Government and Non-profit Collaboration in Times of Deliverology, Policy Innovation Laboratories and Hubs, and New Public Governance

Brock, Kathy L.

doi:10.1007/s11266-019-00145-0

Cited by 21 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, we often repeated the notion that such co‐creation existed until we began to believe it, or based our evidence on a few, usually favourable case studies. Thus, we tended to conclude, with some cautions, that “co‐governance of policy offers the nonprofit sector unprecedented opportunities to influence policy and craft policy solutions” (Brock 2020: 267).…”

Section: Government‐civil Society Relations Post‐pandemic: a Reinventmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond COVID‐19: Five commentaries on reimagining governance for future crises and resilience

Brousselle¹,

Brunet‐Jailly²,

Kennedy³

et al. 2020

Can Public Adm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several Canadian and international scholars offer commentaries on the implications of the COVID-19 pandemic for governments and public service institutions, and fruitful directions for public administration research and practice. This second suite of commentaries considers the challenges confronting governments as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and in the decades to come with an increasingly broad lens: the need to understand and rethink the architecture of the state given recent and future challenges awaiting governments; the need to rethink government-civil society relations and policies to deliver services for increasingly diverse citizens and communities; the need for new repertoires and sensibilities on the part of governments for recognizing, anticipating, and engaging on governance risks despite imperfect expert knowledge and public skepticism; how the COVID-19 crisis has caused us to reconceive international and sub-national borders where new "borders" are being drawn; and the need to anticipate a steady stream of crises similar to the COVID-19 pandemic arising from climate change and related challenges, and develop new national and international governance strategies for fostering population and community resilience. Sommaire : Plusieurs universitaires canadiens et internationaux ont offert des suggestions sur les implications de la pandémie du COVID-19 pour les gouvernements et les institutions de la fonction publique, ainsi que des orientations futures pour la recherche et la pratique en administration publique. Cette deuxième série de commentaires examine les défis que devront affronter les gouvernements en raison de la pandémie de COVID-19 et dans les décennies à venir, dans une optique large. Cette série souligne le besoin de comprendre et de repenser l'architecture de l'État, de revoir les relations entre le gouvernement et la société civile pour fournir des services à des citoyens et des communautés de plus en plus divers, d'élaborer de nouvelles façons d'identifier et d'anticiper les risques, et de s'engager malgré

show abstract

Section: Government‐civil Society Relations Post‐pandemic: a Reinventmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond COVID‐19: Five commentaries on reimagining governance for future crises and resilience

Brousselle¹,

Brunet‐Jailly²,

Kennedy³

et al. 2020

Can Public Adm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Šiugždinienė et al studied the importance of citizens to public governance from the perspective of people's participation in public governance and found that community knowledge activists played an important role in community governance [15]. Brock studied the joint governance of public management departments and some nonprofit organizations and found that cooperative management among organizations provided a direction for improving governance efficiency and interorganizational competitiveness [16]. Gjaltema et al explored the deficiencies of current community governance in China and found that the root causes were the unity of grass-roots departments of governance and the decentralization of government and society to citizens [17].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intelligent Sensor Network Using Internet of Things in Urban Community Network Governance

Liu¹,

Zhang²

2022

Journal of Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose is to conform to the development of the times and study a new way of urban community network governance. First, the ways of governance, social governance, urban community governance, and urban community network governance are discussed. Next, the intelligent sensor function of Internet of things (IoT) technology is applied to realize the communication between IoT and urban community network governance. An urban community network governance system based on an intelligent sensor network is established. The system combines Kalman filtering to realize the dynamic monitoring of the mobile Application (APP) of the urban community residents and can update and process the collected information in real time. Finally, a survey is conducted on the satisfaction of residents of a community in Jiaozuo City, Henan Province, in 2019 on community network governance under the IoT. The efficiency and ability of urban community network governance under different network modes are compared and analyzed. The results show that the community has improved the needs of community residents through IoT network governance in multiple aspects, but the community service level of culture is not high. The community needs to strengthen the network publicity of community culture to improve the cultural level of the community. Meanwhile, in urban community governance, the comprehensive governance ability of the network governance model under network organization management is the highest, with an average of 50.93%. It shows that the established system is beneficial to the construction of urban community network governance. This exploration provides the direction for the IoT urban community network governance and constructs the urban community network governance system based on the intelligent sensor network.

show abstract

“…The Canadian state has transitioned from the principles and practices of traditional Public Administration (TPA) existing up to the 1970 and 1980s to NPM into the 2000s, and then to NPG to create the new administrative state (Brock, 2020). However, these theories and phases are not entirely distinct and sequential (Gow and Dufour, 2000; Osborne, 2006; Levi-Faur, 2012).…”

Section: Moving Away From Partisanship: From Tpa To Npm To Npgmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…NPG emphasizes interorganizational governance driven by steering or networked leadership; interdependence of organizations in policy design and delivery; decentering the state in policy development with shared acknowledgement of each partners' expertise and knowledge; the use of partnerships to address complex policy problems with far-reaching externalities and a plurality of actors, resources and knowledge working together in networks that are autonomous from exclusive state control and direction and share in the allocation of public resources (Salamon and Toepler, 2015;Klijn, 2012;Head, 2008;Pierre, 2000). NPG departed from the private sector philosophy of NPM to emphasize collaborative governance models based on reciprocal respect, interdependence and trust among the partners rather than on contracting and competition as the animators of relations (Brock, 2020), giving rise to ideas of co-production, co-management and co-governance (Conteh, 2018;Brandsen and Pestoff, 2006). Core NPG assumptions are that one sector possesses insufficient knowledge to define and decipher the policy challenges and that bureaucratic paralysis, lethargy or intransigence are surmounted by building strategic alliances and partnerships with organizations from the private and nonprofit sectors (Osborne, 2010).…”

Section: Moving Away From Partisanship: From Tpa To Npm To Npgmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Trudeau government and GIC appointments in Canada

Brock

Shepherd

2022

IJPSM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeAccording to the traditional view of public administration, a critical component of good policy formulation is the provision of frank and fearless advice to elected decision-makers. This advice can be provided by permanent public officials or by the people selected by the elected governments to fill key and continuing posts. However, there are major questions as to whether new Governor-in-Council (GIC) appointment processes rooted in new public governance (NPG) are yielding the expected results promised, such as less partisanism, as a consideration for appointment.Design/methodology/approachThe paper uses a mixed methods approach to examine the GIC process as it is used in Canada. In using these methods, the authors employed interviews with senior officials, governmental documents review and expert validation interviews to triangulate its main findings.FindingsThe paper uses the case of the revised appointment process for GIC appointments in Canada and suggests that the new arrangements do not deliver on merit-based criteria that ensures independence is protected between political executive and senior bureaucratic officials. Although new processes may be more open and transparent than past processes, the paper suggests that such processes are more susceptible to partisan influence under the guise of being merit-based.Research limitations/implicationsThe research was limited to one country context, Canada. As such, it will be necessary to expand this to other Westminster countries. Testing whether manifestations of new public governance in appointment processes elsewhere will be important to validate whether Canada is unique or not.Practical implicationsThe authors are left to wonder if this innovation of merit-based appointments in the new administrative state is obscuring the lines of accountability and whether it forms the basis for good policy advice despite promises to the contrary.Social implicationsTrust in the government is affected by decisions behind closed doors. They appear partisan, even when they may not be. Process matters if only to highlight increased value placed on meritorious appointments.Originality/valuePrevious studies on GIC appointments have generally been to explore representation as a value. That is, studies have questioned whether diversity is maintained, for example. However, few studies have explored appointment processes using institutional approaches to examine whether reforms to such processes have respected key principles, such as merit and accountability.

show abstract

Government and Non-profit Collaboration in Times of Deliverology, Policy Innovation Laboratories and Hubs, and New Public Governance

Cited by 21 publications

References 42 publications

Beyond COVID‐19: Five commentaries on reimagining governance for future crises and resilience

Beyond COVID‐19: Five commentaries on reimagining governance for future crises and resilience

Intelligent Sensor Network Using Internet of Things in Urban Community Network Governance

The Trudeau government and GIC appointments in Canada

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About