The Institutional Collective Action Framework

Feiock, Richard C.

doi:10.1111/psj.12023

Cited by 500 publications

(670 citation statements)

References 104 publications

(149 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

638

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The potential benefits of exchanges in forums depend not only on actors' goals, but also on the characteristics of forums (Feiock 2013), which vary on at least eight dimensions (see also Koontz and Moore Johnson 2004). For each of them, we discuss how the specific characteristics affect exchange processes among actors.…”

Section: Characteristics Of Forumsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Policy forums can serve to resolve a specific problem, or they can deal with a broader field (Feiock 2013). In the first case, the forum is set up in order to solve a well-defined problem and exists only until the problem has been solved.…”

Section: Specificity Of the Issue And Time Horizonmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In order to participate, actors must recognize a relation between forum participation and a likely outcome, i.e., a certain probability that they can achieve their goals (Ansell and Gash 2008;Feiock and Scholz 2010). The expected gains from forum participation must be higher than the opportunity costs of not pursuing a competing activity plus the transaction costs implied by participation in the forum (Feiock 2013). Transaction costs are the time and resources to be invested in getting access to the forum, preparing for the meetings, and spending time in forum meetings.…”

Section: Multipartite Exchange and Resource Dependencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…decisions and take the form of information costs, negotiation costs, or enforcement costs (Koontz and Moore Johnson 2004;Feiock 2013).…”

Section: Multipartite Exchange and Resource Dependencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…We therefore rely on actor-centered approaches such as rational-choice institutionalism (Hall and Taylor 1996) and the institutional collective action framework (Feiock 2013) to understand why policy forums exist. 3 These approaches posit that political actors are generally goaloriented and (boundedly) rational.…”

Section: Multipartite Exchange and Resource Dependencementioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Policy forums: Why do they exist and what are they used for?

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Policy forums are issue-based intermediary organizations where diverse types of political and societal actors repeatedly interact. Policy forums are important elements of modern governance systems as they allow actors to learn, negotiate, or build trust. They can vary in composition, size, membership logic, and other distinct features. This article lays the foundation of a theory of policy forums based on three interrelated elements: First, it discusses conditions for the formation of a forum and describes the logic of these organizations as one of an asymmetric multipartite exchange. Second, it enumerates the potential set of goals and motivations of participating actors that are fed into this exchange. Third, it proposes eight different dimensions on which policy forums differ and which affect the exchange mechanisms among actors. We claim that empirical work on policy forums should systematically take these elements into account and propose elements of a research agenda.

show abstract

Section: Characteristics Of Forumsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Specificity Of the Issue And Time Horizonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Multipartite Exchange and Resource Dependencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…decisions and take the form of information costs, negotiation costs, or enforcement costs (Koontz and Moore Johnson 2004;Feiock 2013).…”

Section: Multipartite Exchange and Resource Dependencementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Multipartite Exchange and Resource Dependencementioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Policy forums: Why do they exist and what are they used for?

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Managing the Cascading Risks of Droughts: Institutional Adaptation in Transboundary River Basins

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transboundary river basins experience complex coordination challenges during droughts. The multiscale nature of drought creates potential for spillovers when upstream adaptation decisions have cascading impacts on downstream regions. This paper advances the institutional analysis and development (IAD) framework to examine drought adaptation decision‐making in a multijurisdictional context. We integrate concepts of risk management into the IAD framework to characterize drought across its natural and human dimensions. A global analysis identifies regions where severe droughts combine with institutional fragmentation to require coordinated adaptation. We apply the risk‐based IAD framework to examine drought adaptation in the Rio Bravo/Grande—an archetypical transboundary river shared by the United States and Mexico and by multiple states within each country. The analysis draws on primary data and a questionnaire with 50 water managers in four distinct, yet interlinked, “institutional catchments,” which vary in terms of their drought characteristics, socioeconomic attributes, and governance arrangements. The results highlight the heterogeneity of droughts and uneven distribution of their impacts due to the interplay of drought hazards and institutional fragmentation. Transboundary water sharing agreements influence the types and sequence of interactions between upstream and downstream jurisdictions, which we describe as spillovers that involve both conflict and cooperation. Interdependent jurisdictions often draw on informal decision‐making venues (e.g., data sharing, operational decisions) due to the higher transaction costs and uncertainty associated with courts and planning processes, yet existing coordination and conflict resolution venues have proven insufficient for severe, sustained droughts. Observatories will be needed to measure and manage the cascading risks of drought.

show abstract

Policy between Evolution and Engineering

Schaffernicht¹

2017

Social Systems Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Institutional Collective Action Framework

Abstract: Institutional collective action (ICA)

Cited by 500 publications

References 104 publications

Policy forums: Why do they exist and what are they used for?

Policy forums: Why do they exist and what are they used for?

Managing the Cascading Risks of Droughts: Institutional Adaptation in Transboundary River Basins

Policy between Evolution and Engineering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About