Investigating Innovative Models of Governance and Collaboration for Effective Public Administration in a Multi-Stakeholder Landscape

Abstract

This thesis investigates innovative models of governance and collaboration in public administration to address the complexities of a multi-stakeholder landscape. The study explores the principles, characteristics, types, benefits, and challenges of collaborative governance, public-private partnerships, networked governance, and cross-sectoral collaboration. The research utilizes qualitative and quantitative methods, including interviews, surveys, and document analysis, to gather comprehensive insights. The findings showcase the importance of embracing new approaches that involve government agencies, private sector organizations, and civil society groups working together to tackle complex societal challenges. Tables present the key elements of each model, providing a visual comparison of their features and real-world applications. Additionally, the study highlights evaluation frameworks, such as the Logic Model, Results-Based Management (RBM), Theory of Change, Impact Evaluation, and Utilization-Focused Evaluation, to assess effectiveness and measure impact. The thesis contributes to the field of public administration by emphasizing the significance of collaborative governance and cross-sectoral collaboration. The research provides insights for policymakers, public administrators, and practitioners to adopt effective approaches in addressing challenges and achieving desired outcomes. By embracing innovative models of governance and collaboration, public administration can foster cooperation, inclusivity, and collective problem-solving among stakeholders. The study concludes with a call for further research and implementation of these approaches to create a resilient, responsive, and sustainable public administration system that delivers meaningful impact to society.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 10 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.