Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 329

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Dealing with Wicked Problems in Networks: Analyzing an Environmental Debate from a Network Perspective

van Bueren, E. M.·2003·Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory

Abstract

Policy makers in today's network society are increasingly confronted with complex and wicked policy problems that require collective action. This article analyzes such a collective action problem from a policy network perspective. By explaining impasses and breakthroughs in decision‐making processes from a cognitive, a social, and an institutional point of view, the network perspective offers explanations for the presence and absence of collective action.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/jopart/mug017

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 329

Metadata

Authors
van Bueren, E. M.
Venue
Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory
Published
2003-04-01
Volume
13
Issue
2
Pages
193-212
ISSN
  • 1053-1858 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-9803
OpenAlex
W4232717689
Cited by
329
References
0
FWCI
10.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Dealing with Wicked Problems in Networks: Analyzing an Environmental Debate from a Network Perspective. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jopart/mug017
The paper
van Bueren, E. M. (2003). Dealing with Wicked Problems in Networks: Analyzing an Environmental Debate from a Network Perspective. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mug017

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.