Shared Positions on Divisive Beliefs Explain Interorganizational Collaboration : Evidence from Climate Change Policy Subsystems in 11 Countries

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216224%3A14230%2F22%3A00129832" target="_blank" >RIV/00216224:14230/22:00129832 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://academic.oup.com/jpart/advance-article/doi/10.1093/jopart/muac031/6648118" target="_blank" >https://academic.oup.com/jpart/advance-article/doi/10.1093/jopart/muac031/6648118</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muac031" target="_blank" >10.1093/jopart/muac031</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Shared Positions on Divisive Beliefs Explain Interorganizational Collaboration : Evidence from Climate Change Policy Subsystems in 11 Countries

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Collaboration between public administration organizations and various stakeholders is often prescribed as a potential solution to the current complex problems of governance, such as climate change. According to the Advocacy Coalition Framework, shared beliefs are one of the most important drivers of collaboration. However, studies investigating the role of beliefs in collaboration show mixed results. Some argue that similarity of general normative and empirical policy beliefs elicits collaboration, while others focus on beliefs concerning policy instruments. Proposing a new divisive beliefs hypothesis, we suggest that agreeing on those beliefs over which there is substantial disagreement in the policy subsystem is what matters for collaboration. Testing our hypotheses using policy network analysis and data on climate policy subsystems in 11 countries (Australia, Brazil, the Czech Republic, Germany, Finland, Ireland, Japan, Korea, Portugal, Sweden, and Taiwan), we find belief similarity to be a stronger predictor of collaboration when the focus is divisive beliefs rather than normative and empirical policy beliefs or beliefs concerning policy instruments. This knowledge can be useful for managing collaborative governance networks because it helps to identify potential competing coalitions and to broker compromises between them.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Shared Positions on Divisive Beliefs Explain Interorganizational Collaboration : Evidence from Climate Change Policy Subsystems in 11 Countries

Popis výsledku anglicky

Collaboration between public administration organizations and various stakeholders is often prescribed as a potential solution to the current complex problems of governance, such as climate change. According to the Advocacy Coalition Framework, shared beliefs are one of the most important drivers of collaboration. However, studies investigating the role of beliefs in collaboration show mixed results. Some argue that similarity of general normative and empirical policy beliefs elicits collaboration, while others focus on beliefs concerning policy instruments. Proposing a new divisive beliefs hypothesis, we suggest that agreeing on those beliefs over which there is substantial disagreement in the policy subsystem is what matters for collaboration. Testing our hypotheses using policy network analysis and data on climate policy subsystems in 11 countries (Australia, Brazil, the Czech Republic, Germany, Finland, Ireland, Japan, Korea, Portugal, Sweden, and Taiwan), we find belief similarity to be a stronger predictor of collaboration when the focus is divisive beliefs rather than normative and empirical policy beliefs or beliefs concerning policy instruments. This knowledge can be useful for managing collaborative governance networks because it helps to identify potential competing coalitions and to broker compromises between them.

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

50601 - Political science

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

S - Specificky vyzkum na vysokych skolach

Rok uplatnění

2022

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory

ISSN

1053-1858

e-ISSN

1477-9803

Svazek periodika

33

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

3

Stát vydavatele periodika

GB - Spojené království Velké Británie a Severního Irska

Počet stran výsledku

13

Strana od-do

421-433

Kód UT WoS článku

000840414700001

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85162797542