Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T12:24:08.150Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
Series:   Elements in Public and Nonprofit Administration

Apples to Apples

A Taxonomy of Networks in Public Management and Policy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 June 2022

Branda Nowell  and
H. Brinton Milward
Branda Nowell
Affiliation:
North Carolina State University
H. Brinton Milward
Affiliation:
University of Arizona

Summary

Interest in networks in the fields of public management and policy has grown to encompass a wide array of phenomena. However, we lack a stable and empirically verifiable taxonomy for delineating one network class from another. The authors propose all networks and multi-organizational collaborative entities can be sorted into three taxonomic classes: structural-oriented, system-oriented, and purpose-oriented. This Element reviews the intellectual disciplinary histories that have informed our understanding of each of the three classes of networks. It then offers a taxonomic description of each of the three classes of networks. Finally, it provides a field guide for empirically classifying networks. The authors hope is the taxonomy presented will serve as a tool to allow the field to quicken the pace of learning both within and across classes. When we are able to compare apples to apples and avoid inadvertent comparison of apples and oranges, we all get smarter faster.
Get access

Keywords

networkspartnershipscollaborationcollaborative governancenetwork management
Type
Element
Information
Series: Elements in Public and Nonprofit Administration
Online ISBN: 9781108987646
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication: 30 June 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abson, D. J., Fischer, J., Leventon, J. et al. (2017). Leverage points for sustainability transformation. Ambio, 46(1), 30–39.Google Scholar
Ackoff, R. L. & Emery, F. E. (1972). On purposeful systems. Aldine-Atherton.Google Scholar
Agranoff, R. (2007). Managing within networks: Adding value to public organizations. Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Agranoff, R., & McGuire, M. (2003). Inside the matrix: Integrating the paradigms of intergovernmental and network management. International Journal of Public Administration, 26(12), 1401–1422.Google Scholar
Aiken, M., & Hage, J. (1968). Organizational interdependence and intraorganizational structure. American Sociological Review, 33: 912–930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aldrich, H. (1976). Resource dependence and interorganizational relations. Administration and Society, 7(4), 419–455.Google Scholar
Aldrich, H., & Whetten, D. (1981). Organization sets, action sets, and networks: Making the most of simplicity. In Nystrom, P and Starbuck, W., (Eds.), Handbook of organization design, Vol 1. (pp. 385–408). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Alter, C., & Hage, J. (1993). Organizations working together (Vol. 191). Sage, Incorporated.Google Scholar
Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 543–571.Google Scholar
Ashby, W. R. (1956). An introduction to cybernetics. Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
Astley, W. G., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1983). Central perspectives and debates in organization theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(2), 245–273.Google Scholar
Atouba, Y. C., & Shumate, M. (2015). International nonprofit collaboration: Examining the role of homophily. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 44(3), 587–608.Google Scholar
Axelrod, R. (1984). The evolution of cooperation. Basic.Google Scholar
Bailey, K. D. (1994). Typologies and taxonomies: An introduction to classification techniques. Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barabàsi, A., & Bonabeau, E. (2003). Scale-free networks. Scientific American, 288(5), 60–69.Google Scholar
Bensen, J. K. (1975). The interorganizational network as a political economy. Administrative Science Quarterly, 20, 229–249.Google Scholar
Berardo, R. (2014). The evolution of self-organizing communication networks in high-risk social-ecological systems. International Journal of the Commons, 8(1), 236–258.Google Scholar
Berry, F. S., Brower, R. S., Choi, S. O. et al. (2004). Three traditions of network research: What the public management research agenda can learn from other research communities. Public Administration Review, 64(5), 539–552.Google Scholar
Berthod, O., & Segato, F. (2019). Developing purpose-oriented networks: A process view. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 2(3), 203–212.Google Scholar
Boulding, K. E. (1956). General systems theory – The skeleton of science. Management Science, 2(3), 197–208.Google Scholar
Breiger, R. L. (1976). Social structure from multiple networks. American Journal of Sociology, 81(4), 730–780.Google Scholar
Brewer, M. B., & Silver, M. D. (2000). Group distinctiveness, social identification, and collective mobilization. Self, Identity, and Social Movements, 13, 153–171.Google Scholar
Broido, A. D., & Clauset, A. (2019). Scale-free networks are rare. Nature Communications, 10(1), 1–10.Google Scholar
Brown, K., & Keast, R. (2003). Citizen-government engagement: Community connection through networked arrangements. Asian Journal of Public Administration, 25(1), 107–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bryson, J. M., & Crosby, B. C. (1992). Leadership for the common good – Tackling public problems when no one is in charge (2nd ed) Jossey-Bass, . (2005). Leaders.hip for the common good – Tackling public problems when no one is in charge. Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Stone, M. M. (2006). The design and implementation of cross‐sector collaborations: Propositions from the literature. Public Administration Review, 66, 44–55.Google Scholar
Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Stone, M. M. (2015). Designing and implementing cross‐sector collaborations: Needed and challenging. Public Administration Review, 75(5), 647–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burns, T. & Stalker, G. M. (1961). Mechanistic and organic systems of management. Reprinted (1994) In The Management of Innovation rev (pp. 96–125). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Burns, T., & Stalker, G. M. (1961). The management of innovation. Tavistock.Google Scholar
Burt, R. S. (1995). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Burt, R. S., Kilduff, M., & Tasselli, S. (2013). Social network analysis: Foundations and frontiers on advantage. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 527–547.Google Scholar
Burt, R. S. (1997). The contingent value of social capital. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(2), 339–365.Google Scholar
Burt, R. S. (2001). Structural holes versus network closure as social capital. In Lin, N., Cook, K., & Burt, R. S. (Eds.), Social capital: Theory and research, (pp. 31–55). Taylor Francis.Google Scholar
Burt, R. S. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology, 110(2), 349–399.Google Scholar
Carboni, J. L., Saz-Carranza, A., Raab, J., & Isett, K. R. (2019). Taking dimensions of purpose-oriented networks seriously. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 2(3), 187–223.Google Scholar
Cater, D. (1964). Power in Washington. Vintage. Change, 14(2), 527–539.Google Scholar
Chapman, C. L., & Varda, D. M. (2017). Nonprofit resource contribution and mission alignment in interorganizational, cross-sector public health networks. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 46(5), 1052–1072.Google Scholar
Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95–S120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Comfort, L. K. (2007). Crisis management in hindsight: Cognition, communication, coordination, and control. Public Administration Review, 67, 189–197.Google Scholar
Conner, D. S., King, B., Koliba, C., Kolodinsky, J., & Trubek, A. (2011). Mapping farm-to-school networks implications for research and practice. Journal of Hunger & Environmental Nutrition, 6(2), 133–152.Google Scholar
D’Andreta, D., Marabelli, M., Newell, S., Scarbrough, H., & Swan, J. (2016). Dominant cognitive frames and the innovative power of social networks. Organization Studies, 37(3), 293–321.Google Scholar
Dahl, R., & Lindblom, C. E. (1953). Politics, economics and welfare. Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Damanpour, F. (1991). Organizational innovation: A meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators. Academy of Management Journal, 34(3), 555–590.Google Scholar
Davidson, R. H. (1974). Policy making in the manpower subgovernment. In Smith, Michael D. (Ed.), Policies in America: Studies in policy analysis. Random House, 82–106.Google Scholar
Derrida, J. (1992). The other heading: Reflections on today’s Europe. Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Drabek, T. E. (1983). Alternative patterns of decision-making in emergent disaster response networks. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 1(2), 277–305.Google Scholar
Dryzek, J. S. (2000). Deliberative democracy and beyond: Liberals, critics, contestations. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Eden, C., & Ackermann, F. (1998). Making strategy: The journey of strategic management. Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elmore, R. F. (1979). Backward mapping: Implementation research and policy decisions. Political Science Quarterly, 94(Winter), 601–616.Google Scholar
Emerson, K., & Nabatchi, T. (2015). Collaborative governance regimes. Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Emerson, K., Nabatchi, T., & Balogh, S. (2012). An integrative framework for collaborative governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 65(5), 1–29.Google Scholar
Emery, F. E., & Trist, E. L. (1965). The causal texture of organizational environments. Human Relations, 18(1), 21–32.Google Scholar
Emery, F. E., & Trist, E. L. (1973). Task and contextual environments for new personal values. In Towards a Social Ecology (pp. 182–189). Springer.Google Scholar
Evan, W. F. (1965). Toward a theory of inter-organizational relations. Management Science, 11 (10), B-217–B-230.Google Scholar
Evan, W. M. (1972). An organization-set model of interorganizational relations. In Chisholm, R. (Ed.), Interorganizational decisionmaking (pp. 181–200). Aldine.Google Scholar
Faulk, L., Willems, J., McGinnis Johnson, J., & Stewart, A. J. (2016). Network connections and competitively awarded funding: The impacts of board network structures and status interlocks on nonprofit organizations’ foundation grant acquisition. Public Management Review, 18(10), 1425–1455.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S., & Sengupta, P. (2020). Enacting the logic of possibility in organizations and management. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 3(2), 95–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foster-Fishman, P. G., Nowell, B., & Yang, H. (2007). Putting the system back into systems change: A framework for understanding and changing organizational and community systems. American Journal of Community Psychology, 39(3–4), 197–215.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (1991). The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Frank, K. A. (2009). Quasi-ties: Directing resources to members of a collective. American Behavioral Scientist, 52(12), 1613–1645.Google Scholar
Freeman, J. L. (1955). The political process. Random House.Google Scholar
Freeman, L. (2004). The development of social network analysis. A Study in the Sociology of Science, 1(687), 159–167.Google Scholar
Friend, J., & Hickling, A. (1987). Planning under pressure. Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Friis, C., & Østergaard, N. J. (2017). On the system boundary choices, implications, and solutions in telecoupling land use change research. Sustainability, 9(6), 974.Google Scholar
Fritchler, A. (1969). Smoking and politics: Policy-making and the federal bureaucracy. Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Frumkin, P., & Reingold, D. (2004) Why programs get replicated. Nonprofit Quarterly, Fall: 46–59.Google Scholar
Galloway, A. R., & Thacker, E. (2013). The exploit: A theory of networks (Vol. 21). University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. (1976). New rules of sociological method. Hutchinson.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society. Polity Press.Google Scholar
Glisson, C., & Hemmelgarn, A. (1998). The effects of organizational climate and interorganizational coordination on the quality and outcomes of children’s service systems. Child Abuse & Neglect, 22(5), 401–421.Google Scholar
Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380.Google Scholar
Gray, B. (1989). Collaborating. Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Gray, B., & Purdy, J. (2018). Collaborating for our future: Multistakeholder partnerships for solving complex problems. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Griffith, E. S. (1939). Impasse of democracy. Harrison-Hilton.Google Scholar
Hammond, D. (2002). Exploring the genealogy of systems thinking. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 19(5), 429–439.Google Scholar
Hanf, K., & Scharpf, F. W. (Eds.) (1978). Interorganizational policy making: Limits to coordination and central control. Sage Modern Politics Series Vol. 1 sponsored by the European Consortium for Political Research. Sage.Google Scholar
Hanf, K., Hjern, B., & Porter, D. (1978). Local networks of manpower training in the federal republic of Germany and Sweden. In Hanf, Kenneth & Scharpf, F. W. (Eds.), Interorganizational policy making: Limits to coordination and central control (pp. 303–341). Sage Modern Politics Series Vol. 1 sponsored by the European Consortium for Political Research. Sage.Google Scholar
Heclo, H. (1978). Issue networks and the executive establishment. In King, A. (Ed.), The new American political system (pp. 413–422). American Enterprise Institute.Google Scholar
Hegele, Y. (2018). Explaining bureaucratic power in intergovernmental relations: A network approach. Public Administration: An International Quarterly, 96, 753–768.Google Scholar
Henry, A. D., Lubell, M., & McCoy, M. (2011). Belief systems and social capital as drivers of policy network structure: The case of California regional planning. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(3), 419–444.Google Scholar
Herzog, P. S., & Yang, S. (2018). Social networks and charitable giving: Trusting, doing, asking, and alter primacy. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 47(2), 376–394.Google Scholar
Hirschman, D., & Reed, I. A. (2014). Formation stories and causality in sociology. Sociological Theory, 32(4), 259–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hjern, B., & Porter, D. O. (1981). Implementation structures: A new unit of administrative analysis. Organizational Studies, 2(3), 211–227.Google Scholar
Hodgson, G. M. (2019). Taxonomic definitions in social science, with firms, markets and institutions as case studies. Journal of Institutional Economics, 15(2), 207–233.Google Scholar
Holme, P. (2019). Rare and everywhere: Perspectives on scale-free networks. Nature Communications, 10(1), 1–3.Google Scholar
Hugg, V. G. (2019). Public service-function types and interlocal agreement network structure: A longitudinal study of Iowa. Urban Affairs Review, 56(4), 1293–1315.Google Scholar
Human, S. E., & Provan, K. G. (2000). Legitimacy building in the evolution of small-firm multilateral networks: A comparative study of success and demise. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(2), 327–365.Google Scholar
Huxham, C., & Vangen, S. (2013). Managing to collaborate: The theory and practice of collaborative advantage. Routledge University Press.Google Scholar
Hwang, H., & Colyvas, J. A. (2020). Ontology, levels of society, and degrees of generality: Theorizing actors as abstractions in institutional theory. Academy of Management Review, 45(3), 570–595.Google Scholar
Iborra, S. S., Saz-Carranza, A., Fernández-i-Marín, X., & Albareda, A. (2018). The governance of goal-directed networks and network tasks: An empirical analysis of European regulatory networks. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 28(2), 270–292.Google Scholar
Isett, K. R., Mergel, I. A., LeRoux, K., Mischen, P. A., & Rethemeyer, R. K. (2011). Networks in public administration scholarship: Understanding where we are and where we need to go. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21 (suppl_1), i157–i173.Google Scholar
Jenkins-Smith, H. C., Nohrstedt, D., Weible, C. M., & Sabatier, P. A. (2014). The advocacy coalition framework: Foundations, evolution, and ongoing research. Theories of the Policy Process, 3, 183–224.Google Scholar
Joosse, A. P., & Milward, H. B. (2017). Health policy networks. In Victor, J. N., Montgomery, A. H. & Lubell, M. The Oxford handbook of political networks, Oxford University Press, 627–647.Google Scholar
Kammerer, M., & Namhata, C. (2018). What drives the adoption of climate change mitigation policy? A dynamic network approach to policy diffusion. Policy Sciences, 51(4), 477–513.Google Scholar
Kania, J., & Kramer, M. (2011). Collective Impact. Stanford Social Innovation Review. https://senate.humboldt.edu/sites/default/files/senate/Chair%20Written%20Report%201–23–2018.pdfGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, A. (1964). The conduct of inquiry. Chandler.Google Scholar
Kapucu, N. (2006). Interagency communication networks during emergencies: Boundary spanners in multiagency coordination. The American Review of Public Administration, 36(2), 207–225.Google Scholar
Kapucu, N., & Garayev, V. (2016). Structure and network performance: Horizontal and vertical networks in emergency management. Administration & Society, 48(8), 931–961.Google Scholar
Kapucu, N., & Hu, Q. (2020). Network governance: Concepts, theories, and applications. Routledge.Google Scholar
Kapucu, N., Hu, Q., & Khosa, S. (2014). The state of network research in public administration. Administration & Society, 1, 34.Google Scholar
Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1966). The social psychology of organizations. Wiley.Google Scholar
Keast, R. (2016). Network governance. In Handbook on theories of governance (edited by Ansell, C. and Torfing, J.), Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Keast, R., Brown, K., & Mandell, M. (2007). Getting the right mix: Unpacking integration meanings and strategies. International Public Management Journal, 10(1), 9–33.Google Scholar
Keast, R., Mandell, M. P., Brown, K., & Woolcock, G. (2004). Network structures: Working differently and changing expectations. Public Administration Review, 64(3), 363–371.Google Scholar
Kenis, P. (2016). Networks. In Ansell, C., & Torfing, J. (Eds)., Handbook on theories of governance. Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Kickert, W. J., Klijn, E. H., & Koppenjan, J. F. (Eds.). (1997). Managing complex networks: Strategies for the public sector. Sage.Google Scholar
Kiser, L. L., & Ostrom, E. (1982). The three worlds of action: A metatheoretical synthesis of institutional approaches, In Ostrom, E. (Ed.), Strategies for political inquiry (pp. 179–222). Sage.Google Scholar
Klijn, E. H. (2008). Governance and governance networks in Europe: An assessment of ten years of research on the theme. Public Management Review, 10(4), 505–525.Google Scholar
Klijn, E. H. (2020). Network management in public administration: The essence of network and collaborative governance. In Oxford research encyclopedia of politics (edited by Thompson, W.). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/978019228637.013.1418Google Scholar
Klijn, E. H., & Koppenjan, J. (2016). The 11 shift toward network governance. Theory and Practice of Public Sector Reform, 27, 158.Google Scholar
Klijn, E. H., & Koppenjan, J. F. (2000). Public management and policy networks: Foundations of a network approach to governance. Public Management an International Journal of Research and Theory, 2(2), 135–158.Google Scholar
Koliba, C. J., Meek, J. W., Zia, A., & Mills, R. W. (2018). Governance networks in public administration and public policy. Routledge.Google Scholar
Koliba, C. J., Mills, R. M., & Zia, A. (2011). Accountability in governance networks: An assessment of public, private, and nonprofit emergency management practices following Hurricane Katrina. Public Administration Review, 71(2), 210–220.Google Scholar
Kramer, R. M., Brewer, M. B., & Hanna, B. A. (1996). Collective trust and collective action. In Kramer, R. M. & Tyler, T. R. (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 357–389). Sage.Google Scholar
Laumann, E. O., & Knoke, D. (1987). The organizational state: Social choice in national policy domains. University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Laumann, E. O., Galaskiewicz, J., & Marsden, P. V. (1978). Community structure as interorganizational linkages. Annual Review of Sociology, 4, 455–484.Google Scholar
Laumann, E. O., Marsden, P. V., & Prensky, D. (1983). The boundary specification problem in network analysis. In Burt, R. S. & Minor, M. J. (Eds.), Applied network analysis: A methodological introduction (pp. 18–34). Sage.Google Scholar
Laumann, E. O., Marsden, P. V., & Prensky, D. (1989). The boundary specification problem in network analysis. Research Methods in Social Network Analysis, 61, 87.Google Scholar
Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W. (1967). Differentiation and integration in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12,1–47.Google Scholar
Lawrence, P., & Lorsch, J. (1967). Organization and environment. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Lecy, J. D., Mergel, I. A., & Schmitz, H. P. (2014). Networks in public administration: Current scholarship in review. Public Management Review, 16(5), 643–665.Google Scholar
Lemaire, R. H. (2020). What is our purpose here? Network relationships and goal congruence in a goal-directed network. The American Review of Public Administration, 50(2), 176–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lemaire, R. H., & Provan, K. G. (2012). Managing collaborative effort: A dyadic analysis of a public goal-directed network. Working Paper. www.researchgate.net/profile/Keith_Provan/publication/228509005_Managing_Collaborative_Effort_A_Dyadic_Analysis_of_a_Public_Goaldirected_Network/links/5626849f08ae4d9e5c4d342d.pdf.Google Scholar
Lemaire, R. H., Mannak, R. S., Ospina, S. M., & Groenleer, M. (2019). Striving for state of the art with paradigm interplay and meta-synthesis: Purpose-oriented network research challenges and good research practices as a way forward. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 2(3), 175–208.Google Scholar
Levin, S., & White, P. E. (1961). Exchange as a conceptual framework for the study of interorganizational relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly, 5(4), 583–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Litwak, E., & Hylton, L. F. (1962). Interorganizational analysis: A hypothesis on co-ordinating agencies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 6, 395–420.Google Scholar
Long, N. (1958). The local community as an ecology of games. American Journal of Sociology, 64(3), 251–261.Google Scholar
Lubell, M. (2013). Governing institutional complexity: The ecology of games framework. Policy Studies Journal, 41(3), 537–559.Google Scholar
Lubell, M. N., Robins, G., & Wang, P. (2011). Policy coordination in an ecology of water management games. Paper 22. http://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/pnconfs_2011/22.Google Scholar
Lubell, M., & Fulton, A. (2008). Local policy networks and agricultural watershed management. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 673–696.Google Scholar
Maass, A. (1951). Muddy waters: The Army engineers and the nation’s rivers. Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maslow, A. H. (1967). A theory of metamotivation: The biological rooting of the value-life. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 7(2), 93–127.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. R. (1972). Social system models for planners. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 38(3): 130–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAllister, R. R. J., McCrea, R., & Lubell, M. N. (2014). Policy networks, stakeholder interactions and climate adaptation in the region of South East Queensland, Australia. Regional Environmental Change, 14(2), 527–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meier, K. J., & O’Toole, L. J. Jr (2001). Managerial strategies and behavior in networks: A model with evidence from US public education. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 11(3), 271–294.Google Scholar
Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Actualize. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved April 27, 2021, www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/actualize.Google Scholar
Mills, C. W. (1959). The power elite. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Milward, H. B. (1982). Interorganizational policy systems and research on public organizations. Administration and Society, 13(4), 457–478.Google Scholar
Milward, H. B., & Provan, K. G. (1998). Measuring network structure. Public Administration, 76(2), 387–407.Google Scholar
Milward, H. B., & Provan, K. G. (2000). Governing the hollow state. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(2), 359–380.Google Scholar
Milward, H. B., & Wamsley, G. L. (1985). Policy subsystems, networks and the tools of public policy. In Hanf, K. F. & Toonen, T. A. J. (Eds.), Policy implementation in federal and unitary systems (pp. 105–130). Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.Google Scholar
Milward, H. B. & Provan, K. G. (2006). A Manager’s Guide to Choosing and Using Collaborative Networks. Networks and Partnerships Series, IBM Center for the Business of Government.Google Scholar
Milward, H. B., Cooper, K. R., & Shumate, M. (2016) Who says a common agenda is necessary for Collective Impact? Summer, 41–43. www.npqmag.org.Google Scholar
Mingers, J., & White, L. (2010). A review of the recent contribution of systems thinking to operational research and management science. European Journal of Operational Research, 207(3), 1147–1161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, J. C. (Ed.). (1969). Social networks in urban situations: Analyses of personal relationships in Central African towns. Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Moreno, J. L. (1934). Who shall survive?. Nervous and Mental Disease.Google Scholar
Moreno, J. L. (1934). Who shall survive?: A new approach to the problem of human interrelations. Nervous and Mental Disease.Google Scholar
Moynihan, D. P. (2009). The network governance of crisis response. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(4), 895–915.Google Scholar
Nisar, M. A., & Maroulis, S. (2017). Foundations of relating: Theory and evidence on the formation of street-level bureaucrats’ workplace networks. Public Administration Review, 77(6), 829–839.Google Scholar
Nohrstedt, D., & Bodin, Ö. (2019). Collective action problem characteristics and partner uncertainty as drivers of social tie formation in collaborative networks: Social tie formation in collaborative networks. Policy Studies Journal, 48(4), 1082–1108.Google Scholar
Nolte, I. M., & Boenigk, S. (2011). Public-nonprofit partnership performance in a disaster context: The case of Haiti. Public Administration, 89(4), 1385–1402.Google Scholar
North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nowell, B., Bodkin, C. P., & Bayoumi, D. (2017). Redundancy as a strategy in disaster response systems: A pathway to resilience or a recipe for disaster? Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 25(3), 123–135.Google Scholar
Nowell, B. L., & Kenis, P. (2019). Purpose-oriented networks: The architecture of complexity. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 2(3), 169–173.Google Scholar
Nowell, B., & Steelman, T. (2013). 12 The role of responder networks in promoting community resilience. Disaster resiliency: Interdisciplinary perspectives, 4, 232.Google Scholar
Nowell, B., & Steelman, T. (2019). Beyond ICS: How should we govern complex disasters in the United States? Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 16(2), 1–5.Google Scholar
Nowell, B., Steelman, T., Velez, A. L. K., & Yang, Z. (2018). The structure of effective governance of disaster response networks: Insights from the field. The American Review of Public Administration, 48(7), 699–715.Google Scholar
Nowell, B. L., Velez, A. L. K., Hano, M. C. et al. (2018). Studying networks in complex problem domains: Advancing methods in boundary specification. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 1(4), 273–282.Google Scholar
Ofem, B., Arya, B., & Borgatti, S. P. (2018). The drivers of collaborative success between rural economic development organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 47(6), 1113–1134.Google Scholar
Opsahl, T., Vernet, A., Alnuaimi, T., & George, G. (2017). Revisiting the small-world phenomenon: Efficiency variation and classification of small-world networks. Organizational Research Methods, 20(1), 149–173.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. (2011). Background on the institutional analysis and development framework. Policy Studies Journal, 39(1), 7–27.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E., Parks, R. B., & Whitaker, G. P. (1974). Defining and measuring structural variations in interorganizational arrangements. Publius, 4(4), 87–108.Google Scholar
O’Toole, L. J. Jr., & Meier, K. J. (2003). Plus ça change: Public management, personnel stability, and organizational performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 13, 43–64.Google Scholar
Ouchi, W. G. (1991). Markets, bureaucracies and clans. In Thompson, G., Frances, J., Levacic, R., & Mitchell, J. (Eds.), Markets, hierarchies and networks. The coordination of social life (pp. 246–255). Sage.Google Scholar
Pachucki, M. C., & Lewis, K. (2017). Networks at Harvard University Sociology. In Alhaji, R. & Rokne, J. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of social network analysis and mining. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7163-9_73–1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Park, H. H., & Rethemeyer, R. K. (2014). The politics of connections: Assessing the determinants of social structure in policy networks. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24(2), 349–379.Google Scholar
Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Polanyi, M. (1951). The logic of liberty. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Pollack Porter, K. M., Rutkow, L., & McGinty, E. E. (2018). The importance of policy change for addressing public health problems. Public Health Reports, 133(1_suppl), 9S-14S.Google Scholar
Powell, R. (1991). Absolute and relative gains in international relations theory. The American Political Science Review, 85, 1303–1320.Google Scholar
Pressman, J. L., & Wildavsky, A. B. (1973). Implementation: How great expectations in Washington are dashed in Oakland, or why it’s amazing that federal programs work at all. University of California Press.Google Scholar
Provan, K. G., Fish, A., & Sydow, J. (2007). Interorganizational networks at the network level: A review of the empirical literature on whole networks. Journal of Management, 33(3), 479–516.Google Scholar
Provan, K. G., & Kenis, P. (2008). Modes of network governance: Structure, management, and effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(2), 229–252.Google Scholar
Provan, K. G., & Milward, H. B. (1995). A preliminary theory of interorganizational network effectiveness: A comparative study of four community mental health systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 1–33.Google Scholar
Raab, J., & Kenis, P. (2009). Heading toward a society of networks: Empirical developments and theoretical challenges. Journal of Management Inquiry, 18(3), 198–210.Google Scholar
Raab, J., Mannak, R. S., & Cambré, B. (2015). Combining structure, governance, and context: A configurational approach to network effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(2), 479–511.Google Scholar
Redford, E. S. (1960). A case analysis of Congressional activity: Civil aviation, 1957–1958. Journal of Politics, 22(2), 228–258.Google Scholar
Rethemeyer, R. K., & Hatmaker, D. M. (2008). Network management reconsidered: An inquiry into management of network structures in public sector service provision. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 617–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rhodes, R. A. W. (2008). Policy network analysis. In Goodin, R. E., Moran, M., & Rein, M. (Eds.), The oxford handbook of public policy (pp. 425–447). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rhodes, M. L., & Murray, J. (2007). Collaborative decision making in urban regeneration: A complex adaptive systems perspective. International Public Management Journal, 10(1), 79–101.Google Scholar
Richman, B. D. (2006). How community institutions create economic advantage: Jewish diamond merchants in New York. Law & Social Inquiry, 31(2), 383–420.Google Scholar
Rittel, H. W., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.Google Scholar
Rogers, E. M. (1962). Diffusion of innovations. Free Press of Glencoe.Google Scholar
Sabatier, P. A. (1987). Knowledge, policy-oriented learning, and policy change: An advocacy coalition framework. Knowledge, 8(4), 649–692.Google Scholar
Sabatier, P., & Mazmanian, D. (1979). The conditions of effective implementation: A guide to accomplishing policy objectives. Policy Analysis, 5(4), 481–504.Google Scholar
Saz-Carranza, A. (2012). Uniting diverse organizations: Managing goal-oriented advocacy networks. Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saz-Carranza, A., & Ospina, S. M. (2011). The behavioral dimension of governing interorganizational goal-directed networks – Managing the unity-diversity tension. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(2), 327–365.Google Scholar
Scharpf, F. W. (1978). Comparative policy studies: Cases in search of systematic theory. European Journal of Political Research, 6(1), 117–125.Google Scholar
Scharpf, F. W. (1978). Interorganizational policy studies: Issues, concepts, and perspectives. In Hanf, Kenneth and Scharpf, Fritz W. (Eds.), Interorganizational policy making: Limits to coordination and central control (pp. 345–370). Sage Modern Politics Series Vol. 1 sponsored by the European Consortium for Political Research. Sage.Google Scholar
Scharpf, F. W. (1997). Introduction: the problem-solving capacity of multi-level governance. Journal of European Public Policy, 4(4), 520–538.Google Scholar
Schmitter, P. C. (1974). Still the century of corporatism?. The Review of Politics, 36(1), 85–131.Google Scholar
Shumate, M., & Cooper, K. R. (2016). Collective impact: What we really know. Network for Nonprofit and Social Impact, Northwestern University. https://nnsi.soc.northwestern.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Collective-impact-Report-Final.pdfGoogle Scholar
Siciliano, M. D. (2016). Ignoring the experts: Networks and organizational learning in the public sector. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 27(1), 104–119.Google Scholar
Siciliano, M. D., Wang, W., & Medina, A. (2021). Mechanisms of network formation in the public sector: A systematic review of the literature. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 4(1), 63–81.Google Scholar
Simo, G., & Bies, A. L. (2007). The role of nonprofits in disaster response: An expanded model of cross‐sector collaboration. Public administration review, 67, 125–142.Google Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1946). The proverbs of administration. Public Administration Review, 6(1), 53–67.Google Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1962). The architecture of complexity. American Philosophical Society, 106(6), 467–482.Google Scholar
Smith, K. B. (2002). Typologies, taxonomies, and the benefits of policy classification. Policy Studies Journal, 30(3), 379–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2005). The democratic anchorage of governance networks. Scandinavian Political Studies, 28(3), 195–218.Google Scholar
Spencer, H. (1897). Principles of sociology (Vol. 6). D. Appleton and Company.Google Scholar
Tasselli, S. (2015). Social networks and inter-professional knowledge transfer: The case of healthcare professionals. Organization Studies, 36(7), 841–872.Google Scholar
Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in action. McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Torfing, J. (2012). Governance networks. The Oxford Handbook of Governance, edited by Levi-Faur, D.: Retrieved from //www.oxfordhandbooks.com/, Oxford Handbooks Online (2012) 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199560530.001 .0001/oxfordhb-9780199560530-e-7. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Trist, E. (1983). Referent organizations and the development of inter-organizational domains. Human Relations, 36(3), 269–284.Google Scholar
Tsoukas, H. (2016). Don’t simplify, complexify: From disjunctive to conjunctive theorizing in organization and management studies. Journal of Management Studies, 54(2), 132–153.Google Scholar
Tulin, M., Volker, B., & Lancee, B. (2019). The same place but different: How neighborhood context differentially affects homogeneity in networks of different social groups. Journal of Urban Affairs, 43(1), 57–76.Google Scholar
Turner, J. C. (2010). Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behavior. In Postmes, T. & Branscombe, N. R. (Eds.), Key readings in social psychology. Rediscovering social identity (pp. 243–272). Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Vantaggiato, F. P. (2018). The drivers of regulatory networking: policy learning between homophily and convergence. Journal of Public Policy, 39(3), 443–464.Google Scholar
Vantaggiato, F., & Lubell, M. (2020, September 24). The Benefits of Specialization in Collaborative Governance Forums. Paper presented for the ESADE/Tilburg Network Webinar Series.Google Scholar
Varda, D. M., & Sprong, S. (2020). Evaluating networks using PARTNER: A social network data tracking and learning tool. New Directions for Evaluation, 2020(165), 67–89.Google Scholar
Von Bertalanffy, L. (1951). “General System Theory – A new approach to unity of science” (Symposium). Human Biology, 23(4), 303–361.Google Scholar
Warren, R. L. (1967). The interorganizational field as a focus for investigation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12, 396–419.Google Scholar
Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Watts, D. J. (2004). The “new” science of networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 30, 243–270.Google Scholar
Weber, M. (1949). Max Weber on the methodology of the social sciences. Free Press.Google Scholar
Weick, K. E. (1969). The social psychology of organizing. Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Weick, K. E. (1989). Organized improvisation: 20 years of organizing. Communication Studies, 40(4), 241–248.Google Scholar
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
White, H. C. (1970). Chains of opportunity: System models of mobility in organizations. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
White, H. C., Boorman, S. A., & Breiger, R. L. (1976). Social structure from multiple networks. I. Blockmodels of roles and positions. American Journal of Sociology, 81(4), 730–780.Google Scholar
Wikileaks (2011). Global Futures Forum, https://wikileaks.org/gifiles/attach/7/7023_What%20Is%20GFF%202011.pdfGoogle Scholar
Wildavsky, A. (1979). Speaking truth to power: The art and craft of policy analysis. Little Brown and Company.Google Scholar
Williamson, O. E. (1975). Markets and hierarchies: Analysis and antitrust implications. The Free Press.Google Scholar
Xu, W., & Saxton, G. D. (2019). Does stakeholder engagement pay off on social media? A social capital perspective. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 48(1), 28–49.Google Scholar
Zafonte, M., & Sabatier, P. (1998). Shared beliefs and imposed interdependencies as determinants of ally networks in overlapping subsystems. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 10(4), 473–505.Google Scholar
Zald, M. N. (1970). Organizational change: The political economy of the YMCA. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Zarghami, M., & Akbariyeh, S. (2012). System dynamics modeling for complex urban water systems: Application to the city of Tabriz, Iran. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 60, 99–106.Google Scholar

Save element to Kindle

To save this element to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Apples to Apples
Available formats
×

Save element to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Apples to Apples
Available formats
×

Save element to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Apples to Apples
Available formats
×