Shared Positions on Divisive Beliefs Explain Interorganizational Collaboration

Evidence from Climate Change Policy Subsystems in 11 Countries

Dados Bibliográficos

ID6294641
AutoresAasa Karimo (0009-0003-5381-1595, University of Helsinki, autor correspondente), Paul M Wagner (0000-0001-7020-3952, Northumbria University , Ireland), Ana Delicado (0000-0001-9657-396X, Instituto de Ciências Sociais), James Goodman (0000-0003-3211-3416, University of Technology Sydney), Antti Gronow (0000-0002-7639-6422, University of Helsinki), Myanna Lahsen (0000-0001-5225-2048, Linköping University), Tze-Luen Lin (National Taiwan University , Taiwan), Petr Ocelík (0000-0002-0690-265X, Masaryk University), Volker Schneider (0000-0001-5908-3347, University of Konstanz), K Satoh (0000-0003-3316-301X, Hitotsubashi University), L Schmidt (0000-0002-7449-8636, University of Lisbon), Sun-Jin Yun (0000-0002-0461-0151, Seoul National University , South-Korea), Tuomas Ylä-Anttila (0000-0002-6908-3495, University of Helsinki)
Ano2023
Volume33
Fascículo3
Páginas421-433
Data de publicação2023-06-13
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoJournal of Public Administration Research and Theory (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 1053-1858 • E-ISSN: 1477-9803
EditoraOxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1093/jopart/muac031
OpenAlexW4286489769
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas17
Referências citadas62

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

Business · Collaborative governance · Corporate governance · Czech · Economics · Empirical evidence · Epistemology · Network governance · Normative · Political science · Public economics · Public policy · Public relations · Similarity (geometry · Sociology · Policy Transfer and Learning · Public Policy and Administration Research · Sustainability and Climate Change Governance · Public Administration