LIST OF PANELS

Collaborative governance arrangements are becoming more familiar as a policy tool that can better cope with the challenges of the current era (Ansell, Sørensen & Torfing 2017; Emerson et al., 2012, 2015; Kekez, Howlett & Ramesh, in process). The term “collaborative governance” refers to specific features of formal, long-term, consensual arrangements involving different stakeholders to promote public policies or programs (Ansell & Gash, 2008). While many use the term “collaborative governance,” some refer to it in the same manner as other practices, such as cooperation and coordination (O'Flynn, 2009). However, using these terms interchangeably masks the unique characteristics of collaborative governance. Collaborative governance is a formal arrangement of consensual and reciprocal practices that involves various stakeholders who engage in more profound, diverse and lasting collaborations and that demand mutual contributions and shared responsibilities. Thus, while there is a growing interest in collaborative governance arrangements as a possible tool that can be added to the range of instruments used by governments, we still need to investigate its contribution, features, and outcomes, as well as when and where it has added value in comparison to other tools, and when it does not. 

We claim that one of the reasons for the growing interest in collaborative governance is its ability to serve as a bridge between public policy and public administration. While there is an obvious connection between the two, in many cases, both in theory and practice, these streams diverge from one another (Lahat, 2017; Moynihan & Soss, 2014).  Policies focus more on the processes, the definitions of public problems and their solutions regarding diverse populations and on the interaction between different actors, while public administration emphasizes the role of the organizational structures and human resources that can achieve these goals. In recent decades, the public policy literature has emphasized the role of different voices in the policy process as an intrinsic feature. By the same token, the public administration literature discusses the next generation of administrative models in the post-NPM era, focusing especially on the need to enhance collaboration and trust. In this context, collaborative governance arrangements can be perceived as a bridge that connects the two. It facilitates the organizational structures that promote insightful dialogue between different stakeholders, including the construction, definition and legitimization of social problems and their solutions.      

Collaborative governance arrangements are becoming more familiar as a policy tool that can better cope with the challenges of the current era (Ansell, Sørensen & Torfing 2017; Emerson et al., 2012, 2015; Kekez, Howlett & Ramesh, in process). The term “collaborative governance” refers to specific features of formal, long-term, consensual arrangements involving different stakeholders to promote public policies or programs (Ansell & Gash, 2008). While many use the term “collaborative governance,” some refer to it in the same manner as other practices, such as cooperation and coordination (O'Flynn, 2009). However, using these terms interchangeably masks the unique characteristics of collaborative governance. Collaborative governance is a formal arrangement of consensual and reciprocal practices that involves various stakeholders who engage in more profound, diverse and lasting collaborations and that demand mutual contributions and shared responsibilities. Thus, while there is a growing interest in collaborative governance arrangements as a possible tool that can be added to the range of instruments used by governments, we still need to investigate its contribution, features, and outcomes, as well as when and where it has added value in comparison to other tools, and when it does not. 

We claim that one of the reasons for the growing interest in collaborative governance is its ability to serve as a bridge between public policy and public administration. While there is an obvious connection between the two, in many cases, both in theory and practice, these streams diverge from one another (Lahat, 2017; Moynihan & Soss, 2014).  Policies focus more on the processes, the definitions of public problems and their solutions regarding diverse populations and on the interaction between different actors, while public administration emphasizes the role of the organizational structures and human resources that can achieve these goals. In recent decades, the public policy literature has emphasized the role of different voices in the policy process as an intrinsic feature. By the same token, the public administration literature discusses the next generation of administrative models in the post-NPM era, focusing especially on the need to enhance collaboration and trust. In this context, collaborative governance arrangements can be perceived as a bridge that connects the two. It facilitates the organizational structures that promote insightful dialogue between different stakeholders, including the construction, definition and legitimization of social problems and their solutions.

The panel seeks to develop the theoretical aspects of collaborative governance by considering theories from both perspectives, those of public policy and public administration. Our goal is to enrich our knowledge about collaborative governance arrangements and their role in the changing nature of public administration and democracy. We emphasize strong theoretical aspects and innovative empirical works that contribute to this connection between public administration and the public policy literature with regard to collaborative governance. Examples include:

· collaborative governance and implementation

· collaborative governance as a policy tool

· collaborative governance arrangements and post-NPM models 

· collaborative governance and the stages of formulating policy

· critical  aspects of collaborative governance

· collaborative governance and the spanning of borders