Co-participation in the Swiss water forum networkFootnote

Paper resubmitted to the International Journal of Water Resources Development, Special Issue on ‘Understanding emergent participation practices in water governance’

References

• Adam, S., & Kriesi H. (2007). The network approach. In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process (pp. 129–154). Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18, 543–571.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bates, L. E., Green, M., Leonard, R., & Walker, I. (2013). The influence of forums and multilevel governance on the climate adaptation practices of australian organizations. Ecology and Society, 18(4), art. 62.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berry, J. M., & Wilcox, C. (2015). Interest group society. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Bochsler, D. (2009). Neighbours or friends? When Swiss cantonal governments cooperate with each other. Regional and Federal Studies, 19, 349–370. doi:10.1080/13597560902957476
   Google Scholar
• Börzel, T., & Risse, T. (2010). Governance without state: Can it work? Regulation & Governance, 4, 113–134. doi:10.1111/(ISSN)1748-5991
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bouwen, P. (2004). Exchanging access goods for access: A comparative study of business lobbying in the European Union institutions. European Journal of Political Research, 43, 337–369. doi:10.1111/ejpr.2004.43.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cranmer, S. J., & Desmarais, B. A. (2011). Inferential network analysis with exponential random graph models. Political Analysis, 19, 66–86. doi:10.1093/pan/mpq037
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cranmer, S. J., Leifeld P., McClurg S. D., & Rolfe M. (2017). Navigating the range of statistical tools for inferential network analysis. American Journal of Political Science, 61, 237–251.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crona, B. I., & Parker, J. N. (2012). Learning in support of governance: Theories, methods, and a framework to assess how bridging organizations contribute to adaptive resource governance. Ecology and Society, 17, 32–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dür, A., & De Bièvre, D. (2007). The question of interest group influence. Journal of Public Policy, 27(01), 1–12. doi:10.1017/S0143814X07000591
   Google Scholar
• Dür, A., & Mateo, G. (2013). Gaining access or going public? Interest group strategies in five European countries. European Journal of Political Research, 52, 660–686. doi:10.1111/ejpr.2013.52.issue-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edelenbos, J., & Teisman, G. (2013). Water governance capacity: The art of dealing with a multiplicity of levels, sectors and domains. International Journal of Water Governance, 1, 89–108. doi:10.7564/12-IJWG5
   Google Scholar
• Edelenbos, J., & van Meerkerk, I. (2015). Connective capacity in water governance practices: The meaning of trust and boundary spanning for integrated performance. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 12, 25–29. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2014.08.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Emerson, K., Nabatchi, T., & Balogh, S. (2012). An Integrative Framework for Collaborative Governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22, 1–29. doi:10.1093/jopart/mur011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feiock, R. C. (2013). The institutional collective action framework. Policy Studies Journal, 41, 397–425. doi:10.1111/psj.2013.41.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feldman, M. S., & Khademian, A. M. (2007). The role of the public manager in inclusion: Creating communities of participation. Governance, 20, 305–324. doi:10.1111/gove.2007.20.issue-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischer, M. (2016). Institutions and policy networks in Europe. In J. N. Victor, M. Lubell, & A. Montgomery (Eds.), Oxford handbook of political networks (pp. 833–854). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer, M., & Leifeld, P. (2015). Policy forums: Why do they exist and what are they used for? Policy Sciences, 48, 363–382. doi:10.1007/s11077-015-9224-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischer, M., & Schläpfer I. (2017). Metagovernance and policy forum outputs in Swiss environmental politics. Environmental Politics, 26, 870–892. doi: 10.1080/09644016.2017.1284981.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer, M., & Sciarini, P. (2015). Unpacking reputational power: Intended and unintended determinants of the assessment of actors’ power. Social Networks, 42, 60–71. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2015.02.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischer, M., & Sciarini, P. (2016). Collaborative tie formation in policy networks: A cross-sector perspective. The Journal of Politics, 78, 63–74. doi:10.1086/683061
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huxham, C., Vangen, S., Huxham, C., & Eden, C. (2000). The challenge of collaborative governance. Public Management an International Journal of Research and Theory, 2, 337–358.
   Google Scholar
• Ingold, K. (2011). Network structures within policy processes: Coalitions, power, and brokerage in swiss climate policy. Policy Studies Journal, 39, 435–459. doi:10.1111/psj.2011.39.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ingold, K., & Leifeld, P. (2016). Structural and institutional determinants of reputational power in policy networks. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 26(1), 1–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ingold, K., & Varone, F. (2012). Treating policy brokers seriously: Evidence from the climate policy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22, 319–346. doi:10.1093/jopart/mur035
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jasny, L., & Lubell, M. (2015). Two-mode brokerage in policy networks. Social Networks, 41, 36–47. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2014.11.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klijn, E.-H., Koppenjan, J., & Termeer, K. (1995). Managing networks in the public sector: A theoretical study of management strategies in policy networks. Public Administration, 73, 437–454. doi:10.1111/padm.1995.73.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koontz, T. M., & Johnson, E. M. (2004). One size does not fit all: Matching breadth of stakeholder participation to watershed group accomplishments. Policy Sciences, 37, 185–204. doi:10.1023/B:OLIC.0000048532.94150.07
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leifeld, P., & Schneider, V. (2012). Information exchange in policy networks. American Journal of Political Science, 56, 731–744. doi:10.1111/ajps.2012.56.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leifeld, P., Cranmer S. J., & Desmarais B. A. (2016). xergm: Extensions for Exponential Random Graph Models. R package.
   Google Scholar
• Lijphart, A. (1999). Patterns of democracy: Government forms and performance in thirty-six countries. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lubell, M. (2013). Governing institutional complexity: The ecology of games framework. Policy Studies Journal, 41, 537–559. doi:10.1111/psj.2013.41.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lubell, M., Mewhirter J., Berardo R., & Scholz J. (2017). Transaction costs and the perceived effectiveness of complex institutional systems. Public Administration Review, 77, 668–680. doi: 10.1111/puar.12622.
   Google Scholar
• Mansbridge, J. (2014). The role of the state in governing the commons. Environmental Science & Policy, 36, 8–10. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2013.07.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mauch, C., & Reynard, E. (2004). The evolution of water regime in Switzerland. In I. Kissling-Näf, & S. Kuks (Eds.), The evolution of national water regimes in Europe (pp. 293–328). Dortrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers. doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-2484-9
   Google Scholar
• Moss, T., & Newig, J. (2010). Multilevel water governance and problems of scale: Setting the stage for a broader debate. Environmental Management, 46(1), 1–6. doi:10.1007/s00267-010-9531-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons. The evolution of institutions for collective actors. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511807763
   Google Scholar
• Ostrom, E. (2010). Polycentric systems for coping with collective action and global environmental change. Global Environmental Change, 20, 550–557.10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.07.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Provan, K. G., & Kenis, P. (2008). Modes of network governance: Structure, management, and effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18, 229–252.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R Development Core Team. (2014). R: A language and environment for statistical computing.
   Google Scholar
• Sciarini, P., Fischer, M., & Traber, D. (2015). Political decision-making in Switzerland. The consensus model under pressure. Basingstoke / New York: Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1057/9781137508607
   Google Scholar
• Scott, T. A, & Thomas C. W. (2017). Unpacking the collaborative toolbox: Why and when do public managers choose collaborative governance strategies? Policy Studies Journal, 45, 191–214. doi: 10.1111/psj.12162
   Google Scholar
• Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2009). Making governance networks effective and democratic through metagovernance. Public Administration, 87, 234–258.10.1111/j.1467-9299.2009.01753.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spekkink, W. A. H., & Boons, F. A. A. (2016). The emergence of collaborations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 26, 613–630.10.1093/jopart/muv030
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tortajada, C. (2010a). Water governance: Some critical issues. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 26, 297–307.10.1080/07900621003683298
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tortajada, C. (2010b). Water governance: A research agenda. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 26, 309–316.10.1080/07900621003683322
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Meerkerk, I., Edelenbos J., & Klijn E.-H. (2014). Connective management and governance network performance: The mediating role of throughput legitimacy. Findings from survey research on complex water projects in the Netherlands. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 33, 746–764.
   Google Scholar
• Wang, P., Sharpe, K., Robins, G. L., & Pattison, P. E. (2009). Exponential random graph (p*) models for affiliation networks. Social Networks, 31, 12–25. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2008.08.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, P., Robins, G., Pattison, P., & Lazega, E. (2013). Exponential random graph models for multilevel networks. Social Networks, 35, 96–115.10.1016/j.socnet.2013.01.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar