The Institutional Collective Action Framework
Open accessAbstract
I nstitutional collective action ( ICA ) dilemmas arise from the division or partitioning of authority in which decisions by one government in one or more specific functional area impacts other governments and/or other functions. The focus on externalities of choice in fragmented systems integrates multiple research traditions into a conceptual system to understand and investigate collective dilemmas ubiquitous in contemporary governance arrangements. The mechanisms for mitigating ICA dilemmas are classified according to their scope and enforcement. Incentives to participate in a mechanism are hypothesized to favor mechanisms that provide the greatest gain for the least cost under different conditions of collaboration risk as determined by the nature of the underlying ICA problem, the compositions of affected jurisdictions, and institutional contexts. After reviewing empirical applications of the framework, an agenda to advance the theoretical and empirical development of the ICA approach is advanced.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Cites
Coase, R. H. (1960) · The Journal of Law and Economics · doi:10.1086/466560 · Cited by 18,255 · see citing works
Modes of Network Governance: Structure, Management, and Effectiveness
Provan, K. G., & Kenis, P. (2007) · Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory · doi:10.1093/jopart/mum015 · Cited by 4,006 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
INTER‐MUNICIPAL COOPERATION AND COSTS: EXPECTATIONS AND EVIDENCE
BEL, G., & WARNER, M. E. (2015) · Public Administration · doi:10.1111/padm.12104 · Cited by 335 · see citing works
Data Governance in the Age of Large-Scale Data-Driven Language Technology
Jernite, Y., Nguyen, H., Biderman, S., Rogers, A., Masoud, M., Danchev, V., Tan, S., Luccioni, A. S., Subramani, N., Johnson, I., et al. (2022) · 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness Accountability and Transparency · doi:10.1145/3531146.3534637 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
“The approach of Feiock [52] addresses dilemmas stemming from different externalities, such as different local regulations of the object of governance.”
BackgroundDimand, A. M. (2022) · International Journal of Public Sector Management · doi:10.1108/ijpsm-10-2021-0239 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
- Authors
- Feiock, R. C.
- Corresponding author
- Feiock, Richard C.
- ORCID
- Feiock, Richard C.
- Venue
- Policy Studies Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2013-08
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 397-425
- ISSN
- 0190-292X (ISSN-L)
- 1541-0072
- OpenAlex
- W1552709038
- Cited by
- 691
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 56 · 2025: 71 · 2024: 46 · 2023: 73 · 2022: 51 · 2021: 61 · 2020: 82 · 2019: 62 · 2018: 53 · 2017: 46 · 2016: 37 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 7
- FWCI
- 93.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Policy Studies Journal (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Public Administration › Public Policy and Administration Research
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Systems and Governance
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Local Government Finance and Decentralization
- Keywords
- institutional collective action, collective action problems, intergovernmental relations, governance arrangements, participation incentives, enforcement mechanisms, interjurisdictional collaboration
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