IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fpr/ifprid/964.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Who has influence in multistakeholder governance systems?

Author

Listed:
  • Schiffer, Eva
  • Hartwich, Frank
  • Monge, Mario

Abstract

As multistakeholder governance has emerged as an important feature in development, new governance structures that foster the participation of multiple stakeholders from the public sector, civil society, and the private sector have emerged in various fields, ranging from the management of natural resources to the provision of public services. To make such governance structures work, it is essential to understand how different stakeholders influence decisionmaking and what determines their influence. This paper uses Net-Map, an innovative participatory method, to analyze how networking influences decisionmaking in multistakeholder governance structures, using the case of the governance board of the White Volta River Basin in northern Ghana as an example. The method visualizes both the relations between all stakeholders in watershed management as perceived by the 17 members on the board and their influence on development outcomes. The study suggests that significant effects of social networking are at play beyond the formal lines of command and funding as stakeholders in watershed management make decisions. Stakeholders are more influential if they participate more prominently in information exchange and provide more advice to others. This counterbalances the overrepresentation of government actors on the board. Meanwhile some government organizations have a low level of influence, even though they are central in giving funding and command. These findings may be interesting for program leaders and policymakers in watershed management: when designing governance structures they need to take into account the importance of social networking to attain main objectives of watershed development; it is important to provide space that allows the exchange of information and advice among stakeholders. Meanwhile, policymakers and program leaders as well must consider overrepresentation of social network champions in multistakeholder governance structures and the limited capacity of government bodies in social networking. The paper serves to introduce not only the specific findings concerning this case study but also the participatory research method (Net-Map) that was used.

Suggested Citation

  • Schiffer, Eva & Hartwich, Frank & Monge, Mario, 2010. "Who has influence in multistakeholder governance systems?," IFPRI discussion papers 964, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
  • Handle: RePEc:fpr:ifprid:964
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/ifpridp00964.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Agrawal, Arun & Gibson, Clark C., 1999. "Enchantment and Disenchantment: The Role of Community in Natural Resource Conservation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 629-649, April.
    2. Daniel Z. Levin & Rob Cross, 2004. "The Strength of Weak Ties You Can Trust: The Mediating Role of Trust in Effective Knowledge Transfer," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(11), pages 1477-1490, November.
    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. Jean-Philippe Berrou & Alain Piveteau & Thibaud Deguilhem & Leo Delpy & Claire Gondard-Delcroix, 2021. "Who Drives if No-one Governs? A Social Network Analysis of Social Protection Policy in Madagascar," Working Papers hal-03180029, HAL.
    2. Jean-Philippe Berrou & Alain Piveteau & Thibaud Deguilhem & Delpy Léo & Claire Gondard-Delcroix, 2020. "Qui pilote si personne ne gouverne ? La politique publique de protection sociale à Madagascar au prisme de l’analyse des réseaux sociaux," Working Papers hal-02918286, HAL.
    3. Robert G. Boutilier & Michal Zdziarski, 2017. "Managing stakeholder networks for a social license to build," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(8-9), pages 498-513, September.
    4. Ratner, B. D. & Larson, A. M. & Barletti, J. P. S. & ElDidi, H. & Catacutan, D. & Flintan, F. & Suhardiman, Diana & Falk, T. & Meinzen-Dick, R., 2022. "Multistakeholder platforms for natural resource governance: lessons from eight landscape-level cases," Papers published in Journals (Open Access), International Water Management Institute, pages 1-27(2):2..
    5. Sharma, Dabasis & Alam, Mohammad Jahangir & Begum, Ismat Ara & McKenzie, Andrew M., 2022. "Factors affecting the choice of governance structure along the vegetable value chain in Bangladesh," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 26(1), October.
    6. Olivier Walther, 2015. "Social Network Analysis and informal trade," Working Papers 4, University of Southern Denmark, Centre for Border Region Studies.
    7. Dabasis Sharma & Mohammad Jahangir Alam & Ismat Ara Begum & Shijun Ding & Andrew M. McKenzie, 2023. "A Value Chain Analysis of Cauliflower and Tomato in Bangladesh," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-22, July.
    8. Jing Wei & Yongping Wei & Fuqiang Tian & Yonglan Xiong & Hongchang Hu, 2023. "Transition in the societal value and governance of water resources in Australia and China," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-12, December.

    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. Nault, Kelly A. & Sezer, Ovul & Klein, Nadav, 2023. "It’s the journey, not just the destination: Conveying interpersonal warmth in written introductions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    2. Andersson, Krister P. & Smith, Steven M. & Alston, Lee J. & Duchelle, Amy E. & Mwangi, Esther & Larson, Anne M. & de Sassi, Claudio & Sills, Erin O. & Sunderlin, William D. & Wong, Grace Y., 2018. "Wealth and the distribution of benefits from tropical forests: Implications for REDD+," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 510-522.
    3. M. Max Evans & Ilja Frissen & Anthony K. P. Wensley, 2018. "Organisational Information and Knowledge Sharing: Uncovering Mediating Effects of Perceived Trustworthiness Using the PROCESS Approach," Journal of Information & Knowledge Management (JIKM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(01), pages 1-29, March.
    4. M. Kamil Kozan & Levent Akdeniz, 2014. "Role of Strong versus Weak Networks in Small Business Growth in an Emerging Economy," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 4(1), pages 1-16, February.
    5. Krott, Max & Bader, Axel & Schusser, Carsten & Devkota, Rosan & Maryudi, Ahmad & Giessen, Lukas & Aurenhammer, Helene, 2014. "Actor-centred power: The driving force in decentralised community based forest governance," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 34-42.
    6. Purnamita Dasgupta, 2007. "Common Property Resources as Development Drivers: A Study of Fruit Cooperative in Himachal Pradesh: India," Working Papers id:917, eSocialSciences.
    7. Skutsch, Margaret & Turnhout, Esther, 2020. "REDD+: If communities are the solution, what is the problem?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    8. Gareth D. Leeves, 2014. "Increasing returns to education and the impact on social capital," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(5), pages 449-470, October.
    9. Boeker, Warren & Howard, Michael D. & Basu, Sandip & Sahaym, Arvin, 2021. "Interpersonal relationships, digital technologies, and innovation in entrepreneurial ventures," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 495-507.
    10. Schusser, Carsten, 2013. "Who determines biodiversity? An analysis of actors' power and interests in community forestry in Namibia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 42-51.
    11. Fang Li & Sheng Zhang & Yuhuan Jin, 2018. "Sustainability of University Technology Transfer: Mediating Effect of Inventor’s Technology Service," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-17, June.
    12. Wang, Le & Luo, Xin (Robert) & Li, Han, 2022. "Envy or conformity? An empirical investigation of peer influence on the purchase of non-functional items in mobile free-to-play games," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 308-324.
    13. Shigeno, Hidenori & Matsuzaki, Taisuke & Ueki, Yasushi & Tsuji, Masatsugu, 2023. "The Effect of the Covid-19 Pandemic on the Innovation Process of Small and Medium-sized Regional Firms," 32nd European Regional ITS Conference, Madrid 2023: Realising the digital decade in the European Union – Easier said than done? 278018, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    14. Xin Liu & Lin Zhang & Abhinav Gupta & Xiaoming Zheng & Changqi Wu, 2022. "Upper echelons and intra‐organizational learning: How executive narcissism affects knowledge transfer among business units," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(11), pages 2351-2381, November.
    15. Hangeun Lee & Seong Ho Lee, 2019. "The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Long-Term Relationships in the Business-to-Business Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-12, September.
    16. von den Driesch, Till & Eva Susanne da Costa, Maika & Christina Flatten, Tessa & Brettel, Malte, 2015. "How CEO experience, personality, and network affect firms' dynamic capabilities," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 245-256.
    17. Yildiz, H. Emre, 2016. "“Us vs. them” or “us over them”? On the roles of similarity and status in M&As," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 51-65.
    18. Bui, Huong T. & Saito, Hiroaki, 2022. "Resource convergence for post disaster recovery," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    19. Yuzhuo Cai & Borja Ramis Ferrer & Jose Luis Martinez Lastra, 2019. "Building University-Industry Co-Innovation Networks in Transnational Innovation Ecosystems: Towards a Transdisciplinary Approach of Integrating Social Sciences and Artificial Intelligence," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-23, August.
    20. Kumar, Sushil & Kant, Shashi, 2005. "Bureaucracy and new management paradigms: modeling foresters' perceptions regarding community-based forest management in India," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 651-669, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    decisionmaking; multistakeholder governance; Natural resource management; Social networks;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:fpr:ifprid:964. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifprius.html .

    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.