Abstract
The notion of governance networks urges study of complex interaction processes rather than formal institutions. We argue that the study of interaction in governance networks should be widened to include different ways in which interaction shapes network outcomes. Here, we focus on a dimension of governance networks that is understood as fundamental and problematic, but that as yet has not been researched through the study of interaction: the construction of responsibility in such networks. We propose a model for the analysis of responsibility construction through (implicit) negotiation on the three proposed elements of responsibility and their links: stakeholder identities, contributions to reform, and norms. This model called “the triangle of responsibility in network governance” is the main result of our research. In addition, we offer an empirical case that illustrates both the problem of responsibility construction in network governance and the usefulness of our model, thereby providing proof of concept.
Highlights
Responsibility, like most intangible phenomenon, is socially constructed
Responsibility construction is studied through a newly constructed model, combining insights from theories on responsibility construction from the individual-focused, psychological perspective (Schlenker et al, 1994) and a more interaction-focused, constructivist perspective (Uzzell et al, 2012). These insights are combined into a model of responsibility construction in governance networks, proposing that responsibility is collectively constructed through negotiation on different elements of responsibility. This model was constructed through a process of grounded-theory construction involving the methodical gathering and analysis of data from a stakeholder dialogue of a governance network, exemplary for governance networks aimed at reform of resource management as described above
The specific network studied was aimed at reform in Dutch livestock farming, a sector commonly seen to be in need of a so-called “license to produce,” referring to the diminishing public support for current livestock farming practices
Summary
Responsibility, like most intangible phenomenon, is socially constructed. This goes for responsibility of individual people as well as groups. The following propositions with regard to the requirement of construction of responsibility in the context of reform of complex problems can be formulated: For the norms-contributions to reform link to be strong, a clear and salient set of norms must be perceived to exist and applied to contributions to reform and should govern conduct (e.g., clear laws, moral codes, and social roles) These norms should be clearly specified, not subject to alternative interpretations, not in conflict with other potentially applicable prescriptions, and clearly pertinent to the contribution to reform in question. In this second section of the article, we apply the “triangle of responsibility in network governance” to an empirical case to provide proof of concept
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
