This paper describes how an urban commons is established on the Amsterdam market square Plein ’40-’45, to explain how an experimental learning environment can be a living lab for improving collaborative governance arrangements. We detail how this improvement is facilitated by an experimental learning environment that engages stakeholders in a process where practical solutions are developed and systemic obstacles are addressed and redesigned simultaneously. Our study is guided by the research question: How can an experimental learning environment develop practical solutions as a means to address systemic obstacles and improve collaborative governance arrangements?
LINK
Urban commons is presented as a challenge of collaborative governance. This study delivers a normative perspective to analyse and evaluate processes and outcomes of the governance of urban commons. It demonstrates the development and application of the perspective in action research on Amsterdam’s Zero Waste Lab case, as a way to better understand successful and failing institutions in a concrete practice and to design interventions for improvement. Consequently, the (im)plausibility of collective action in urban communities and the participation of public actors present dilemmas for urban commons. The study specifically synthesises urban commons and collaborative governance scholarship and relates also in general to the transition towards co-creation in governing the city, e.g. in public administration or planning.
DOCUMENT
Our approach is multi-actor and solution driven: • We study global problems with the people directly involved in those problems. • We study what those people do, how they do it, and how their practices can be improved. • This allows us to unpack global governance into more local practices of new and underrepresented actors, and • to develop new collaborative solutions to global problems through communities of practice • using research methods such as interviews, surveys, focus discussion groups, archival work, and citizen science
DOCUMENT
Collaborative learning is not a new teaching and learning approach; it has been around since the 1970s and is an evidence-based practice that has been proven to be effective time after time. Therefore, instead of reinventing the wheel or only relying on best practices or anecdotal evidence of what works and what doesn’t, especially when designing Collaborative Online International Learning (COIL) environments, educators might find it useful to make use of existing collaborative learning instructional design elements. These elements have been scientifically proven to be effective and can be applied in both the physical and online international classroom.
LINK
Abstract: The typical structure of the healthcare sector involves (specialist) intertwined practices co-occurring in formal or informal networks. These practices must answer to the concerns and needs of all related stakeholders. Multimorbidity and the need to share knowledge for scientific development are among the driving factors for collaboration in healthcare. To establish and keep up a permanent collaborative link, it takes effort and understanding of the network characteristics that must be governed. It is not hard to find practices of Network Governance (NG) in a variety of industries. Still, there is a lack of insight in this subject, including knowledge on how to establish and maintain an effective healthcare network. Consequently, this study's research question is: How is network governance organized in the healthcare sector? A systematic literature study was performed to select 80 NG articles. Based on these publications the characteristics of NG are made explicit. The findings demonstrate that combinations of governance style (relational versus contractual governance) and governance structure (lead versus shared governance) lead to different network dynamics. Furthermore, the results show that in order to comprehend how networks in the healthcare sector emerge and can be regulated, it is vital to understand the current network type. Additionally, it informs us of the governing factors. Zie https://www.hbo-kennisbank.nl/details/sharekit_han:oai:surfsharekit.nl:e4f8fa3a-4af8-42ef-b2dd-c86d77b4cec6
MULTIFILE
Understanding the decision-making process of a boardroom is one of the most fascinating parts of organizational research. We are all interested in power games, team dynamics and how the external environment could influence the decision of directors. One of the important buzzwords of today is “good governance” and many boards face a lot of societal pressure to implement best practices of governance. It goes beyond regulatory requirements and boards need to take a different perspective on integrating governance codes and best practices in their organizations. In this study, we focused on the role of individual directors in developing organizational responses to that pressure. More specifically, we looked at how directors’ own cognitive frames of governance influence the way boards choose best practices.
MULTIFILE
Urban construction logistics has a big impact on cities. The topic of this paper is governance strategies for realising more sustainable urban construction logistics. Although not much research has been done in the field of governance of construction logistics, several authors have stressed the fragmented nature of the construction industry and the importance of collaboration in urban construction logistics as issues. A literature review was done to identify the barriers in collaboration. Based on these barriers the research objective was to determine which drivers for collaborative governance are needed to improve urban construction logistics. The methods for data collection were semi-structured interviews and a focus group. The collaborative governance model is applied as a strategy to overcome the barriers in collaboration and governance identified. Key findings are both formal and informal barriers hinder the governance of construction logistics. Based on a collaborative governance model we identified four for improving collaborative governance.
DOCUMENT
Educational innovations often tend to fail, mainly because teachers and school principals do not feel involved or are not allowed to have a say. Angela de Jong's dissertation shows the importance of school principals and teachers leading 'collaborative innovation' together. Collaborative innovation requires a collaborative, distributed approach involving both horizontal and vertical working relationships in a school. Her research shows that teams with more distributed leadership have a more collaborative 'spirit' to improve education. Team members move beyond formal (leadership) roles, and work more collectively on school-wide educational improvement from intrinsic motivation. De Jong further shows that school principals seek a balance in steering and providing space. She distinguished three leadership patterns: Team Player, Key Player, Facilitator. Team players in particular are important for more collaborative innovation in a school. They balance between providing professional space to teachers (who look beyond their own classroom) and steering for strategy, frameworks, boundaries, and vision. This research took place in schools working with the program of Foundation leerKRACHT, a program implemented by more than a thousand schools (primary, secondary, and vocational education). The study recommends, towards school principals and teachers, and also towards trainers, policymakers, and school board members, to reflect more explicitly on their roles in collaborative innovation and talk about those roles.
DOCUMENT
The aim of this study is to understand how governance mechanisms in cross-sector collaborations (CSCs) for sustainability affect value creation and capture and subsequently the survival of this organizational form. Drawing on a longitudinal, participatory, single-case study of collaborative action in the textile industry, we identify three governance mechanisms—safeguarding, bundling and connecting—that coevolve with the rising and waning of collaborative tensions and the shifting levels of action in the CSC we studied. These mechanisms aided value creation and helped facilitate private value capture. We integrate these insights into a process model that visualizes the interplay between governance mechanisms of tensions and systems of value creation and capture in CSCs for sustainability. Our study contributes to the cross-sector collaboration literature by providing a dynamic and nuanced understanding of how governance mechanisms influence outcomes in CSCs for sustainability. We also add to the business model for sustainability literature by theorizing the value creation and capture system of collaborative rather than individual organizations. Our findings have important implications for policymakers who fund collaborative organizations and practitioners who manage or participate in them.
DOCUMENT
Artificial intelligence (AI) is a technology which is increasingly being utilised in society and the economy worldwide, but there is much disquiet over problematic and dangerous implementations of AI, or indeed even AI itself deciding to do dangerous and problematic actions. These developments have led to concerns about whether and how AI systems currently adhere to and will adhere to ethical standards, stimulating a global and multistakeholder conversation on AI ethics and the production of AI governance initiatives. Such developments form the basis for this chapter, where we give an insight into what is happening in Australia, China, the European Union, India and the United States. We commence with some background to the AI ethics and regulation debates, before proceedings to give an overview of what is happening in different countries and regions, namely Australia, China, the European Union (including national level activities in Germany), India and the United States. We provide an analysis of these country profiles, with particular emphasis on the relationship between ethics and law in each location. Overall we find that AI governance and ethics initiatives are most developed in China and the European Union, but the United States has been catching up in the last eighteen months.
DOCUMENT