Explore the vast range of titles available.

Experiments in collaborative governance over the last several decades have transformed the way the public's business is getting done. Despite growing interest, empirical research on the performance of cross-boundary collaboration continues to be limited by conceptual and methodological challenges. This article extends previous research to develop a performance matrix for assessing the productivity of collaborative governance regimes (CGRs). Three performance levels (actions, outcomes, and adaptation) are addressed at three units of analysis (participant organizations, the CGR itself, and target goals), creating a performance matrix of nine critical dimensions of CGR productivity. This performance matrix is illustrated with a case study of a CGR operating on the U.S.-Mexico border.

Purpose: The article aims to provide an updated and comprehensive overview of academic research in the field of collaborative governance and digital transformation, with an emphasis on the emerging topic of collaborative digital transformation. Digital transformation is a recurrent theme in today’s society, fuelled by events such as the Covid-19 pandemic, global climate challenges, and other crises reshaping the world. As societies increasingly rely on digital platforms and online communication, the prime urge and necessity of the human race – i.e., to communicate and collaborate in tackling these challenges – puts collaborative governance in digital transformation high on the agenda of governments, the private sector, and citizens.Design/Methodology/Approach: To address this topic, we performed a bibliometric analysis using various analytical and visualisation tools to evaluate and visualise existing scientific bibliographic materials. The analysis covers 286 articles published in the Scopus and Web of Science databases over the past two decades in the area of collaborative governance and digital transformation, employing established and innovative bibliometric approaches. Graphical analyses are used to illustrate co-authorship, keywords co-occurrence, research topics evolution, and the network of influential researchers within collaborative governance and digital transformation.Findings: The results show that the relationship between collaborative governance and digital transformation is still limited and needs further study, considering that these two concepts have been emerging trends in public administration over the past two decades. In addition, the findings reveal a significant growth in research of these topics over time, although not specifically focused on collaborative digital transformation.Practical Implications: The article provides a summary of key aspects of collaborative governance and digital transformation research and helps lay the foundations for shaping the future of this evolving field of public administration. Thus, it helps researchers understand the development of collaborative digital transformation research over the past two decades, as collaborative digital transformation is a relatively new field of research characterised by rapid growth and evolution.Originality/Value: The research contributes to the understanding of collaborative digital transformation as a distinct research area within the broader concepts of digital transformation and collaborative governance, which is still seeking its own identity in academic literature, and offers a definition of collaborative digital transformation (CDT).

Reforms in social governance are promoted by changes in social environments. Social governance models cannot be constant, and the rise of every innovative governance model is inseparable from an ever-changing society. The theoretical connotation of the collaborative innovation model in regional social governance is mainly reflected in its agents, actions, and processes. The fundamental requirements of the collaborative innovation model in regional social governance are de-administration and market-based. The key elements of the collaborative regional social governance model include: delegating power from central authorities, transferring selected social governance affairs, enhancing the development of governance capabilities in social governance agents, diversifying these agents by giving full play to the agency to strengthen the concept of collaborative governance for social governance agents, strengthening the establishment of the governance system, and ensuring the normal progress of the governance processes. The collaborative innovation model in regional social governance should be built in three aspects: a system of institutional norms, an evaluation indicator system, and law-based collaborative governance.

This paper uses the EBM model to measure the collaborative governance efficiency of air pollution caused by energy consumption in 27 cities in the Yangtze River Delta (YRD) urban agglomeration. The collaborative governance efficiency of these cities ranges from 0.6665 to 0.9356, with Shanghai having the highest efficiency (0.8277–0.9356) and Chuzhou having the lowest (0.6665–0.8787). On this basis, this article uses a spatial Durbin model and government panel data to test the drivers of air pollution collaborative governance efficiency, the empirical testing found that the relationship between environmental regulation intensity (ERI) and air collaborative governance efficiency (AGE) is U-shaped, with an inverse coefficient of impact of − 0.5852 and a positive coefficient of influence of its squared term of 0.3427. Air pollution governance investment level (AGI) has a 0.8107 positive effect on governance efficiency. All spatial lag term coefficients in the spatial test are positive, indicating a spatial spillover effect of collaborative governance efficiency air pollution caused by energy consumption across cities in the urban agglomeration. In addition, control variables: energy consumption intensity (ECI), the air quality index (AQI), per capita CO2 emission scale (PCE), and air pollution loss rate (ALI), had inverse correlations with governance efficiency, with impact coefficients of − 0.5185, − 0.5107, − 0.6164, and − 0.5147. Per capita, GDP level (PGL) and R&D investment intensity (RDII) had positive relationships with governance efficiency with coefficients of 0.6026 and 0.5786, respectively. Based on this foundation, policy recommendations have been proposed to enhance the collaborative governance efficiency of air pollution in the Yangtze River Delta urban cluster.

In the digital economy era, the efficient, secure, and compliant circulation of cross-border data flow has become a key issue for the coordination of global industrial chains and the deepening of regional cooperation. It is a driving force for the high-quality development of the global digital economy. Currently, cross-border data flow is confronted with multiple challenges, including the interweaving of driving forces and contradictions, inadequate adaptation between mechanisms and technologies, and poor connection between compliance requirements and practical implementation. There is an urgent need to formulate systematic solutions from both theoretical and practical perspectives. To this end, this journal has invited five experts from universities and enterprises to organize a roundtable discussion on the complete logical chain of \"the underlying logic, mechanism construction, trend prediction, compliance governance, and scenario-based implementation of cross-border data flow\". The key viewpoints are as follows: 1) Dynamic Mechanism and Governance Logic of Cross-border Data Flow: Cross-border data flow is jointly driven by three major forces: economic interests, technological innovation, and international cooperation. Meanwhile, it faces core contradictions including the trade-off between sovereign security and flow efficiency, fragmentation of rules and institutional coordination, and technological balance and the digital divide. It is necessary to establish a governance philosophy of \"dynamic balance\" and build a multilateral co-governance system through three types of tools-algorithm-based supervision, technology empowerment, and institutional experimentation-to promote the shift from \"fragmented rule-based games\" to \"systematic coordination\". 2) Construction of a Collaborative Mechanism for Cross-border Data Flow: The mechanism for cross-border data flow needs to break through the limitations of a single dimension and form a multi-dimensional collaborative system integrating \"policy, technology, and industry\". At the policy level, regulatory sandbox pilots, standard mutual recognition, and compliance infrastructure sharing are adopted to address regulatory barriers. At the technical level, scenario-specific needs are met based on a maturity gradient, and the integrated innovation of \"technology + management\" is promoted. At the industry level, the self-regulatory role of professional fields such as library and information science (LIS) is leveraged to compensate for the rigidity of policies and build a closed-loop governance structure. 3) Trend Evolution and Risk Resilience of Cross-border Data Flow: In the next 3 to 5 years, cross-border data flow will exhibit characteristics of structural growth and domain differentiation. Smart manufacturing and digital trade will drive growth on a large scale, while smart healthcare and modern agriculture will emerge as core sectors. It is imperative to address bottlenecks in infrastructure upgrading and the impact of \"black swan\" events, establish a risk resilience system from technical, governance and strategic dimensions, and promote service model innovation in LIS as well as advance layout in the agricultural sector. 4) Compliance Governance and China's Path for Cross-border Data Flow: China has established a hierarchical and classified governance framework centered on three fundamental laws, and explored practical paths through institutional innovations such as the negative list system in free trade pilot zones. To tackle challenges including discrepancies in legal compliance requirements, technical barriers, and the complexity of regulatory coordination, it is necessary to strengthen legal synergy and rule mutual recognition, advance infrastructure construction and technological innovation, and improve the compliance service support system, thereby forming a China-specific path that balances security and controllability with high efficiency and convenience. 5) Practice of Cross-border Data Circulation and Credit Product Mutual Recognition: Cross-border data circulation lays a core foundation for the cross-border mutual recognition of credit products, which holds significant strategic value for promoting the facilitation of international trade and supporting the international development of enterprises. Currently, it faces challenges such as data security compliance, standard discrepancies, and high technical costs. To advance the implementation of cross-border mutual recognition of credit products, efforts should be made to improve the legal and regulatory framework and standard system, strengthen the construction of technical infrastructure, deepen international cooperation and mutual recognition mechanisms, and cultivate international credit service institutions.

The goal of public security and safety under the concept of sustainable development has been transformed into the maximization of the comprehensive goal of economic, environmental, and social security and safety. The polycentric collaborative governance mode is a crucial approach for the reform of government regulation. Social–ecological resilience has become a typical paradigm in the field of risk governance. Polycentric collaborative governance and safety resilience are the foundation and booster of elevator safety governance. In this paper, we expound on the system elements and mechanisms of polycentric collaborative governance and ecological resilience of elevator safety under the guidance of sustainable development by using a conceptual framework method. On this basis, we explore the influence degree and mechanism of elevator safety polycentric collaborative governance on elevator safety ecological resilience under the guidance of sustainable development by constructing a structural equation model based on micro-survey data. The results show that (1) the polycentric collaborative governance subject composed of the government, business, society, and the public is the key force to enhancing the ecological resilience of elevator safety; (2) enhancing the ecological resilience of elevator safety has a significant direct promoting effect on improving the mitigation, recovery, learning, and coping ability of elevator safety; (3) improving the learning ability has a significant direct promoting effect on improving the mitigation, recovery, and coping ability of elevator safety; (4) improving the coping ability has a significant direct promoting effect on improving the mitigation and recovery ability of elevator safety; (5) improving the mitigation ability has a significant direct promoting effect on improving the recovery ability of elevator safety. Therefore, in the process of elevator safety governance under the guidance of sustainable development, we should not only adhere to the polycentric collaborative governance mode but also attach importance to the ecological resilience governance paradigm of elevator safety, which together can improve the elevator quality and safety level.

Collaborative governance is often advocated as a way to address ‘messy’ problems that individual stakeholders cannot solve alone. However, whereas stakeholders’ participation brings a broad range of response options to public decision-making, the complexities of the perspectives at stake may also lead to conflicts and stalemates. This is especially true in collaborative environmental governance, where conflict is common and stakeholders’ interdependence in more than one arena tends to be frequent. Based on a longitudinal field study, we explore how to break stalemates in collaborative environmental governance when they occur, and move the collaboration towards a shared decision. The successful collaborative decision-making for the defence of Venice against floods represents our empirical setting. Our findings show that, in this context, the combined effect of three factors seems to be important to break stalemates and lead stakeholders towards a shared decision in collaborative environmental governance: stakeholders’ reactivation, fear of marginalization and leaders acting as orchestrators.

The goal of this article is to evaluate what the Czech and Slovak governments have done to protect their countries and try to assess why they have achieved different results for the first and second waves of the Covid- 19 pandemic. The basis for such evaluation is the concept of collaborative governance, while qualitative research methods are used to achieve this goal. Based on comprehensive case studies and following analysis, the article suggests that in countries with limited quality of collaborative governance and no experience in similar pandemics, short-term “ultramobilisation” and positive results are indeed possible, but failures are non-avoidable in the long run. During the second wave of the pandemic, the weaknesses in governance resulted in massive governance failures. As a result, the governments’ responses delivered very limited results in terms of prevalence of Covid-19.

The dairy industry can be considered a contributor to biodiversity loss in Australia. To address this, many forms of governance can be enlisted, including traditional legislation and regulations, persuasive techniques such as publicly funded subsidy programs or education, and participation in voluntary stewardship programs. This paper explores the benefits of collaborative governance programs, which have international applications to reduce the impact of the dairy industry on biodiversity loss. However, as the Australian sector is unique, the specific opportunities and present challenges are discussed. This paper reports three important objectives that could underpin industry-led initiatives by supporting improved biodiversity conservation on dairy farms: (1) Increase the personal and financial capacities of individual farmers to operate profitable, biodiverse farms; (2) Facilitate market rewards to incentivise pro-conservation behaviours; and (3) Improve the effectiveness of the implementation of biodiversity protection laws and regulatory objectives via collaborative governance arrangements. Existing environmental programs that have been developed by the dairy industry could be suitable for incorporation into more formal co-governance structures sympathetic to biodiversity conservation. However, to be successful in addressing sustainability issues, including biodiversity loss, strengthening the integrity mechanisms around farmers’ self-reporting of performance is required to ensure that the industry can credibly refute claims of greenwashing and defend their environmental credentials in the global marketplace.