New Paths for Public Governance: Literature Review,Content Analysis,and Proposed Conceptual Framework for an Integrative View

Abstract

This article qualitatively investigates the new attributes necessary for leveling interagency relations in the public arena. Our approach focuses on political effectiveness, based on new roles for the State, for society, and for the market. As a result, institutional leadership gains centrality in the new context, moving from the procedural view to an approach of simultaneous and interdependent systems. The research aims to contribute to advancing of debates in the area by offering an analytical model that subsidizes the implementation of governance mechanisms aligned with contemporary public management.

Keywords

public governance collaboration Institutional leadership social participation governance subsystems

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ansell

Gash

(2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 543–571.

Bandeira

Ferraro

(2017). Integrating participatory institutions into the traditional representative and bureaucratic model of public governance. International Political Science Review, 38(5), 642–658. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512116641815

Bao

Wang

Larsen

G. L.

Morgan

D. F.

(2013). Beyond new public governance: A value-based global framework for performance management, governance, and leadership. Administration and Society, 45(4), 443–467. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399712464952

Barabashev

A. G.

(2016). Are existing administrative paradigms capable of producing the tools to resolve the contemporary administrative crisis? Public Administration Issues, 5, 6–25. https://doi.org/10.17323/1999-5431-2016-0-5-6-25

Barabashev

A. G.

Klimenko

A. V.

(2017). Russian governance changes and performance. Chinese Political Science Review, 2(1), 22–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41111-017-0057-z

Benish

Mattei

(2020). Accountability and hybridity in welfare governance. Public Administration, 98(2), 281–290.

Beyers

Heinrichs

(2020). Global partnerships for a textile transformation? A systematic literature review on inter-and transnational collaborative governance of the textile and clothing industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 261, 121131.

Bowen

G. A.

(2008). Naturalistic inquiry and the saturation concept: A research note. Qualitative Research, 8(1), 137–152.

Emerson

Nabatchi

Balogh

(2012). An integrative framework for collaborative governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(1), 1–29.

10.

Fattore

Dubois

H. F. W.

Lapenta

(2012). Measuring new public management and governance in political debate. Public Administration Review, 72(2), 218–227. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02497.x

11.

Gjaltema

Biesbroek

Termeer

(2020). From government to governance. . . to meta-governance: A systematic literature review. Public Management Review, 22(12), 1760–1780.

12.

Gnan

Hinna

Monteduro

Scarozza

(2013a). Corporate governance and management practices: Stakeholder involvement, quality and sustainability tools adoption. Journal of Management & Governance, 17(4), 907–937.

13.

Gnan

Hinna

Monteduro

Scarozza

(2013b). The movement beyond the new public management: Public governance practices in Italian public organisations. Conceptualizing and Researching Governance in Public and Non-Profit Organizations Studies in Public and Non-Profit Governance, 1, 117–150.

14.

Grossi

Pianezzi

(2018). The new public corruption: Old questions for new challenges. Accounting Forum, 42(1), 86-101.

15.

Halachmi

(2014). Accountability overloads. In Bovens

Goodin

Schillemans

(Eds.), The Oxford handbook of public accountability. (pp 560–573). Oxford Academic. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199641253.013.0011

16.

Hamann

(2019). Dynamic de-responsibilization in business–government interactions. Organization Studies, 40(8), 1193–1215.

17.

Howlett

Kekez

Poocharoen

(2017). Understanding co-production as a policy tool: Integrating new public governance and comparative policy theory. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 19(5), 487–501. https://doi.org/10.1080/13876988.2017.1287445

18.

Janowski

Estevez

Baguma

(2018). Platform governance for sustainable development: Reshaping citizen-administration relationships in the digital age. Government Information Quarterly, 35(4), S1–S16.

19.

Jayasinghe

Kenney

C. M.

Prasanna

Velasquez

(2020). Enacting “accountability in collaborative governance”: Lessons in emergency management and earthquake recovery from the 2010–2011 canterbury earthquakes. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting and Financial Management, 32(3), 439–459. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBAFM-09–2019–0143

20.

Jing

(2017). From service contracting to collaborative governance: Evolution of Government–Nonprofit relations. Public Administration and Development, 37(3), 191–202. https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.1797

21.

Laitinen

Kinder

Stenvall

(2018a). Co-design and action learning in local public services. Journal of Adult and Continuing Education, 24(1), 58–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477971417725344

22.

Laitinen

Kinder

Stenvall

(2018b). Local public service productivity and performance measurement. International Journal of Knowledge-Based Development, 9(1), 49–75.

23.

Liddle

(2018). Aligning vertical structures and horizontal relationships: Collaborative leadership and accountability mechanisms to enhance economic growth in England. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 84(4), 659–674. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852316651694

24.

Lubell

Stacey

Hummel

M. A.

(2021). Collective action problems and governance barriers to sea-level rise adaptation in San Francisco Bay. Climatic Change, 167(3), 46.

25.

Mangan

Thomas

Davies

Gasper

(2018). The challenges of police-community collaboration: Identity Manoeuvres and power struggles in a neighbourhood based meeting. Public Management Review, 20(9), 1353–1373. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2017.1383718

26.

McDonnell

(2020). Municipality size, political efficacy and political participation: A systematic review. Local Government Studies, 46(3), 331–350.

27.

McMullin

(2021). Challenging the necessity of New Public Governance: Co-production by third sector organizations under different models of public management. Public Administration, 99(1), 5–22.

28.

Mills

D. E.

Bradley

Keast

(2021). NPG and stewardship theory: Remedies for NPM privatization prescriptions. Public Management Review, 23(4), 501–522.

29.

Moher

Stewart

Shekelle

(2015). All in the family: Systematic reviews, rapid reviews, scoping reviews, realist reviews, and more. Systematic Reviews, 4(1), 1–2.

30.

Monteduro

Hinna

Moi

(2016). Governance and corruption in the public sector: An extended literature review. Governance and Performance in Public and Non-Profit Organizations.

31.

Mota

L. M.

(2016). Integração Semântica de Modelos Conceptuais [Doctoral dissertation]. Instituto Politecnico do Porto.

32.

Osborne

S. P.

Radnor

Kinder

Vidal

(2014). Sustainable public service organisations: A Public Service-Dominant approach. Society and Economy, 36(3), 313–338.

33.

Osborne

S. P.

Radnor

Nasi

(2013). A new theory for public service management? Toward a (public) service-dominant approach. The American Review of Public Administration, 43(2), 135–158.

34.

Ostrom

(2009). Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton University Press.

35.

Page

M. J.

McKenzie

J. E.

Bossuyt

P. M.

Boutron

Hoffmann

T. C.

Mulrow

C. D.

Shamseer

Tetzlaff

J. M.

Akl

E. A.

Brennan

S. E.

Chou

Glanville

Grimshaw

J. M.

Hróbjartsson

Lalu

M. M.

Loder

E. W.

Mayo-Wilson

McDonald

. . . Moher

(2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

36.

Podger

(2017). Enduring challenges and new developments in public human resource management: Australia as an example of international experience. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 37(1), 108–128.

37.

Quelin

B. V.

Cabral

Lazzarini

Kivleniece

(2019). The private scope in public–private collaborations: An institutional and capability-based perspective. Organization Science, 30(4), 831–846.

38.

Rakšnys

A. V.

Valickas

Vanagas

(2020). Challenges of creation and implementation of collaborative innovations in public sector organisations. [Bendradarbiavimugrįstųinovacijųkūrimoirįgyvendinimoiššūkiaiviešojosektoriausorganizacijose]. Public Policy and Administration, 19(1), 9–21. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.ppaa.19.1.25989

39.

Sapparojpattana

(2020). Management, collaboration and new public governance: A case study of a public hospital in Thailand. Public Administration Issues, 5, 171–190. https://doi.org/10.17323/1999-5431-2020-0-5-171-190

40.

Seuring

Gold

(2012). Conducting content-analysis based literature reviews in supply chain management. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 17, 544–555.

41.

Siekiera

(2020). Regional integration in the south pacific: Challenges for public governance. [Integração Regional no Pacífico Sul: Desafios para a governança pública] Brazilian Journal of International Law, 17(1), 433–442. https://doi.org/10.5102/RDI.V17I1.6641

42.

Sørensen

(2013). Institutionalizing interactive governance for democracy. Critical Policy Studies, 7(1), 72–86.

43.

Sørensen

Torfing

(2017). Metagoverning collaborative innovation in governance networks. The American Review of Public Administration, 47(7), 826–839.

44.

Sørensen

Torfing

(2018). The democratizing impact of governance networks: From pluralization, via democratic anchorage, to interactive political leadership. Public Administration, 96(2), 302–317.

45.

Sørensen

Torfing

(2021). Accountable government through collaborative governance? Administrative Sciences, 11(4), 127.

46.

Sorrentino

Sicilia

Howlett

(2018). Understanding co-production as a new public governance tool. Policy and Society, 37(3), 277–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2018.1521676

47.

Stroehle

J. C.

(2017). The enforcement of diverse labour standards through private governance: An assessment. Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, 23(4), 475-493.

48.

Tang

(2014). Managing incentive dynamics for collaborative governance in land and ecological conservation. Public Administration Review, 74(2), 220–231. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12190

49.

Torfing

Sørensen

Røiseland

(2019). Transforming the public sector into an arena for co-creation: Barriers, drivers, benefits, and ways forward. Administration & Society, 51(5), 795–825.

50.

Torfing

Triantafillou

(2013). What’s in a name? Grasping new public governance as a political-administrative system. International Review of Public Administration, 18(2), 9–25.

51.

Triantafillou

(2020). Trapped in the complexity bowl? Public governance and the liberal art of governing. International Journal of Public Administration, 43(14), 1228–1236.

52.

Wälitalo

Callaghan

Robèrt

K. H.

Broman

(2023). Understanding governance barriers and enablers for municipal and regional transition towards sustainability—Presenting a comprehensive diagnostic tool based on six case studies in Sweden. Geo: Geography and Environment, 10(1), e00118.