IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v12y2022i2p21582440221106172.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Value of Systems Thinking for and in Regulatory Governance: An Evidence Synthesis

Author

Listed:
  • Jeroen van der Heijden

Abstract

Systems thinking has often been suggested (and sometimes been applied) to improve the development and implementation of regulation (“regulatory governance†). But what are the pros and cons of this approach to regulatory governance? Following the logic of meta-research, a systematic and replicable process of synthesizing research findings across a body of original research, this article presents an evidence synthesis of academic literature on systems thinking for and in regulatory governance. Through a staged approach, an initial body of 757 articles are analyzed. The article presents the main findings from the evidence synthesis, presents the gaps in our knowledge, and suggests a future agenda for research on systems thinking for and in regulatory governance.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeroen van der Heijden, 2022. "The Value of Systems Thinking for and in Regulatory Governance: An Evidence Synthesis," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(2), pages 21582440221, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:12:y:2022:i:2:p:21582440221106172
    DOI: 10.1177/21582440221106172
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21582440221106172
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/21582440221106172?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Philip Haynes, 2018. "Understanding the influence of values in complex systems-based approaches to public policy and management," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(7), pages 980-996, July.
    2. Erika G. Martin & Roderick H. MacDonald & Lou C. Smith & Daniel E. Gordon & James M. Tesoriero & Franklin N. Laufer & Shu‐Yin J. Leung & Daniel A. O'Connell, 2015. "Policy Modeling To Support Administrative Decisionmaking On The New York State Hiv Testing Law," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(2), pages 403-423, March.
    3. Jeroen van der Heijden, 2021. "Why meta‐research matters to regulation and governance scholarship: An illustrative evidence synthesis of responsive regulation research," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(S1), pages 123-142, November.
    4. Jeroen van der Heijden, 2021. "Risk as an Approach to Regulatory Governance: An Evidence Synthesis and Research Agenda," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(3), pages 21582440211, July.
    5. Arango, Santiago, 2007. "Simulation of alternative regulations in the Colombian electricity market," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 305-319, December.
    6. Paul Cairney, 2012. "Complexity Theory in Political Science and Public Policy," Political Studies Review, Political Studies Association, vol. 10(3), pages 346-358, September.
    7. Elizabeth Anne Eppel & Mary Lee Rhodes, 2018. "Complexity theory and public management: a ‘becoming’ field," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(7), pages 949-959, July.
    8. Karen Yeung, 2018. "Algorithmic regulation: A critical interrogation," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(4), pages 505-523, December.
    9. Elizabeth Eppel, 2017. "Complexity thinking in public administration’s theories-in-use," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(6), pages 845-861, July.
    10. Erik-Hans Klijn, 2008. "Complexity Theory and Public Administration: What's New?," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(3), pages 299-317, May.
    11. Geert R. Teisman & Erik-Hans Klijn, 2008. "Complexity Theory and Public Management," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(3), pages 287-297, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Yi Yang, 2021. "Critical realism and complexity theory: Building a nonconstructivist systems research framework for effective governance analysis," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(1), pages 177-183, January.
    2. Giovanni Esposito & Andrea Terlizzi, 2023. "Governing wickedness in megaprojects: discursive and institutional perspectives," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 42(2), pages 131-147.
    3. Evert Waeterloos, 2021. "Introducing Collaborative Governance in Decentralized Land Administration and Management in South Africa: District Land Reform Committees Viewed through a ‘System of Innovation’ Lens," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-20, May.
    4. Pečarič Mirko, 2020. "Regulatory Cybernetics: Adaptability and Probability in the Public Administration’s Regulations," NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, Sciendo, vol. 13(1), pages 133-156, June.
    5. Cairney, Paul & McHarg, Aileen & McEwen, Nicola & Turner, Karen, 2019. "How to conceptualise energy law and policy for an interdisciplinary audience: The case of post-Brexit UK," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 459-466.
    6. Paul Cairney & Christopher M. Weible, 2017. "The new policy sciences: combining the cognitive science of choice, multiple theories of context, and basic and applied analysis," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(4), pages 619-627, December.
    7. Whetsell, Travis A, 2023. "On the Theory of the Pragmatic Public," SocArXiv 8ukmr, Center for Open Science.
    8. G. Biesbroek & Catrien Termeer & Judith Klostermann & Pavel Kabat, 2014. "Analytical lenses on barriers in the governance of climate change adaptation," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 19(7), pages 1011-1032, October.
    9. Jon Nyhlén & Gustav Lidén, 2014. "Methods for analyzing decision-making: a framework approach," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(5), pages 2523-2535, September.
    10. Chao Yang & Xianyin Meng, 2023. "A Fuzzy-Set Configurational Examination of Governance Capability under Certainty and Uncertainty Conditions: Evidence from the Chinese Provincial Cases of Early COVID-19 Containing Practice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-20, February.
    11. Eleni Kosta, 2022. "Algorithmic state surveillance: Challenging the notion of agency in human rights," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 212-224, January.
    12. Hyungjo Hur & Maryam A Andalib & Julie A Maurer & Joshua D Hawley & Navid Ghaffarzadegan, 2017. "Recent trends in the U.S. Behavioral and Social Sciences Research (BSSR) workforce," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(2), pages 1-18, February.
    13. Crabolu, Gloria & Font, Xavier & Eker, Sibel, 2023. "Evaluating policy complexity with Causal Loop Diagrams," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    14. Dolata, Ulrich & Schrape, Jan-Felix, 2022. "Platform architectures: The structuration of platform companies on the Internet," Research Contributions to Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies, SOI Discussion Papers 2022-01, University of Stuttgart, Institute for Social Sciences, Department of Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies.
    15. Lin, Wanlin & Lin, George C.S., 2023. "Strategizing actors and agents in the functioning of informal property Rights: The tragicomedy of the extralegal housing market in China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    16. Rapuano Violeta & Valickas Andrius, 2021. "Application of Complexity Theory to Organizational Career Management System’s Development," Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, Sciendo, vol. 85(1), pages 47-64, June.
    17. Teufel, Felix & Miller, Michael & Genoese, Massimo & Fichtner, Wolf, 2013. "Review of System Dynamics models for electricity market simulations," Working Paper Series in Production and Energy 2, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Institute for Industrial Production (IIP).
    18. Ahmad, Salman & Mat Tahar, Razman & Muhammad-Sukki, Firdaus & Munir, Abu Bakar & Abdul Rahim, Ruzairi, 2016. "Application of system dynamics approach in electricity sector modelling: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 29-37.
    19. Teichmann, Fabian & Boticiu, Sonia & Sergi, Bruno S., 2023. "RegTech – Potential benefits and challenges for businesses," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    20. Andrea M. Bassi & Valeria Costantini & Elena Paglialunga, 2021. "Modelling the European Union Sustainability Transition: A Soft-Linking Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-24, June.

    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:sae:sagope:v:12:y:2022:i:2:p:21582440221106172. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.