Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
PulseExploreClubsResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeClubsExplore
September 10, 2025Public AdministrationOpen Access

Evaluating Conflict, Interest Advancement, and Representation in Collaborative Governance

View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Authors

GAGraham AmbroseSLSiwei LiAYAndi Patta Yusuf

Discussion

Loading...

Member takes

Overview

Observational analysis highlights communication's role in prioritizing stakeholder outputs in collaborative governance.

Key Points

  • Communication quantity alone does not guarantee prioritization in collaborative governance, leading to nuanced outcomes.
  • The affiliation type of communicating stakeholders significantly influences which topics are prioritized.
  • Conflict can hinder prioritization, but its negative effects occur only when it outweighs concord in discussions.
  • Analysis employed Hierarchical Latent Dirichlet Allocation modeling combined with multi-group QAP models to evaluate findings.

Cite This Study

Ambrose et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68c1a5ff54b1d3bfb60e0136https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.70003
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Evaluating conflict in collaborative environmental governance: A study of environmental justice councils2024 · 4 citations
  2. 2Assessing drivers of sustained engagement in collaborative governance arrangements2024 · 10 citations
  3. 3The influence of conflict on agenda setting in the US Congress2024
  4. 4Analyzing AHP-based prioritization of strategic planning factors using social network analysis2026
  5. 5A decentred study of uncollaborative governance2025 · 2 citations