Building Consensual Institutions: Networks and the National Estuary Program
Open accessAbstract
Currently, many approaches to solving policy problems seek to create community-based, less coercive solutions that are creating the conditions for the birth of new regional governmental institutions. We argue that networks form the core of these emergent structures and that federal programs can play a positive role in developing local networks. Our empirical work compares networks in estuaries included in National Estuary Program with networks in comparable estuaries that were not. We find that the networks in NEP areas span more levels of government, integrate more experts into policy discussions, nurture stronger interpersonal ties between stakeholders, and create greater faith in the procedural fairness of local policy, thus laying the foundation for a new form of cooperative governance.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A leader's willingness to absorb high transaction costs may help reinforce the collaborative endeavor.
“In addition, the willingness of a leader to absorb the high (and potentially constraining) transaction costs of initiating a collaborative effort, for example, by providing staffing, technologies, and other resources may help reinforce the endeavor (e.g., Schneider et al. 2003).”
From An Integrative Framework for Collaborative Governance (2012) · cites this paper as Schneider et al. 2003
Cites
Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital
Putnam, R. D. (1995) · Journal of Democracy · doi:10.1353/jod.1995.0002 · Cited by 14,037 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
An Integrative Framework for Collaborative Governance
Emerson, K., Nabatchi, T., & Balogh, S. (2012) · Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory · doi:10.1093/jopart/mur011 · Cited by 3,637 · see citing works
Isaac, M. E. (2012) · Agricultural Systems · doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2012.01.011 · Cited by 127 · see citing works
- Authors
- Schneider, M., Scholz, J., Lubell, M., Mindruta, D., & Edwardsen, M.
- Affiliations
- Florida State University (US)
- Venue
- American Journal of Political Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2003-01
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 143-158
- ISSN
- 0092-5853 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-5907
- OpenAlex
- W2082808961
- Cited by
- 493
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 42 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 33 · 2013: 25 · 2012: 39
- FWCI
- 40.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- American Journal of Political Science (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (9815473)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Public Administration › Public Policy and Administration Research
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Coastal and Marine Management
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Policy Transfer and Learning
- Keywords
- National Estuary Program, estuary management, policy networks, cooperative governance, intergovernmental networks, federal programs, stakeholder networks, procedural justice
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