Complex systems, governance and policy administration consequences*

Abstract

This paper combines insights from literature on complex systems theory and the state, applies them to new challenges facing public administrators in metropolitan areas, and tests them in a case study of the Peace Officers Association of Los Angeles County (POALAC). The argument is advanced that administrative networks, shared governance, and co-production of public services developed in the are real-world exemplars of the emergent properties of complex adaptive systems (CAS). As the production of social capital and public trust of government decline in response to the increasing inability of hierarchical, topdown, command-and-control institutions to solve complex societal problems, the fundamental nature of associations and relations among citizens, policy makers, civic leaders, and government is changing in metropolitan areas as government slowly shifts toward governance. The case study of POALAC reveals a coordinated networked administrative response to the complexity of regional law enforcement consistent with theoretical predictions. Introduction This paper explores how complex metropolitan systems are evolving through the creation of administrative networks, and how those networks influence public administration and policy formation through the work of public administrators. It draws on previous research (Bogason, 2000; Meek & Newell, 2005; Morcol, 2002; Newell & Meek, 1997) to establish a synthesis of complex systems theories from which we develop central tenets that ground an understanding of complex urban systems. It then sketches out how these conditions have influenced the recent movement toward shared governance in urban environments. The paper embraces the conjunctive state (Frederickson, 1999) as a central feature of public administration. The interplay of administrative conjunction with policy deliberation and administration is then explored through a case study of the collective responses of police officers in Los Angeles county to what is referred to as the disarticulated One concern of the paper is to examine the characteristic policy deliberation and administration that evolves from complex conditions, and the consequences of such deliberations for public administrators. Collective activities among public administrators - administrative conjunction - greatly influence policy administration. What is yet to be explored in both the policy and administrative networkliteratures are consequences ofadministrative conjunction that are a product of complex jurisdictional interdependences as well as a contributor to complex urban system management. The very condition of complexity that draws administrators to work collectively is reflective of their deliberation and collective action. Such influence also has administrative consequences. The goal of this paper is to examine these consequences and highlight their implications for advancing complexity thinking for innovation in public administration. The paper opens with a review of selected literature on complexity theory and its relevance for public administration, followed by characterization of metropolitan environments as disarticulated states full of complexity and self-organization. These forms of collective activities are then discussed within the context of public management network theory. Finally, the paper examines a case study analysis of the POALAC network in order to highlight the central policy administrative consequences that evolve out of practices. Complex systems theory, while developed in the natural sciences, has much to offer the social sciences. While our previous work provided a cautious assessment of the applicability of various complex systems theories to human behavior (Newell & Meek, 2000), this paper provides a summary of findings from recent literature on complex systems that can be applied to the recent movement toward shared governance in urban environments - the socalled state. …

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 — 33 citations exist upstream.

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