ScholarGate
Asistente

Comparar métodos

Revisa los métodos seleccionados uno junto a otro; las filas que difieren aparecen resaltadas.

Comparative Public Administration×Collaborative Governance Assessment×
CampoPublic AdministrationPublic Administration
FamiliaProcess / pipelineProcess / pipeline
Año de origen19642008
Autor originalFred W. RiggsChris Ansell & Alison Gash
TipoCross-system comparative analysisProcess-based governance assessment framework
Fuente seminalRiggs, F. W. (1964). Administration in Developing Countries: The Theory of Prismatic Society. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. ISBN: 9780395067352Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative Governance in Theory and Practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 543–571. DOI ↗
AliasComparative Administrative Analysis, Cross-National Public Administration Study, Comparative Bureaucracy AnalysisCollaborative Governance Analysis, Ansell-Gash Governance Framework, Multi-Stakeholder Governance Assessment
Relacionados44
ResumenComparative public administration is the systematic study of administrative systems across countries, regions or historical periods in order to explain similarities and differences in how states organise and run their bureaucracies. Fred Riggs, a pioneer of the field, argued in his 1964 Theory of Prismatic Society that administration cannot be understood apart from its ecological context — the social, economic, political and cultural environment in which it is embedded. The method compares administrative structures, behaviours and performance while situating each case in its setting, guarding against the assumption that arrangements which work in one country will transfer to another. Its purpose is to build generalisable knowledge about administration that is sensitive to context rather than ethnocentric.Collaborative governance assessment is a framework for analysing arrangements in which public agencies and non-state stakeholders deliberate together to make or implement public policy by consensus. Synthesised by Chris Ansell and Alison Gash in their 2008 article from a meta-analysis of over a hundred cases, it identifies the starting conditions, institutional design and facilitative leadership that feed into an iterative collaborative process and ultimately shape outcomes. The framework treats collaboration not as a single event but as a cycle of face-to-face dialogue, trust-building, shared understanding and intermediate commitments. Its purpose is to explain why some multi-stakeholder partnerships succeed while others stall or collapse.
ScholarGateConjunto de datos
  1. v1
  2. 2 Fuentes
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 1 Fuentes
  3. PUBLISHED

Ir a la búsqueda Descargar diapositivas

ScholarGateComparar métodos: Comparative Public Administration · Collaborative Governance Assessment. Recuperado el 2026-06-25 de https://scholargate.app/es/compare