|
Using data from 22 U.S.
estuaries, we analyzed the role of networks in facilitating
collaborative activities among agencies. We found
that collaboration does not require perceived agreement;
agencies with greater diversity in their networks recognized
more disagreements, but still collaborated more than agencies
with clustered networks of more like-minded associates.
Also, agencies that tended to play central roles in networks
were the most likely to be involved in multiple collaborative
activities.
Ramiro Berardo. 2008. "Generalized
Trust in Multi-organizational Policy Arenas: Studying its
Emergence from a Network Perspective." Forthcoming
in Political Research Quarterly. [link]
This study tests hypotheses linking the structural
characteristics of policy networks to the feelings of trust
of their members. A social capital perspective suggests
that actors in denser networks should trust others more,
while an alternative "centrality" approach suggests
that trust may be a byproduct of the occupation of key positions
in the group. The author tests these expectations with data
mapping policy networks in twenty-two estuaries in the United
States and finds that centrality is a better predictor of
trust. This opens room for questioning the real value of
trust as a necessary ingredient in the solution of collective
action dilemmas.
Ramiro Berardo. 2008. Sustaining Joint
Ventures through the Exchange of Resources: A Study of 41
Water-Related Projects in Southwest Florida.” Mimeo
[download]
Main findings: This paper
analyses information collected on 41 water-related projects
in Southwest Florida. Findings show that stakeholders manifest
a higher likelihood to continue collaborating with their
partners when they receive assistance in increasing the
public and political support for the projects AND when their
interactions are stronger in terms of frequency.
A copy of the survey used in this study is available
here. A list of Organizations
that participated in the study is contained here.
John T. Scholz and Cheng-Lung Wang.
2006. "Cooptation or Transformation? Local Policy Networks
and Federal Regulatory Enforcement." American Journal
of Political Science 50(1): 81-97. [download]
Our study of Clean Water permits found both tougher enforcement and more compliance in watersheds with active policy networks and local partnerships. These networks transform local policy interests by galvanizing the combined efforts of those concerned and affected by water pollution, resulting in more enforcement and compliance even in conservative areas generally opposed to government regulation.
John Scholz and Bruce Stiftel, editors.
2005. Adaptive Governance and WaterConflicts. Washington,
D.C.: Resources for the Future. [link]
This book investigates new types of water
conflicts among users in the seemingly water-rich Eastern
United States. Eight case studies were chosen to span the
range of conflicts crossing fragmented regulatory boundaries.
Each begins with a history of the conflict and then focuses
on the institutional arrangements that evolved to grapple
with the resulting challenges. In the chapters that follow,
scholars and practitioners offer different theoretical and
experience-based perspectives on the cases. Together, they
discuss five challenges that new institutions must overcome
to develop sustainable solutions for water users: Who is
to be involved in the policy process? How are they to interact?
How is science to be used? How are users and the public
to be educated? How can solutions be made efficient and
equitable? This book is a valuable tool for water professionals,
policy scientists, students, and scholars in natural resource
planning and management.
Mark Schneider, Mark Lubell, John
T. Scholz, Denisa Midruta, and Matt Edwards. 2003. “Building
Consensual Institutions: Networks and the National Estuary
Program” American Journal of Political Science
47:143-158. [download].
The National Estuary Program provided resources
that allowed 28 selected estuaries to develop comprehensive
planning to integrate watershed policies. This study
compared the policy networks in 12 of these estuaries with
10 similar estuaries, and found that NEP estuaries generally
had larger more extensive networks of shareholders.
The networks spanned many boundaries between different levels
of government, and between government, stakeholders, and
the research community. These more-developed policy
networks are associated with stronger beliefs that the policy
process in the estuary is fair, that stakeholders interests
are adequately interested, and that conflicts can be resolved
within the estuary. The authors discuss how the NEP
stimulated the expansion of policy networks, and speculate
about the implications.
Mark Lubell, John Scholz, Mark Schneider,
and Mihriye Mete. 2002. “Watershed Partnerships and
the Emergence of Collective Action Institutions” American
Journal of Political Science 46: 148-163. [download]
Watershed partnerships have been formed to
coordinate and plan watershed policies in some, but not
all watersheds in the U.S. This study found that they
were more likely to develop when the pollution problems
facing the watershed were most severe and where other governmental
agencies were not as active in tackling these problems.
They also emerged in areas where the costs of organizing
were less because of higher social capital (higher income,
education levels), particularly when other planning organizations
had existed prior to the partnership.
|
