Transcending the Institutionalist- Interpretivist Binary: Realizing Critical Realist Theory of Governance as Metagovernance
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18196/jgp.2016.0047.662-696Keywords:
Governance, Metagovernance, Institutionalism, Interpretivism, Critical RealismAbstract
Governance is essentially a popular contested concept and its definition is variously applied. Hence, it has arisen as a new mode by which society is governed and denotes the institutions, traditions and processes which define how power is operated. Given that, different governance scholars do have different ontological and epistemological positions. Two authoritative governance research strands have been noted: formal and institutional, and interpretive. The institutionalist approach assumes the capacity to understand governance through the behavior of institutions and organizations while the interpretative approach argues for the interpretations of individuals instead. However, this paper contends that both of them are commonly represented in binary and lack critical elements. This article thus tries to discuss the epistemological route to ‘transcend the institutionalist-interpretivist binary’ by specifying critical realist insights, which can contribute a relatively new perspective to governance research as the concept by nature is non-intradisciplinary and, in reality, holding a mixture of various modes and levels of governance. The alternative approach is the analytic of metagovernance. Metagovernance shows us an alternate way we can read contemporary governance which is, in particular, interested in power relations and interactive modes of governance, attempting to bring the centrality of the state back in the analysis of governance and then to call for the recognition of government and governance in the shadow of hierarchy. It sensitizes us the context and limits of governance rather than simply talking about the implications of the shift to governance with and through networks.
References
Archer, M. S. (1995). Realist Social Theory: The Morphogenetic Approach. Cambridge.
Cambridge University Press.
Baker, K., & Stoker, G. (2012). Metagovernance and Nuclear Power in Europe. Journal of
European Public Policy, 19(7), 1026-1051.
Baker, K., & Stoker, G. (2013). Governance and Nuclear Power: Why Governing is Easier
Said than Done. Political Studies, 61(3), 580–598.
Baker, K., & Stoker, G. (2015). Nuclear Power and Energy Policy: The Limits to Gover-
nance. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bell, S., & Hindmoor, A. (2009). Rethinking Governance: The Centrality of the
State in Modern Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bevir, M. (2003). A Decentred Theory of Governance. In H. P. Bang (ed.), Governance as
Social and Political Communication (pp.200-221). Manchester: Manchester Univer-
sity Press.
Bevir, M. (2005). New Labour: A Critique. London: Routledge.
Bevir, M. (2010). Democratic Governance. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Bevir, M. (2011a). Governance as Theory, Practice, and Dilemma. In M. Bevir (ed.), The
Sage Handbook of Governance (pp.1-16). London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Bevir, M. (2012). Governance: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bevir, M. (2013). A Theory of Governance. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Bevir, M. (ed.). (2011b). The Sage Handbook of Governance. London: Sage Publications
Ltd.
Bevir, M., & Krupicka, B. (2011). On Two Types of Governance Theory. A Response to B.
Guy Peters. Critical Policy Studies, 5(4), 450-453.
Bevir, M., & Rhodes, R. A. W. (2002). Interpretive Theory. In D. Marsh & G. Stoker (eds.)
Theory and Methods in Political Science (pp.131-152). 2nd ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Bevir,M.,&Rhodes,R.A.W.(2003a).InterpretingBritishGovernance.London:Routledge.
Bevir, M., & Rhodes, R. A. W. (2003b). Searching for Civil Society: Changing Patterns of
Governance in Britain. Public Administration, 81(1), 41–62.
Bevir,M., & Rhodes, R. A. W.(2006a). Interpretive Approachesto British Government and
Politics. British Politics, 1(1), 84-112.
Bevir, M., & Rhodes, R. A. W. (2006b). Governance Stories. London: Routledge.
Bevir, M., & Rhodes, R. A. W. (2006c). Disaggregating Structures: An Agenda for Critical
Realism? British Politics, 1(3), 397–403.
Bevir, M., & Rhodes, R. A. W. (2007). Decentred Theory, Change and Network Gover-
nance. In E. Sørensen & J. Torfing (eds.), Theories of Democratic Network Gover-
nance (pp.77–94). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bevir, M., & Rhodes, R. A. W. (2008). The Differentiated Polity as Narrative. British Journalof Politics and International Relations, 10(4), 729-734.
Bevir, M., & Rhodes, R. A. W. (2011). The Stateless State. In M. Bevir (ed.), The Sage
Handbook of Governance (pp.203-217). London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Bevir, M., & Rhodes, R. A. W. (2015). The State as Cultural Practice. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Bevir, M., Rhodes, R. A. W.,& Weller, P.(2003). Traditions of Governance: Interpreting the
Changing Role of the Public Sector. Public Administration, 81(1), 1–17.
Bhaskar, R. (2008). A Realist Theory of Science. London: Routledge.
Biebricher, T. (2013). Critical Theories of the State: Governmentality and the Strategic-
relational Approach. Constellations, 20(3), 388-405.
Börzel, T.A., & Risse, T.(2010). Governance Without a State: Can it Work? Regulation and
Governance, 4(2), 113–134.
Cepiku, D. (2013). Unraveling the Concept of Public Governance: A Literature Review of
Different Traditions. In L. Gnan, A. Hinna, & F.Monteduro (eds.), Conceptualizing and
Researching Governance in Public and Non-profit Organizations (pp.3-32). Bingley:
Emerald Group PublishingLimited.
Chhotray, V., & Stoker, G. (2009). Governance Theory and Practice: A Cross-disciplinary
Approach. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Collier, A. (1994). Critical Realism: An Introduction to Roy Bhaskar’s Philosophy. London:
Verso.
Cruickshank, J. (2003). Introduction. In J. Cruickshank (ed.), Critical Realism: The Differ-
ence It Makes (pp.1-14). London: Routledge.
Daugbjerg, C., & Fawcett, P. (2015). Metagovernance, Network Structure, and Legiti-
macy: Developing a Heuristic for Comparative Governance Analysis. Administration
& Society. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0095399715581031
Davies,J. S.(2011).Challenging Governance Theory: FromNetworkstoHegemony.Bristol:
The Policy Press.
Davies, J. S. (2013, June). Whatever Happened to Coercion? A Gramscian Critique of
Metagovernance Theory. Paper presented at the workshop “Networks, Policy and
Governance: Big Society Utopia or Workfare Dystopia?,” Brunel University.
Dean, M. (2010). Governmentality: Power and Rule in Modern Society. 2nd ed. London:
Sage Publication Ltd.
Delanty, G. (2005). Social Science. 2nd ed. Berkshire: Open University Press.
Della Porta, D., & Keating, M. (2008). How Many Approaches in the Social Sciences? An
Epistemological Introduction. In D. della Porta, & M. Keating (eds.), Approaches and
Methodologies in the Social Sciences: A Pluralist Perspective (pp.19-39). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Duit, A., & Galaz, V. (2008). Governance and Complexity: Emerging Issues for Gover-
nance Theory. Governance, 21(3), 311–335.
Dunsire, A. (1993a). Manipulating Social Tensions: Collibration as an Alternative Mode
of Government Intervention (MPIFG Discussion Paper 93/7). Max-Planck-Institutfür
Gesellschaftsforschung.
Dunsire, A. (1993b). Modes of Governance. In J. Kooiman (ed.), Modern Governance:
New Government-society Interactions (pp.21-34). London: Sage Publication Ltd.
Dunsire, A. (1996). Tipping the Balance: Autopoiesis and Governance. Administra-
tion & Society, 28(3), 299-334.
Fawcett, P., & Daugbjerg, C. (2012). Explaining Governance Outcomes: Epistemology,
Network Governance and Policy Network Analysis. Political Studies Review, 10(2),
-207.
Feeny,D. (1993). The Demand for and Supply of Institutional Arrangements. In V.Ostrom,
& D. Feeny (eds.), Rethinking Institutional Analysis and Development: Issues, Alter-
natives and Choices (pp.159-209). San Francisco, CA: ICS Press.
Flinders, M., & Matthews, F. (2007). Rebuilding Strategic Capacity? Multi-Level Gover-
nance, Leadership and Public Service Agreements in Britain. In R. Koch, & J. Dixon
(eds.), Public Governance and Leadership Political and Managerial Problems in Mak-
ing Public Governance Changes the Driver for Re-Constituting Leadership (pp.175-
. Weisbaden: DeutscherUniversitäts-Verlag.
Furlong, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). A Skin Not a Sweater: Ontology and Epistemology in
Political Science. In D. Marsh, & G. Stoker (eds.), Theory and Methods in Political
Science (pp.184-211). 3rd ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitutions of Society. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Glynos, J. & Howarth, D. (2008) Structure, Agency and Power in Political Analysis: Beyond
ContextualisedSelf-interpretations. Political StudiesReview,6(2), 155-169.
Gorski, P. S. (2013). “What is Critical Realism? And Why Should You Care?”. Contempo-
rary Sociology, 42(5), 658-670.
Greenwood, R., Oliver, C., Sahlin, K., & Suddaby, R. (eds.). (2008). The Sage Handbook of
Organizational Institutionalism. London: SagePublications Ltd.
Hay,C.(2002). PoliticalAnalysis:ACritical Introduction.Basingstoke:PalgraveMacmillan.
Hay,C.(2004). “Taking Ideas Seriously” in Explanatory Political Analysis. British Journal of
Politics & International Relations, 6(2), 142–149.
Hay, C. (2006). Constructivist Institutionalism. In R. A. W.Rhodes, S. Binder,& B. Rockman
(eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Institutions (pp.56-74). Oxford: Oxford Uni-
versityPress.
Hay, C. (2011a). Ideas and the Construction of Interests. In D. Béland, & R. H. Cox (eds.),
Ideas and Politics in Social Science Research (pp.65-82). Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Hay,C.(2011b). Interpreting Interpretivism Interpreting Interpretations: TheNewHerme-
neutics of Public Administration. Public Administration, 89(1), 167-182.
Hooghe, L. & Marks, G. (2003). Unraveling the Central State, But How? Types of Multi-
level Governance. American Political Science Review, 97(2), 233-243.
Howarth, D. R. (2013). Poststructuralism and After: Structure, Subjectivity and Power.
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hyden, G. (2008, June). Institutions, Power and Policy Outcomes in Africa. Discussion
Paper, No. 2. The African Power and Politics Programme.
Hyden, G., Court, J., & Mease, K. (2004). Making Sense of Governance. Empirical Evi-
dence from 16 Developing Countries. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
in ’t Veld, R. J., Töpfer, K., Meuleman, L., Bachmann., G., Jungcurt, S., Napolitano, J.,
Perez-Carmona, A., & Schmidt, F. (2011). Transgovernance: The Quest for Gover-
nance of Sustainable Development. Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies:
Potsdam.
James, O. (2009). Central State. In M. Flinders, A. Gamble, C. Hay, & M. Kenny (eds.), The
Oxford Handbook of British Politics (pp.342–364). Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.
Jessop, B. (1997a). The Regulation Approach: Implications for Political Theory. Journal of
Political Philosophy, 5(3), 287–326.
Jessop, B. (1997b). Capitalism and Its Future: Remarks on Regulation, Government and
Governance. Review of International Political Economy, 4(3), 561-581.
Jessop, B. (2003). Governance and Metagovernance: On Reflexivity, Requisite Variety,
and Requisite Irony. In H. P. Bang (ed.), Governance as Social and Political Commu-
nication (pp.142-172). Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Jessop, B. (2004). Multi-level Governance and Multi-level Metagovernance: Changes in
the European Union asIntegral Momentsin the Transformation and Reorientation of
Contemporary Statehood. In T. Bache, & M. Flinders (eds.), Multi-level Governance
(pp. 49–74). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jessop, B. (2005). Critical Realism and the Strategic-relational Approach. New Formation:A Journal of Culture, Theory and Politics, 56, 40-53.
Jessop,B.(2007). StatePower:AStrategic-Relational Approach.Cambridge: PolityPress.
Jessop, B. (2011). Metagovernance. In M. Bevir (ed.), The Sage Handbook ofGovernance
(pp.106-123). London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Jessop, B. (2016a). The State: Past, Present, and Future. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Jessop,B.(2016b).Territory,Politics,Governance andMultispatialMetagovernance.Ter-
ritory, Politics, Governance, 4(1), 8-32.
Jessop, B., Ji, J. H., & Kytir, S. (2014). The Strategic-Relational Approach: An Interview
with Bob Jessop. Retrieved from http://bobjessop.org/2014/12/02/the-strategic-re-
lational-approach-an-interview-with-bob-jessop/
Jordan, A., Wurzel, R. K. W., & Zito, A. (2005). The Rise of ‘New’ Policy Instruments in
Comparative Perspective: Has Governance Eclipsed Government? Political Studies, 53,
–496.
Kickert, W J. M., Klijn, E-H., & Koppenjan, J. E. M. (eds.). (1999). Managing Complex
Networks: Strategies for the Pubic Sector. London: Sage Publication Ltd.
Kjær, A. M. (2004). Governance. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Kjær,A. M. (2011). Rhodes’ Contribution to Governance Theory: Praise, Criticism and the
Future Governance Debate. Public Administration, 89(1), 101-113.
Klijn, E-H. & Edelenbos, J. (2006). Meta-governance as Network Management. In E.
Sørensen, & J. Torfing (eds.), Theories of Democratic Network Governance (pp.199-
. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Klijn, E-H. & Koppenjan, J. (2004). Managing Uncertainties in Networks: A Network
Approach to Problem Solving. London: Routledge.
Kooiman, J. & Jentoft, S. (2009). Meta-governance: Values, Norms, and Principles, and
the Making of Hard Choices. Public Administration, 87(4), 818-836.
Kooiman, J. (2000). Societal Governance: Levels, Modes, and Orders of Social-Political
Interaction. In J. Pierre (ed.), Debating Governance: Authority, Steering, and Democ-
racy (pp.138-164). Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress.
Kooiman, J. (2003). Governing as Governance. London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Krahmann, E. (2003). National, Regional and Global Governance: One Phenomenon or
Many? Global Governance, 9(3), 323–346.
Leftwich, A. (2010). Beyond Institutions: Rethinking the Role of Leaders, Elites and Coa-
litions in the Institutional Formation of Developmental States and Strategies, Forum
for Development Studies, 37(1), 93–112.
Levi-Faur, D. (ed.). (2012). Oxford Handbook of Governance. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
López, J. J., & Scott, R. (2000). Social Structure. Berkshire: Open University Press.
Lowndes, V.,& Roberts, M. (2013). Why Institutions Matter: The New Institutionalism in
Political Science. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Lynn, L. E. Jr., Heinrich, C. J., & Hill, C. J. (2001). Improving Governance: A New Logic for
Empirical Research. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press
March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P.(1995). Democratic Governance. New York: The Free Press.
Marsh,D.(2008). UnderstandingBritishGovernment:AnalyzingCompetingModels.British
Journal of Politics and International Relations, 10(2), 251-268.
Marsh, D. (2010). Meta-theoretical Issues. In D. Marsh, & G. Stoker (eds.), Theory and
Methods in Political Science (pp.212-231). 3rd ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan. Marsh, D. (2011). The New Orthodoxy: The Differentiated Polity Model.
Public Administration, 89(1), 32-48.
Marsh, D., & Rhodes, R. A. W. (eds.). (1992). Policy Networks in British Government.
Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Marsh, D., Hall, M., & Fawcett, P. (2014). Two Cheers for Interpretivism: Deconstructing
theBritish Political Tradition.Australian Journal of Public Administration, 73(3), 340-348.
Marsh, D., Richards, R., & Smith, M. (2002). Changing Patterns of Governance in the UK:
Reinventing Whitehall.Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Marsh, D., Richards, R., & Smith, M. (2003). Unequal Plurality: Towards an Asymmetric
Power Model of the British Polity. Government and Opposition, 38(3), 306-332.
McAnulla, S. (2006a). Challenging the New Interpretivist Approach: Towards a Critical
Realist Alternative. British Politics, 1(1), 113–138.
McAnulla, S. (2006b). Critical Realism, Social Structure and Political Analysis: A Reply to
Bevir and Rhodes. British Politics, 1(3), 404-412.
McAnulla, S. (2007). New Labour, Old Epistemology? Reflections on Political Science,
New Institutionalism and the Blair Government. Parliamentary Affairs, 60(2), 313-
Meuleman, L. (2008). Public Management and the Metagovernance of Hierarchies, Net-
works and Markets: The Feasibility of Designing and Managing Governance Style
Combinations. Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag.
Meuleman, L. (2011). Metagoverning Governance Styles—Broadening the Public Man-
agers Action Perspective. In J. Torfing,& P.Triantafillou (eds.), Interactive Policy Mak-
ing, Metagovernance and Democracy (pp.95-109). Colchester: ECPRPress.
Newman, J. (2001). Modernising Governance: New Labour, Policy and Society. London:
Sage Publications Ltd.
Osborne, D. & Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial
Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector. New York: Addison-Wesley.
Painter, M., & Pierre, J. (2005). Unpacking Policy Capacity: Issues and Themes. In M.
Painter, & J. Pierre (eds.), Challenges to State Policy Capacity: Global Trends and
Comparative Perspectives (pp.1-18). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Parsons, C. (2007). How To Map Arguments in Political Science. Oxford: Oxford Univer-
sity Press.
Parsons, C. (2010). Constructivism and Interpretive Theory. In D. Marsh, & G. Stoker
(eds.),Theoryand Methodsin Political Science (pp.80-98).3
rded.Basingstoke:Palgrave
Macmillan.
Peters, B. G. (2000). Governance and Comparative Politics. In J. Pierre (ed.), Debating
Governance: Authority, Steering, and Democracy (pp.36-53). Oxford: Oxford Uni-
versity Press.
Peters, B. G. (2011a). Governance as Political Theory. Critical Policy Studies, 5(1),63-72.
Peters,B.G.(2011b).Response toMarkBevirandBenjamin Krupicka,HubertHeinelt and
Birgit Sauer. Critical Policy Studies, 5(4), 467-470.
Peters, B. G. (2011c). Institutional Theory. In M. Bevir (ed.), The Sage Handbook of Gov-
ernance (pp.78-90). London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Peters, B. G. (2012). Institutional Theory in Political Science: The New Institutionalism.
rd ed. New York: The Continuum International Publishing Group.
Peters, B. G., & Pierre, J. (2006). Governance, Government and the State. In C. Hay, M.
Lister & D. Marsh (eds.), The State: Theories and Issues (pp.209-222). Basingstoke:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Peters, G. B., & Pierre, J. (2004). Multi-level Governance and Democracy: A Faustian Bargain?
In I. Bache, & M. V. Flinders (eds.), Multi-level Governance (pp.75–92). Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Pierson, C. (2004). The Modern State. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.
Pierson, P.(2000a). Increasing Returns, PathDependence, andthe Study of Politics. Ameri-
can Political Science Review, 94, 251-267.
Pierson, P. (2000b). Not Just What, But When: Timing and Sequence in Political Processes.
Studies in American Political Development, 14, 72–92.
Pierson, P., & T. Skocpol (2002). Historical Institutionalism in Contemporary Political Sci-ence. In I. Katznelson, & H. V. Milner (eds.), Political Science: The State of the Disci-
pline (pp.693-721). New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.
Powell, W.W.,& DiMaggio, P.J. (eds.). (1991). The New Institutionalism in Organizational
Analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Rhodes, R. A. W.(1996). The New Governance: Governing without Government. Political
Studies, 44(4), 652-667.
Rhodes, R. A. W. (1997). Understanding Governance: Policy Networks, Governance, Re-
flexivity and Accountability. Bristol, PA: Open University Press.
Rhodes, R. A. W. (2007). Understanding Governance: Ten Years On. Organization Stud-
ies, 28(8), 1243-1264.
Rhodes, R. A. W. (2011). Thinking On: A Career in Public Administration. Public Adminis-
tration, 89(1), 196-212.
Richards, D., & Smith, M. J. (2002). Governance and Public Policy in the United Kingdom.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rothstein, B. (2014). Good Governance. In D. Levi-Faur (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of
Governance (pp.143-154). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Salamon, L. M. (2000). The New Governance and the Tools of Public Action: An Introduc-
tion. Fordham Urban Law Journal, 28(5), 1611-1674.
Salmon, L. M. (ed.). (2002). The Tools of Government: A Guide to New Governance.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sayer, A. (2000). Realism and Social Science. London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Sayer, A. (2010). Method in Social Science: A Realist Approach. Rev. 2nd ed. London:
Routledge.
Scharpf, F. (1993). Co-ordination in Hierarchies and Networks. In F.Scharpf (ed.), Games
in Hierarchies and Networks: Analytical and Empirical Approaches to the Study of
Governance Institutions (pp.125–165). Frankfurt: Campus.
Scharpf, F.W.(1994). Games Real Actors Could Play: Positive and Negative Coordination
in Embedded Negotiations. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 6(1), 27–53.
Schmidt, V. (2006). Institutionalism. In C. Hay, M. Lister, & D. Marsh (eds.), The State:
Theories and Issues (pp.98-117). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Schmidt, V. (2011). Reconciling Ideas and Institutions through Discursive Institutional-
ism. In D. Béland, & R. H. Cox (eds.), Ideas and Politics in Social Science Research
(pp.47-64). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Schneider, V.(2002,November). RegulatoryGovernance and theModern Organizational
State: The Place ofRegulation in Contemporary State Theory. Paper presented atthe
workshop on “ThePolitics ofRegulation”,theUniversitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona.
Scott, W.R.(2014). Institutions and Organizations: Ideas, Interests, and Identities.4
th ed.
London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Skelcher, C. (2000). Changing Images of the State: Overloaded, Hollowed-Out, Con-
gested. Public Policy and Administration, 15(3), 3–19.
Smith, M. J. (1998). Reconceptualizing the British State: Theoretical and Empirical Chal-
lenges to Central Government. Public Administration, 76(1), 45–72.
Smith, M. J. (2008). Re-centring British Government: Beliefs, Traditions and Dilemmas in
Political Science. Political Studies Review, 6(2), 143-154.
Sørensen, E. (2006). Metagovernance: The Changing Role of Politicians in Processes of
Democratic Governance. American Review of Public Administration, 36(1), 98-114.
, E., & J. Torfing (2008). Theoretical Approaches to Metagovernance. In E. Sørensen, & J.
Torfing (eds.), Theories of Democratic Network Governance (pp.169- 182).
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2009). Making Governance Network Effective and Democratic
through Metagovernance. Public Administration, 87(2), 234-258.
Sørensen, G. (2006). The Transformation of the State. In C. Hay, M, Lister, & D. Marsh
(eds.), The State: Theories and Issues (pp.190-208). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Stark, A. (2015). More Micro Than Meta? Competing Concepts of Metagovernance in the
European Union. Public Policy and Administration, 30(1), 73–91.
Stoker, G. (1998). Governance as Theory: Five Propositions. International Social Science
Journal, 50(155), 17-28.
Sum,N-L.(2015).Rethinking theGramsci–FoucaultInterface: ACultural Political Economy
Interpretation Oriented to Discourses of Competitiveness. In D. Kreps (ed.), Gramsci
and Foucault: A Reassessment (pp.31-56). Farnham: Ashgate.
Torfing, J., Peters, G. B., Pierre, J., & Sørensen, E. (2012). Interactive Governance: Ad-
vancing the Paradigm. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Turnbull, N. (2011). Interpretivism and Practice in Governance Studies: The Critique of
Methodological Institutionalism. British Politics, 6(2), 252-264.
Wanna, J., & Weller, P. (2011). The Irrepressible Rod Rhodes: Contesting Traditions and
Blurring Genres. Public Administration, 89(1), 1–14.
Wendt, A., & Shapiro, I. (1997). The Misunderstood Promise of Realist Social Theory. In K.
Monroe (ed.), Contemporary Empirical Political Theory (pp.166-187). Berkeley, CA:
UniversityofCaliforniaPress.
Whitehead,M.(2007).TheArchitecture of Partnerships:UrbanCommunitiesin the Shadow
of Hierarchy. Policy and Politics,35(1), 3-23.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) license.
