IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/policy/v42y2009i3p211-225.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A fresh look at a policy sciences methodology: collaborative modeling for more effective policy

Author

Listed:
  • Kristan Cockerill
  • Lacy Daniel
  • Leonard Malczynski
  • Vincent Tidwell

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Kristan Cockerill & Lacy Daniel & Leonard Malczynski & Vincent Tidwell, 2009. "A fresh look at a policy sciences methodology: collaborative modeling for more effective policy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(3), pages 211-225, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:policy:v:42:y:2009:i:3:p:211-225
    DOI: 10.1007/s11077-009-9080-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11077-009-9080-8
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11077-009-9080-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. J Rosenhead, 2006. "Past, present and future of problem structuring methods," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(7), pages 759-765, July.
    2. Rebecca M. Hendrick & David Nachmias, 1992. "The Policy Sciences: The Challenge of Complexity," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 11(3‐4), pages 310-328, September.
    3. Roger Pielke, 2004. "What future for the policy sciences?," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 37(3), pages 209-225, December.
    4. Coglianese, Cary & Allen, Laurie K., 2003. "Building Sector-Based Consensus: A Review of the EPA's Common Sense Initiative," Working Paper Series rwp03-037, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    5. Mark Lubell, 2004. "Collaborative environmental institutions: All talk and no action?," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(3), pages 549-573.
    6. Andrew Moxey & Ben White, 1998. "NELUP: Some Reflections on Undertaking and Reporting InterdisciplinaryRiver Catchment Modelling," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(3), pages 397-402.
    7. Sarah Connick & Judith Innes, 2003. "Outcomes of Collaborative Water Policy Making: Applyxsing Complexity Thinking to Evaluation," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(2), pages 177-197.
    8. John Randolph & Michael Bauer, 1999. "Improving Environmental Decision‐Making Through Collaborative Methods," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 16(3‐4), pages 168-191, September.
    9. Mingers, John & Rosenhead, Jonathan, 2004. "Problem structuring methods in action," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 152(3), pages 530-554, February.
    10. Carol Chetkovich & David L. Kirp, 2001. "Cases and Controversies: How Novitiates Are Trained to Be Masters of the Public Policy Universe," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(2), pages 283-314.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kristan Cockerill & Pierre Glynn & Ilan Chabay & Mahmud Farooque & Raimo P. Hämäläinen & Ben Miyamoto & Patricia McKay, 2019. "Records of engagement and decision making for environmental and socio-ecological challenges," EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Springer;EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies, vol. 7(3), pages 243-265, November.
    2. Kenter, Jasper O., 2016. "Integrating deliberative monetary valuation, systems modelling and participatory mapping to assess shared values of ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 291-307.
    3. Eefje Cuppen, 2012. "Diversity and constructive conflict in stakeholder dialogue: considerations for design and methods," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 45(1), pages 23-46, March.
    4. Etiënne A. J. A. Rouwette, 2012. "Does Group Model Building Work? Evidence from and Comments on the Paper by Videira et al," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 620-623, November.
    5. Lane, David C. & Rouwette, Etiënne A.J.A., 2023. "Towards a behavioural system dynamics: Exploring its scope and delineating its promise," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 306(2), pages 777-794.
    6. Etiënne Rouwette & Inge Bleijenbergh & Jac Vennix, 2016. "Group Model-Building to Support Public Policy: Addressing a Conflicted Situation in a Problem Neighbourhood," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(1), pages 64-78, January.
    7. Peter S. Hovmand & David F. Andersen & Etiënne Rouwette & George P. Richardson & Krista Rux & Annaliese Calhoun, 2012. "Group Model‐Building ‘Scripts’ as a Collaborative Planning Tool," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 179-193, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Midgley, Gerald & Cavana, Robert Y. & Brocklesby, John & Foote, Jeff L. & Wood, David R.R. & Ahuriri-Driscoll, Annabel, 2013. "Towards a new framework for evaluating systemic problem structuring methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 229(1), pages 143-154.
    2. Mark Lubell & Adam Douglas Henry & Mike McCoy, 2010. "Collaborative Institutions in an Ecology of Games," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(2), pages 287-300, April.
    3. Vieira, Fabiana C. & Ferreira, Fernando A.F. & Govindan, Kannan & Ferreira, Neuza C.M.Q.F. & Banaitis, Audrius, 2022. "Measuring urban digitalization using cognitive mapping and the best worst method (BWM)," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    4. Ya Li & Zhichang Zhu & Catherine M. Gerard, 2012. "Learning from Conflict Resolution: An Opportunity to Systems Thinking," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 209-220, March.
    5. Scholz, Roland W. & Czichos, Reiner & Parycek, Peter & Lampoltshammer, Thomas J., 2020. "Organizational vulnerability of digital threats: A first validation of an assessment method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 282(2), pages 627-643.
    6. Alexandre de A. Gomes Júnior & Vanessa B. Schramm & Fernando Schramm, 2023. "Problem Structuring Methods in Social-Ecological Systems," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 461-478, June.
    7. Gabriela Viale Pereira & Elsa Estevez & Diego Cardona & Carlos Chesñevar & Pablo Collazzo-Yelpo & Maria Alexandra Cunha & Eduardo Henrique Diniz & Alex Antonio Ferraresi & Frida Marina Fischer & Flúvi, 2020. "South American Expert Roundtable: Increasing Adaptive Governance Capacity for Coping with Unintended Side Effects of Digital Transformation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-47, January.
    8. Khadka, Chiranjeewee & Hujala, Teppo & Wolfslehner, Bernhard & Vacik, Harald, 2013. "Problem structuring in participatory forest planning," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 1-11.
    9. William Jones & Mahesh Sooriyabandara & Mike Yearworth & Angela Doufexi & R. Eddie Wilson, 2016. "Planning For 5G: A Problem Structuring Approach for Survival in the Telecoms Industry," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(4), pages 301-321, July.
    10. Konsti-Laakso, Suvi & Rantala, Tero, 2018. "Managing community engagement: A process model for urban planning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1040-1049.
    11. David Lowe & Louise Martingale & Mike Yearworth, 2016. "Guiding interventions in a multi-organisational context: combining the Viable System Model and Hierarchical Process Modelling for use as a Problem Structuring Method," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 67(12), pages 1481-1495, December.
    12. Alexandre de A. Gomes Júnior & Vanessa B. Schramm, 2022. "Problem Structuring Methods: A Review of Advances Over the Last Decade," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 55-88, February.
    13. Ion Georgiou & Joaquim Heck, 2021. "The emergence of problem structuring methods, 1950s–1989: An atlas of the journal literature," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(6), pages 756-796, November.
    14. Luke Houghton & David Tuffley, 2015. "Towards a Methodology of Wicked Problem Exploration through Concept Shifting and Tension Point Analysis," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(3), pages 283-297, May.
    15. Driouchi, Tarik & Leseure, Michel & Bennett, David, 2009. "A robustness framework for monitoring real options under uncertainty," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 698-710, June.
    16. Maria Cerretta & Lidia Diappi, 2014. "Adaptive Evaluations in Complex Contexts: Introduction," SCIENZE REGIONALI, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2014(1 Suppl.), pages 5-22.
    17. Luke Houghton & Larry Crump, 2016. "Temporal Events and Problem Structuring," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(3), pages 324-340, May.
    18. Yearworth, Mike & White, Leroy, 2014. "The non-codified use of problem structuring methods and the need for a generic constitutive definition," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 237(3), pages 932-945.
    19. Nicola Ulibarri & Bruce E. Cain & Newsha K. Ajami, 2017. "A Framework for Building Efficient Environmental Permitting Processes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-17, January.
    20. Cronin, Karen & Midgley, Gerald & Jackson, Laurie Skuba, 2014. "Issues Mapping: A problem structuring method for addressing science and technology conflicts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 233(1), pages 145-158.

    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:kap:policy:v:42:y:2009:i:3:p:211-225. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.