In this manuscript we conclude the special issue on Water Governance. We look back on the different contributions and discuss different interesting insights from the three contributions focusing on Wisconsin, California and Southern Ecuador. We place these insights into a new perspective on integration, i.e. system synchronization, which the authors consider to be an option for integration in complex governance systems, where nobody is in charge.
Points for practitioners
In this epilogue we have picked the fruits of the contributions to this symposium. We have come to another way of looking at the fragmentation—integration debate in public administration, i.e. system synchronization. By discussing different water cases from Wisconsin, California and Southern Ecuador, we have arrived at three principles of system synchronization: Synchronization means self-organization and variation; Synchronization means thinking and acting between self and the larger whole; Synchronization means operating on and beyond the boundaries of subsystems. These principles are needed to realize system synchronicity in which different subsystems largely hold their identity, but strive for coherence.
Adger WN, Brown K. and Tompkins EL ( 2005) The political economy of cross-scale networks in resource co-management. Ecology and Society10(2): 9. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol10/iss2/art9/
2.
Agranoff R. ( 2006) Inside collaborative networks: The lessons for public managers. Public Administration Review66(Special Issue): 56-65.
3.
Bryson J. and Crosby B. ( 1992) Leadership for the Common Good: Tackling Public Problems in a Shared-power World. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
4.
Cilliers P. ( 1998) Complexity and Postmodernism: Understanding Complex Systems . London: Routledge.
5.
Edelenbos J. ( 2005) Institutional implications of interactive governance: Insights from Dutch practice. Governance18(1): 111-134.
6.
Ferlie E., Lynn Jr LE and Pollitt C. ( 2005) The Oxford Handbook of Public Management. New York: Oxford University Press.
7.
Flood RL ( 1999) Rethinking the Fifth Discipline: Learning within the Unknowable . London: Routledge .
8.
Heylighen F. ( 2002) The Science of Self-organization and Adaptivity . Available at: http://www.eolss.net.
9.
Hooghe L. and Marks G. ( 2003) Unraveling the central state, but how? Types of multi-level governance. American Political Science Review97(2): 233-243.
10.
Hunt J. and Shackley S. ( 1999) Reconceiving science and policy: Academic, fiducial and bureaucratic knowledge. Minerva37: 141-164.
11.
Imperial MT ( 1999) Analyzing institutional arrangements for ecosystem-based management: Lessons from the Rhode Island Salt Ponds SAM Plan. Coastal Management27(31): 31-56.
12.
Jaworski J. ( 1996) Synchronicity: The Inner Path of Leadership. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers .
Kickert WJM, Klijn E-H and Koppenjan JFM (eds) (1997) Managing Complex Networks: Strategies for the Public Sector. London: Sage.
15.
Kingdon JW ( 1995) Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company .
16.
Koppenjan JFM and Klijn E.-H (2004) Managing Uncertainties in Networks. London: Routledge.
17.
Lindblom CE ( 1965) The Intelligence of Democracy: Decision Making through Mutual Adjustment. New York: Free Press.
18.
Marks G. and Hooghe L. ( 2004) Contrasting visions of multi-level governance. In: Bache I and Flinders M (eds) Multi-level Governance: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 15-30.
19.
Olsson P., Folke C., Galaz V., Hahn T. and Schultz L. ( 2007) Enhancing the fit through adaptive co-management: Creating and maintaining bridging functions for matching scales in the Kristianstads Vattenrike Biosphere Reserve, Sweden. Ecology and Society12(1). URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol12/iss1/art28/
20.
Ostrom E. ( 2005) Understanding Institutional Diversity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press .
21.
Peters BG ( 1998) Managing horizontal government: The politics of co-ordination . Public Administration76(2): 295-311.
22.
Reinhard S. and Folmer H. ( 2009) Water Policy in the Netherlands: Integrated Management in a Densely Populated Delta. Washington, DC: RFF Press.
23.
Rhodes RAW ( 1997) Understanding Government. Buckingham : Open University Press.
24.
Sabatier PA ( 1986) Top-down and bottom-up approaches to implementation research: A critical analysis and suggested synthesis. Journal of Public Policy6: 21-48.
25.
Schlager E. and Blomquist W. ( 2000) Local communities, policy prescriptions, and watershed management in Arizona, and Colorado. In: Constituting the Commons: Crafting Sustainable Commons in the New Millennium. Eighth Conference of the International Association for the Study of Common Property, 31 May-4 June, Bloomington, IN.
26.
Sørenson E. and Torfing J. ( 2007) Theories of Democratic Network Governance. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
27.
Stacey RD ( 1995) The science of complexity: An alternative perspective for strategic change processes. Strategic Management Journal16(6): 477-495.
28.
Teisman GR, van Buuren A and Gerrits L (eds) ( 2009) Managing Complex Governance Systems. New York: Routledge.
29.
Thompson JD ( 1967) Organization in Action. Chicago, IL : McGraw-Hill.
30.
Tushman ML and Scanlan TJ ( 1981) Boundary spanning individuals: Their role in information transfer and their antecedents. Academy of Management Journal24(2): 289-305.
31.
Uhl-Bien M., Marion R. and McKelvey B. ( 2007) Complexity leadership theory: Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era. Leadership Quarterly18(4): 298-318.
32.
Van Buuren A. and Edelenbos J. ( 2004) Conflicting knowledge: Why is knowledge production such a problem? Science & Public Policy31(4): 289-299.
33.
Weick KE ( 1995) Sensemaking in Organizations. London : Sage Publications.
34.
Williams P. ( 2002) The competent boundary spanner. Public Administration80(1): 103-124.
35.
Young OR ( 2002) The Institutional Dimensions of Environmental Change. Fit Interplay and Scale. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
