IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/jsd123/v9y2016i1p217.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Paradox of Bureaucratic Collaboration Government Bureaucracies in Robust Collaboration with the Public

Author

Listed:
  • Carie Fox
  • Philip Murphy

Abstract

When a government agency engages in robust public participation, it puts bureaucratic culture at risk. Yet agencies do, sometimes, engage successfully in collaboration. The Paradox of Bureaucratic Collaboration suggests that an agency will be willing to engage in robust collaboration if the temporary disruption to bureaucratic systems helps the agency to become more perfectly bureaucratic in the long run. By applying systems perspectives to bureaucracy, this paper assists collaboration designers and would-be participants to understand when bureaucracies might not—or should not—collaborate robustly, to identify the opportunities for robust collaboration that prove the exception and, where robust collaboration is viable, to minimize bureaucratic risk while maximizing overall collaboration benefits.

Suggested Citation

  • Carie Fox & Philip Murphy, 2016. "The Paradox of Bureaucratic Collaboration Government Bureaucracies in Robust Collaboration with the Public," Journal of Sustainable Development, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 9(1), pages 217-217, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:ibn:jsd123:v:9:y:2016:i:1:p:217
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jsd/article/download/29535/30429
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jsd/article/view/29535
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibn:jsd123:v:9:y:2016:i:1:p:217. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.