The move towards collaborative governance in environmental policy often takes the form of collaborative partnerships involving multiple stakeholders with divergent beliefs and interests. Within such partnerships, stakeholders selectively coordinate with one another to varying degrees to achieve both individual and shared objectives. Using interview and questionnaire data from 10 US marine aquaculture partnerships in 2009-2011, we test three theoretical hypotheses regarding how individuals within collaborative partnerships decide with whom to coordinate. These competing propositions include belief homophily (individuals will coordinate with whom they share beliefs), trust (individuals will coordinate with those whom they trust), and resources (individuals will coordinate with those who hold critical resources). Results suggest that specific aspects of trust and resources are more important than shared beliefs in driving coordination in marine aquaculture partnerships. This finding qualifies previous studies that identified shared beliefs as a driving factor. This study concludes with a theoretical discussion about the explanatory boundaries of belief homophily.
|Original language||English (US)|
|Number of pages||27|
|Journal||Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory|
|State||Published - Jul 1 2015|
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Sociology and Political Science
- Public Administration