<p>Collaboration is a dynamic process where regimes emerge, go dormant or extinct, only to resurface with new members, names, forms, geographic scopes, and new purposes. This paper explores the transitions collaborations make when they move from provision (e.g., problem definition, planning, policy development,) to production (e.g., implementing projects, delivering services, etc.). The paper utilizes the Collaborative Life-Cycle Framework to explore the transitions from provision to production in 31 collaborations that emerged in four watersheds in the United States—Delaware Inland Bays, Narragansett Bay, Tampa Bay, and Tillamook Bay. Our analysis found that some collaborations engaged in what we call mixed services (e.g., planning for the transition to production). While this additional stage took more time, those that did not engage in mixed services had less success in the production phase. It was also clear that some collaborations were clearly involved in “governance”, while others were focused only on provision and/or production. The paper concludes with a discussion of the implications for theory and practice.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Transitioning from planning to implementation: comparing collaborative governance and developmental dynamics in 4 watersheds

  • Graham Ambrose,
  • Mark T. Imperial

摘要

Collaboration is a dynamic process where regimes emerge, go dormant or extinct, only to resurface with new members, names, forms, geographic scopes, and new purposes. This paper explores the transitions collaborations make when they move from provision (e.g., problem definition, planning, policy development,) to production (e.g., implementing projects, delivering services, etc.). The paper utilizes the Collaborative Life-Cycle Framework to explore the transitions from provision to production in 31 collaborations that emerged in four watersheds in the United States—Delaware Inland Bays, Narragansett Bay, Tampa Bay, and Tillamook Bay. Our analysis found that some collaborations engaged in what we call mixed services (e.g., planning for the transition to production). While this additional stage took more time, those that did not engage in mixed services had less success in the production phase. It was also clear that some collaborations were clearly involved in “governance”, while others were focused only on provision and/or production. The paper concludes with a discussion of the implications for theory and practice.