Assessing the impact of informal governance on political innovation

References

• Aucoin, P. 2012. “New Political Governance in Westminster Systems: Impartial Public Administration and Management Performance at Risk.” Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration and Institutions 25 (2): 177–199. doi:10.1111/gove.2012.25.issue-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ayres, S., and A. Marsh. 2013. “‘Reflections on Contemporary Debates in Policy Studies’, Special Issue.” Policy & Politics 41 (4): 643–663. doi:10.1332/147084413X674001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ayres, S., and G. Pearce. 2013. “A Whitehall Perspective on Decentralisation in England’s Emerging Territories.” Local Economy 28 (7–8): 801–816. doi:10.1177/0269094213500631
   Google Scholar
• Borzel, T., and D. Panke. 2012. “‘Network Governance: Effective and Legitimate?” In Theories of Democratic Network Governance, edited by E. Sørensen and J. Torfing, 153–165. London: Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Brie, M., and E. Stolting. 2013. “Formal Institutions and Informal Institutional Arrangements.” In International Handbook on Informal Governance, edited by T. Christiansen and C. Neuhold, 19–40. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Centre for Public Scrutiny. 2015. Devo Why? Devo How? Questions (And Some Answers) about Governance under English Devolution. London: Centre for Public Scrutiny.
   Google Scholar
• Christiansen, T., and C. Neuhold, eds. 2013. International Handbook on Informal Governance. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Conservative Party. 2015. The Conservative Party Manifesto 2015: Strong Leadership, a Clear Economic Plan, a Brighter, More Secure Future. London: Conservative Party.
   Google Scholar
• Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) & the Home Office. 2015. Cities and Local Government Devolution Bill. London: The Stationery Office.
   Google Scholar
• Ferreira Da Cruz, N., A. F. Tavares, R. C. Marques, S. Jorge, and L. De Sousa. 2015. “Measuring Local Government Transparency.” Public Management Review. doi:10.1080/14719037.2015.1051572.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flinders, M., and M. Wood. 2014. “Depoliticisation, Governance and the State.” Policy & Politics 42 (2): 135–149. doi:10.1332/030557312X655873.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedman, R. 1995. Front Stage, Backstage: The Dramatic Structure of Labour Negotiations. Massachusetts: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fung, A. 2012. “Continuous Institutional Innovation and the Pragmatic Conception of Democracy.” Polity 44 (4): 609–624. doi:10.1057/pol.2012.17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guarneros-Meza, V., and S. Martin (2014) “Boundary Spanning in Local Public Service Partnerships: Coaches, Advocates and Enforcers?” Public Management Review, 10.1080/1479037.2014.969761.
   Google Scholar
• Hajer, M. 2003. “Policy without Polity? Policy Analysis and the Institutional Void.” Policy Sciences 36: 175–195. doi:10.1023/A:1024834510939.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hambleton, R. 2015. “The Devolution Deception Must Be Exposed.” Local Government Chronicle. November. http://www.lgcplus.com/politics-and-policy/devolution-and-economic-growth/the-devolution-deception-must-be-exposed/7000578.article
   Google Scholar
• Harsh, M. 2013. “Informal Governance of Emerging Technologies in Africa.” In International Handbook on Informal Governance, edited by T. Christiansen and C. Neuhold, 481–501. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Hartley, J. 2014. “New Development: Eight and a Half Propositions to Stimulate Frugal Innovation.” Public Money & Management 34 (3): 227–232. doi:10.1080/09540962.2014.908034.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartley, J., E. Sørensen, and J. Torfing. 2013. “Collaborative Innovation: A Viable Alternative to Market Competition and Organizational Entrepreneurship.” Public Administration Review 73 (6): 821–830. doi:10.1111/puar.2013.73.issue-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Helmke, G., and S. Levitsky. 2013. “Informal Institutions and Comparative Politics: A Research Agenda.” In International Handbook on Informal Governance, edited by T. Christansen and C. Neuhold, 85–117. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Institute for Government. 2014. Achieving Political Decentralisation: Lessons from 30 Years of Attempting to Devolve Power in the UK. London: Institute for Government.
   Google Scholar
• Jessop, B. 2016. “Territory, Politics, Governance and Multispatial Metagovernance.” Territory, Politics, Governance 4 (1): 8–32. doi:10.1080/21622671.2015.1123173.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jiannan, W., M. Liang, and Y. Yuqian. 2013. “‘Innovation in the Chinese Public Sector: Typology and Distribution.” Public Administration 91 (2): 347–365. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9299.2011.02010.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kickert, W. J. M., E. H. Klijn, and J. F. M. Koppenjan. eds. 1997. Managing Complex Networks. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Klijn, E. H. 2014. “Political Leadership in Networks.” In Oxford Handbook of Political Leadership, edited by R. A. W. Rhodes and P. T Hart, 403–417. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Klijn, E. H., and J. Koppenjan. 2016. Governance Networks in the Public Sector. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Klijn, E.-H., B. Steijn, and J. Edelenbos. 2010. “The Impact of Network Management Strategies on the Outcomes in Governance Networks.” Public Administration 88 (4): 1063–1082. doi:10.1111/padm.2010.88.issue-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lane, C., and R. Bachman, eds. 1998. Trust Within and Between Organisations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lauth, H. J. 2013. “Informal Governance and Democratic Theory.” In International Handbook on Informal Governance, edited by T. Christiansen and C. Neuhold, 40–64. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Localis and Grant Thornton. 2015. Making Devolution Work: A Practical Guide for Local Leaders. London: Localis and Grant Thornton.
   Google Scholar
• Newman, J. 2012. Working the Spaces of Power: Activism, Neoliberalism and Gendered Labour. London: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• Osborne, S. P., and L. Brown. eds. 2013. Handbook of Innovations in Public Services. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Political Studies Association. 2016. Examining the Role of ‘Informal Governance’ in Devolution to England’s Cities. London: Political Studies Association.
   Google Scholar
• Polsby, N. 1984. Political Innovations in America: The Politics of Policy Initiation. New Haven: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Reh, C. 2013. “Informal Politics: The Normative Challenge.” In International Handbook on Informal Governance, edited by T. Christiansen and C. Neuhold, 65–84. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Rhodes, R. A. W. 2013. “Political Anthropology and Civil Service Reform: Prospects and Limits.” Policy & Politics 41 (4): 481–496. doi:10.1332/030557312X655684.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogers, E. 2003. Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sandford, M. 2016. “Devolution to Local Government in England.” House of Commons Library Briefing Paper, 07029. April. London: Stationary Office.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, M., and D. Richards. 2015. Against Ad Hocery: UK Devolution and the Need for Consultation, Consensus and Consideration. Manchester: University of Manchester.
   Google Scholar
• Sørensen, E. 2016. “Political Innovations: Innovations in political Institutions, Processes and Outputs.” Public Management Review. doi:10.1080/14719037.2016.1200661.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torfing, J., B. G. Peters, J. Pierre, and E. Sørensen. 2012. Interactive Governance: Advancing the Paradigm. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• van Jitske, P. V., and A. van Buuren. 2015. “Decision Making Patterns in Multilevel Governance: The Contribution of Informal and Procedural Interactions to Significant Multilevel Decisions.” Public Management Review. doi:10.1080/14719037.2015.1028974.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Tatenhove, J., J. Mak, and D. Liefferink. 2006. “The Inter-Play between Formal and Informal Practices.” Perspectives on European Politics and Society 7 (1): 8–24. doi:10.1080/15705850600839470.
   Google Scholar
• Wynen, J., K. Verhoest, E. Ongaro, and S. Van Thiel. 2014. “Innovation-Oriented Culture in the Public Sector: Do Managerial Autonomy and Result Control Lead to Innovation?” Public Management Review 16 (1): 45–66. doi:10.1080/14719037.2013.790273.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar