Lodge and Wegrich (2005: 221): Control over government: Institutional isomorphism and governance dynamics in German public administration.Google Scholar
  180. 214.
    Ringeling (2007: 22): Tussen distantie en betrokkenheid.Google Scholar
  181. 215.
    Lipsky (1980): Street-level bureaucracy.Google Scholar
  182. 216.
    Taylor and Kelly (2006: 639): Professionals, discretion and public sector reform in the UK: re-visiting Lipsky.Google Scholar
  183. 217.
    Hey (2007): Deregulierung und Entbürokratisierung.Google Scholar
  184. 218.
    Lascoumes and Le Gales (2007: 1): Introduction: Understanding public policy through its instruments.Google Scholar
  185. 219.
    König (2003: 459): On the typology of public administration.Google Scholar
  186. 220.
    Kiel (2005): Embedding chaotic logic into public administration thought: Requisites for the new paradigm.Google Scholar
  187. 221.
    Frederickson (2004:12): Whatever happened to public administration? Governance, governance everywhere.Google Scholar
  188. 222.
    E.g. Nelissen (2002, The administrative capacity of new types of governance) questions the claim that the new modes of governance are a panacea.Google Scholar
  189. 224.
    Olsen (2006: 17–18): Maybe it is time to rediscover bureaucracy.Google Scholar
  190. 225.
    Castells (1996): The rise of the network society.Google Scholar
  191. 226.
    Olsen (2006: 13): Maybe it is time to rediscover bureaucracy.Google Scholar
  192. 228.
    Podolny and Page (1998: 74): Network forms of organization.Google Scholar
  193. 229.
    Beetham (1991: 135): Models of bureaucracy.Google Scholar
  194. 230.
    Thompson (2004: 413): Is all the world a complex network?Google Scholar
  195. 231.
    Thompson et al. (1990: xiii): Cultural Theory.Google Scholar
  196. 232.
    Dixon and Dogan (2002: 184–185): Hierarchies, networks and markets: responses to societal governance failure. Bevir and Rhodes (2001: 1): A decentred theory of governance: Rational choice, institutionalism, and interpretation. Haque (2007: 180): Revisiting the New Public Management.Google Scholar
  197. 233.
    Jessop (2003): Governance and metagovernance: On reflexivity, requisite variety, and requisite irony.Google Scholar
  198. 234.
    Hartley (2004): Paradigms, prizes and paradoxes in governance and public management.Google Scholar
  199. 235.
    Considine and Lewis (1999: 468): Governance at ground level: the frontline bureaucrat in the age of markets and networks.Google Scholar
  200. 236.
    Streeck and Schmitter (1985: 122): Community, market, state — and associations?Google Scholar
  201. 237.
    Streeck and Schmitter (1985: 122): Community, market, state — and associations?Google Scholar
  202. 238.
    Morgan (1986/1997): Images of organisation. Jessop (2003): Governance and metagovernance: On reflexivity, requisite variety, and requisite irony.Google Scholar
  203. 239.
    Mintzberg et al. (1998): Strategy safari. A guided tour through the wilderness of strategic management. Knill and Lenschow (2005: 583): Compliance, competition and communication: Different approaches of European governance and their impact on national institutions.Google Scholar
  204. 240.
    Dixon and Dogan (2002: 184–186): Hierarchies, networks and markets: responses to societal governance failure.Google Scholar
  205. 241.
    e.g. Jessop (2003): Governance and metagovernance: On reflexivity, requisite variety, and requisite irony. Streeck and Schmitter (1985: 122): Community, market, state — and associations?Google Scholar
  206. 242.
    Assens and Baroncelli (2004: 7): Marché, Réseau, Hiérarchie: à la recherche de l’organisation idéale.Google Scholar
  207. 243.
    Arentsen 2001: 501): Negotiated environmental governance in the Netherlands: Logic and illustration.Google Scholar
  208. 244.
    Davis and Rhodes (2000:18): From hierarchy to contracts and back again: Reforming the Australian public service.Google Scholar
  209. 245.
    Thompson (2003: 48): Between hierarchies and markets.Google Scholar
  210. 246.
    Susskind (1999: 6–18): An alternative to Robert’s Rules of order for groups, organisations and ad hoc assemblies that want to operate by consensus.Google Scholar
  211. 247.
    Powell (1991: 269): Neither market nor hierarchy: network forms of organisation.Google Scholar
  212. 248.
    Powell (1991: 269): Neither market nor hierarchy: network forms of organisation.Google Scholar
  213. 249.
    Rijnja and Meuleman (2004: 35): Maken we beleid begrijpelijk of maken we begrijpelijk beleid?Google Scholar
  214. 250.
    In’ t Veld (2000): Willingly and knowingly. The roles of knowledge about nature and the environment in policy processes. Adler (2001: 215): Market, hierarchy, and trust: the knowledge economy and the future of capitalism.Google Scholar
  215. 251.
    Assens and Baroncelli (2004: 7): Marché, Réseau, Hiérarchie: à la recherche de l’organisation idéale.Google Scholar
  216. 252.
    Hartley (2004): Paradigms, prizes and paradoxes in governance and public management.Google Scholar
  217. 253.
    Hersey and Blanchard (1982): Management of organizational behaviors: Utilizing human resources.Google Scholar
  218. 254.
    Peters (2004: 2): The search for coordination and coherence in public policy.Google Scholar
  219. 255.
    Kickert (2003: 127): Beneath consensual corporatism: Traditions of governance in the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  220. 256.
    Hartley (2004): Paradigms, prizes and paradoxes in governance and public management.Google Scholar
  221. 257.
    Laske (2006: 32): Measuring hidden dimensions. The art and science of fully engaging adults.Google Scholar
  222. 258.
    Simon (1997: 13): Administrative behaviour. Termeer (1999: 92): Van sturing naar configuratiemanagement.Google Scholar
  223. 259.
    EEAC (2003): European governance for the environment.Google Scholar
  224. 260.
    Jessop (2003): Governance and metagovernance: On reflexivity, requisite variety, and requisite irony.Google Scholar
  225. 261.
    De Bruijn and Ten Heuvelhof (1995: Netwerkmanagement); Hood (2003: Exploring variations in public management reform of the 1980s).Google Scholar
  226. 262.
    Cohen et al. (1972: 2): A garbage can model of organizational choice.Google Scholar
  227. 263.
    Rhodes (2000: 345): The Governance Narrative: Key Findings and Lessons from the ESRC’S Whitehall Programme.Google Scholar
  228. 264.
    Meyer and Baltes (2004: 46): Network failures.Google Scholar
  229. 265.
    Kickert (2003: 127): Beneath consensual corporatism: Traditions of governance in the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  230. 266.
    Eberlein and Kerwer (2004: 121): New Governance in the European Union: A theoretical perspective. Héritier (2002): New Modes of Governance in Europe.Google Scholar
  231. 268.
    Bevir et al. (2003: 206): Comparative Governance: Prospects and Lessons.Google Scholar
  232. 269.
    Meuleman (2003: 39–41; 203): The Pegasus principle.Google Scholar
  233. 270.
    Bauer (2002: 778–779): The EU ‚Partnership Principle’: Still a Sustainable Governance Device Across Multiple Administrative Arenas?Google Scholar
  234. 271.
    Klijn and Koppenjan (2000: 155): Public management and policy network.Google Scholar
  235. 272.
    Kalders et al. (2004: 339–343): Overheid in spagaat. Over spanningen tussen vrticale en horizontale sturing.Google Scholar
  236. 273.
    Kalders et al. consider voluntary agreements a network governance instrument, but it seems to be more related to market governance: such agreements are forms of performance contracts.Google Scholar
  237. 274.
    Kickert, 2003: 126): Beneath consensual corporatism: Traditions of governance in the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  238. 275.
    Edelenbos and Teisman (2004): Interactief beleid en besluitvorming.Google Scholar
  239. 276.
    Levy (2003: 553): Critical success factors in public management reform: the case of the European Commission.Google Scholar
  240. 277.
    Sørensen and Torfing (2005): Democratic anchorage of governance networks.Google Scholar
  241. 278.
    Machado and Burns (1998): Complex Social Organization: Multiple Organizing Modes, Structural Incongruence, and Mechanisms of Integration.Google Scholar
  242. 279.
    Kickert (2005: 23): Lessen uit het verleden. Onderzoek naar veranderoperaties bij de overheid.Google Scholar
  243. 280.
    Considine (2002): The end of the line? Accountable governance in the age of networks, partnerships and joined-up services.Google Scholar
  244. 281.
    Davis and Rhodes (2000: 25): From hierarchy to contracts and back again: Reforming the Australian public service.Google Scholar
  245. 282.
    Steurer (2004: 1): Strategic public management as holistic approach to policy integration.Google Scholar
  246. 283.
    Bradach and Eccles (1989: 97): Price, authority, and trust: From ideal types to plural forms.Google Scholar
  247. 284.
    Lowndes and Skelcher (1998: 320): The dynamics of Multi-Organizational Partnerships: an Analysis of Changing Modes of Governance.Google Scholar
  248. 285.
    EEAC (2003: 26): European governance for the environment.Google Scholar
  249. 286.
    Koffijberg (2005: 363): Getijden van beleid: omslagpunten in de volkshuisvesting.Google Scholar
  250. 287.
    Thacher (2004: 123): Interorganisational partnerships as inchoate hierarchies.Google Scholar
  251. 288.
    Hesse et al. (2003: 14): Paradoxes in Public Sector Reform. An International Comparison.Google Scholar
  252. 289.
    Davis and Rhodes (2000: 21): From hierarchy to contracts and back again: Reforming the Australian public service.Google Scholar
  253. 290.
    Poppo and Zenger (2002): Do formal contracts and relational governance function as substitutes or complements?Google Scholar
  254. 291.
    Toonen (2003: 234): Substance came with little hype. Public sector reform in the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  255. 292.
    Kickert (2003: 127): Beneath consensual corporatism: Traditions of governance in the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  256. 293.
    Meuleman (2003: 202–203): The Pegasus Principle.Google Scholar
  257. 294.
    Geva-May (2002: 388): From theory to practice. Policy analysis, cultural bias and organizational arrangements.Google Scholar
  258. 295.
    Thompson et al. (1990: 1, 5): Cultural Theory.Google Scholar
  259. 296.
    Networks, communities, clans or egalitarism are terms used for the ‘third’ form of coordination, besides hierarchies and markets (Entwistle et al., 2007: 65. The dysfunction of markets, hierarchies and networks in the metagovernance of partnerships).Google Scholar
  260. 297.
    Thompson et al. (1990: 50, 257): Cultural Theory.Google Scholar
  261. 298.
    Thompson et al. (1990: 256): Cultural Theory.Google Scholar
  262. 299.
    Wildavsky (1987): Choosing preferences by constructing institutions: a cultural theory of preference formation.Google Scholar
  263. 300.
    Tenbensel (2005: 278): Multiple modes of governance.Google Scholar
  264. 301.
    Walter (ed.) (1999): The mourning for Diana.Google Scholar
  265. 302.
    Thompson et al. (1990: 7): Cultural Theory.Google Scholar
  266. 303.
    Wildavsky (1987): Choosing preferences by constructing institutions: a cultural theory of preference formation.Google Scholar
  267. 304.
    Bevir and Rhodes (2001: 25): A decentered theory of governance: Rational choice, institutionalism, and interpretation.Google Scholar
  268. 305.
    Jachtenfuchs (1994): Theoretical reflections on the efficiency and democracy of European governance structures.Google Scholar
  269. 306.
    Dixon and Dogan (2002: 191): Hierarchies, networks and markets: Responses to societal governance failure.Google Scholar
  270. 307.
    E.g. Pollit and Bouckaert (2000: 52–54): Public management reform. A comparative analysis.Google Scholar
  271. 308.
    Morgan (1996: 230–232): Analysing fields of change: Civil service systems in developing countries.Google Scholar
  272. 309.
    Hofstede (2001): Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, Behaviours, Institutions and Organisations across Nations.Google Scholar
  273. 310.
    Thompson et al. (1990: 248): Cultural Theory.Google Scholar
  274. 311.
    McSweeny (2002): Hofstede’s model of national cultural differences and their consequences: A triumph of faith — a failure of analysis.Google Scholar
  275. 312.
    Tidwell (2001): Trinidad and Tobago: Customs and Issues Affecting International Business.Google Scholar
  276. 313.
    Pollit and Bouckaert (2000: 23): Public management reform. A comparative analysis.Google Scholar
  277. 314.
    Hofstede and Hofstede (2005): Cultures and organizations. Software of the mind.Google Scholar
  278. 315.
    E.g. Jann et al. (2004: 15): Status-Report Verwaltungsreform. Eine Zwischenbilanz nach zehn Jahren.Google Scholar
  279. 316.
    Hedetoft (2003: 43): Cultures of states and informal governance in the EU: an exploratory study of elites, power and identity.Google Scholar
  280. 317.
    Hooghe (1999: 417): Consociationalists or Weberians? Top Commission officials on nationality.Google Scholar
  281. 318.
    Dimitriakopoulos and Page (2003: 317): Paradoxes in EU Administration.Google Scholar
  282. 319.
    Frederickson and Smith (2003: 162): The administration theory primer.Google Scholar
  283. 320.
    Simon (1997: 4): Administrative Behaviour (Fourth Edition).Google Scholar
  284. 321.
    Frederickson and Smith (2003: 185): The administration theory primer.Google Scholar
  285. 322.
    Hofstede (2001): Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, Behaviours, Institutions and Organisations across Nations.Google Scholar
  286. 323.
    Fairtlough (2005): Triarchy Theory (www.triarchypress.com).Google Scholar
  287. 324.
    E.g. Thompson et al. (2001): Markets, hierarchies and networks: The coordination of social life. Davis and Rhodes (2005): From hierarchy to contracts and back again: Reforming the Australian public service.Google Scholar
  288. 325.
    Jessop (2004: 228): The political economy of scale and European governance.Google Scholar
  289. 326.
    Davis and Rhodes (2005: 25, From hierarchy to contracts and back again: Reforming the Australian public service). The same formulation appears in Fleming and Rhodes (2005: 203): Bureaucracy, contracts and networks: The unholy trinity and the police.Google Scholar
  290. 327.
    Quote attributed to Abraham Maslov (1907–1970). Citation retrieved from http://www.brainyquote.com on 28 August 2007.Google Scholar
  291. 328.
    Bradach and Eccles (1991: 288): Price, authority and trust.Google Scholar
  292. 302.
    Eberlein and Kerwer (2004: 136): New Governance in the European Union: A theoretical perspective.Google Scholar
  293. 331.
    Arentsen (2001: 512, Negotiated environmental governance in the Netherlands: Logic and illustration) therefore calls it ‘negotiated governance’.Google Scholar
  294. 332.
    Jessop (1997: 7): Capitalism and its future: remarks on regulation, government and governance.Google Scholar
  295. 333.
    Jessop (2003): Governance and metagovernance: On reflexivity, requisite variety, and requisite irony.Google Scholar
  296. 334.
    Jessop (2004: 228): The political economy of scale and European governance.Google Scholar
  297. 335.
    Rhodes (1997: 47): Understanding governance.Google Scholar
  298. 336.
    This definition combines definitions by Kooiman (2003: Governing as governance), Jessop (2003: Governance and metagovernance) and Sørensen (2004: Democratic governance and the role of public administrators).Google Scholar
  299. 337.
    Wolf (2003: 1): Some normative considerations on the potential ans limits of voluntary self-regulation.Google Scholar
  300. 338.
    Risse (2007: 6–8): Regieren in Räumen begrenzter Staatlichkeit. Zur „Reisefähigkeit“ des Governance-Konzeptes.Google Scholar
  301. 339.
    See Torfing et al. (2003: Nine competing definitions of governance, governance and networks and meta-governance) for a short overview.Google Scholar
  302. 340.
    Sørensen (2006: 100): Metagovernance: The changing roles of politicians in processes of democratic governance. Sørensen and Torfing (2007: 169: Theoretical approaches to metagovernance.Google Scholar
  303. 341.
    Jessop (2004: 49): Multi-level governance and multi-level metagovernance.Google Scholar
  304. 342.
    Kickert et al. (eds.) (1997): Managing complex networks: strategies for the public sector; Klijn and Edelenbos (2007: 199): Meta-governance as network management.Google Scholar
  305. 343.
    Hovik and Vabo (2005: 262): Norwegian local councils as democratic metagovernors?Google Scholar
  306. 344.
    Westh Nielsen (2007): Metagovernance in the Global Compact — Regulation of a global governance network.Google Scholar
  307. 345.
    Hovik (2005: 15): Local network governance for sustainable development in Norway.Google Scholar
  308. 346.
    Van der Heijden (ed.) (2005: 51): Recombinatie van overheid en samenleving. Denken over innovatieve beleidsvorming.Google Scholar
  309. 348.
    Bell and Park (2006: 63): The problematic metagovernance of networks: Water reform in New South Wales.Google Scholar
  310. 349.
    Sørensen (2006): Metagovernance: The changing roles of politicians in processes of democratic governance.Google Scholar
  311. 350.
    Jayasuriya (2003: 6): Workfare for the global poor’: Anti politics and the New Governance.Google Scholar
  312. 351.
    Whitehead (2003: 8): ‘In the shadow of hierarchy’: metagovernance, policy reform and urban generation in the West Midlands.Google Scholar
  313. 352.
    Bell and Park (2006: 66): The problematic metagovernance of networks: Water reform in New South Wales.Google Scholar
  314. 353.
    Bell and Park (2006: 64).Google Scholar
  315. 354.
    Kelly (2006: 619): Central regulation of English local authorities: An example of metagovernance?Google Scholar
  316. 355.
    Damgaard (2006): Lessons on meta-governance from a longitudinal policy network study.Google Scholar
  317. 356.
    Skelcher et al. (2006): Governance networks, democratic anchorage, and the impact of national political context.Google Scholar
  318. 357.
    Bell and Park (2006: 67): The problematic metagovernance of networks: Water reform in New South Wales.Google Scholar
  319. 358.
    Capabilities are central: capacities and competences derive from capabilities. (Laske, 2006): Measuring hidden dimensions.Google Scholar
  320. 359.
    Farazmand (ed.) (2004): Sound governance. Policy and administrative innovations.Google Scholar
  321. 360.
    Sørensen (2004: 107–108): Democratic governance and the role of public administrators.Google Scholar
  322. 361.
    Sørensen (2006: 112): Metagovernance: The changing roles of politicians in processes of democratic governance.Google Scholar
  323. 362.
    Kickert (1997: 738): Public Governance in the Netherlands: An Alternative to Anglo-American ‘Managerialism’.Google Scholar
  324. 363.
    E.g. Meuleman (2003): The Pegasus Principle.Google Scholar
  325. 364.
    Keeling (1972): Management in government. Cited by Pollit and Bouckaert (2000: 19).Google Scholar
  326. 365.
    Pollit and Bouckaert (2000: 9): Public Management Reform. A Comparative Analysis.Google Scholar
  327. 366.
    Pollit and Bouckaert (2000: 16): Public Management Reform. A Comparative Analysis.Google Scholar
  328. 367.
    Noordegraaf (2004: 94): Management in het publieke domein. (Translated from Dutch by the author).Google Scholar
  329. 368.
    Noordegraaf (2004: 95–96): Management in het publieke domein.Google Scholar
  330. 369.
    Bevir and Rhodes (2001: 32–34): A decentred theory of governance.Google Scholar
  331. 370.
    Rhodes (2007: 1257): Understanding Governance — Ten years on.Google Scholar
  332. 371.
    Koffijberg (2005: 365): Getijden van beleid: omslagpunten in de volkshuisvesting.Google Scholar
  333. 372.
    Lowndes and Skelcher (1998: 318): The dynamics of Multi-Organizational Partnerships: an Analysis of Changing Modes of Governance.Google Scholar
  334. 373.
    Bevir and Rhodes (2003: 59): Searching for civil society: Changing patterns of governance in Britain.Google Scholar
  335. 374.
    Van Kersbergen and van Waarden (2004: 166): ‘Governance’ as a bridge between disciplines.Google Scholar
  336. 375.
    Bevir and Rhodes (2001: 32–34): A decentered theory of governance.Google Scholar
  337. 376.
    Rhodes (2007: 1257): Understanding Governance — Ten years on.Google Scholar
  338. 377.
    Rhodes (1997: 47): Understanding governance.Google Scholar
  339. 378.
    Rhodes (1997): From marketisation to diplomacy: it’s the mix that matters.Google Scholar
  340. 379.
    VROM-Raad (1998: 52): De sturing van een duurzame samenleving.Google Scholar
  341. 380.
    Lowndes and Skelcher (1998: 313): The dynamics of Multi-Organizational Partnerships: an Analysis of Changing Modes of Governance.Google Scholar
  342. 381.
    Assens and Baroncelli (2004): Marché — Réseau — Hiérarchie. Une réflexion sur les idéaux types organisationels.Google Scholar
  343. 382.
    Exworhty et al. (1999: 20): The NHS: quasi-market, quasi-hierarchy and quasi-network?Google Scholar
  344. 383.
    Exworthy et al. (1999: 20): The NHS: Quasi-market, quasi-hierarchy and quasi-network?Google Scholar
  345. 384.
    Linker (2006): Sturing in de rijksdienst: nieuwe en bestaande inzichten verenigd in hét besturingsmodel.Google Scholar
  346. 385.
    In ‘t Veld (Personal communication, February 2006).Google Scholar
  347. 386.
    In ‘t Veld (1996: 42): Rapportage onderzoek Besturingsconcepten VROM.Google Scholar
  348. 387.
    Hey et al. (2007): REACH als Beispiel für hybride Formen von Steuerung und Governance.Google Scholar
  349. 388.
    Peters (2006: 14): The meta-governance of policy networks: Steering at a distance, but still steering.Google Scholar
  350. 389.
    Bevir and Rhodes (2001): A decentered theory of governance: Rational choice, institutionalism, and interpretation.Google Scholar
  351. 390.
    Jessop (1998: 44): The rise of governance and the risk of failure.Google Scholar
  352. 391.
    Svensson and Trommel (2004: 10): Avoiding a messy mix. Hybrid governance in labour reintegration.Google Scholar
  353. 392.
    Considine and Lewis (1999: 475): Governance at ground level: The frontline bureaucrat in the age of markets and networks.Google Scholar
  354. 393.
    Hey (2003: 140): Environmental governance and the Commission White paper: the wider background of the debate.Google Scholar
  355. 394.
    Obstfeld et al. (2004): The trilemma in history: Trade-offs among exchange rates, monetary policies, and capital mobility.Google Scholar
  356. 395.
    Jessop (2005): The governance of complexity and the complexity of governance, revisited.Google Scholar
  357. 396.
    Slaughter (2004): A new world order.Google Scholar
  358. 397.
    Folke et al. (2005): Adaptive governance of social-ecological systems.Google Scholar
  359. 398.
    Lundqvist (2004): Integrating Swedish water resource management: a multilevel governance trilemma.Google Scholar
  360. 399.
    Shell (2005): The Shell Global Scenarios to 2025.Google Scholar
  361. 400.
    Shell (2005: 41): The Shell Global Scenarios to 2025.Google Scholar
  362. 401.
    Shell (2005: 44): The Shell Global Scenarios to 2025.Google Scholar
  363. 402.
    Term coined by Mintzberg (1985): Strategy formation in an adhocracy.Google Scholar
  364. 403.
    In ‘t Veld (personal communication).Google Scholar
  365. 405.
    De Bruijn et al. (2002, Process management. Why project management fails in complex decision making processes) present 15 design principles for good process management.Google Scholar
  366. 408.
    Bouckaert and van Dooren (2003): Progress and regress in performance measurement systems.Google Scholar
  367. 409.
    Jackson (1988: 11): The management of performance in the public sector. Boyle (1996: 3): Measuring civil service performance.Google Scholar
  368. 410.
    Jackson (1988: 11). The management of performance in the public sector.Google Scholar
  369. 411.
    Vigoda and Yuval (2003): Managerial quality, administrative performance, and trust in governance revisited. A follow-up study of causality.Google Scholar
  370. 412.
    Bouckaert (1995): Improving performance measurement.Google Scholar
  371. 413.
    Uusikylä and Valovirta (2004: 1): Three spheres of performance governance. Spanning the boundaries from single-organization focus towards a partnership network.Google Scholar
  372. 414.
    Uusikylä and Valovirta (2004: 18): Three spheres of performance governance.Google Scholar
  373. 415.
    Jackson (2001: 5): Public sector added value: Can bureaucracy deliver?Google Scholar
  374. 416.
    E.g. Farquhar (2003): Network governance and performance measurement in Healthcare; Imperial (2004): Collaboration and performance management in network settings: lessons from three watershed Governance Efforts.Google Scholar
  375. 417.
    Dunshire et al. (1991): Organizational status and performance: Summary of the findings.Google Scholar
  376. 418.
    Skelcher and Mathur (2004: 23–24): Governance arrangements and public sector performance: Reviewing and reformulating the research agenda.Google Scholar
  377. 419.
    Hey et al. (2006: 27): Better regulation by new governance hybrids? Governance styles and the reform of European chemicals policy.Google Scholar
  378. 420.
    Sørensen (2006: 104): Metagovernance. The changing role of politicians in processes of democratic governance.Google Scholar
  379. 421.
    Jessop (2002): The network society, new forms of governance, and democratic renewal.Google Scholar
  380. 422.
    Weick and Sutcliffe (2001: 4): Managing the unexpected.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Physica-Verlag Heidelberg 2008

Personalised recommendations