Research Trends In The Field Of Interactive Governance

Document Type : Review Article

Authors

1 Ph.D Student of Public Administration, Faculty of Management, Imam Hossein University, Tehran, Iran

2 Assistant Professor of Public Administration, Faculty of Management, Imam Hossein University, Tehran, Iran

3 Associate Professor Public law, Faculty of Judicial Administration, University of Judicial Sciences and Administrative Services, Tehran, Iran

4 Associate Professor of Law, Islamic Culture and Education Research Institute, Tehran, Iran

10.22059/jppolicy.2025.105209

Abstract

This study explores the evolving field of 'interactive governance' using scientometrics. It aims to map knowledge, analyze research growth, key topics, collaborations, and influential works. Employing a pragmatic, inductive approach, the research utilizes Scopus data, analyzing 223 documents with Excel and VOSviewer. Findings reveal a surge in publications post-2010, predominantly articles and book chapters. Social sciences, environmental, and agricultural studies dominate. The Netherlands leads collaborations. Key terms include 'governance approach' and 'fisheries management,' emphasizing environmental concerns. Sanderson and Torfing are influential figures. Interactive governance, involving diverse actors, is expanding, with the Netherlands as a leader. Torfing's 2012 book significantly impacted research. The field's breadth is evident in diverse keywords. Recommendations for Iran include fostering discourse, identifying implementation pathways, and adapting the field to national contexts.

Keywords

References

  1. Adduci, A., Perilli, A., Durante, F., de Mattia, E., Cicchetti, A., Ricciardi, W., & de Belvis, A. G. (2023). Clinical governance: An in-depth scientometric analysis. International Journal of Healthcare Management, 17(3), 571–585. https://doi.org/10.1080/20479700.2023.2214963.
  2. Ansell, C., & Torfing, J. (2016). Introduction: theories of governance. In Handbook on theories of governance (pp. 1-18). Edward Elgar Publishing.‏
  3. Ansell, C., & Torfing, J. (Eds.). (2022). Handbook on theories of governance. Edward Elgar Publishing: Chapter 15 Power and Interactive Governance.
  4. Azami, Musa and Pouya, Mehrdad. (2019). Knowledge Map of Governance in Watershed: Introducing a New Approach to Managing Agricultural Extension and Education Research. Agricultural Education Management Research, 11(50), 106-126. doi: 22092/jaear.2020.128026.1657. [In Persian]
  5. Bhaumik, S. K. (2018). Governance: Some Observations. Economics, Management and Sustainability: Essays in Honour of Anup Sinha, 13-25.‏
  6. Cheng, Z., Yan, S., Song, T., Cheng, L., & Wang, H. (2022). Adaptive water governance research in social sciences journals: a bibliometric analysis. Water Policy, 24(12), 1951-1970.‏
  7. Conway, S. (2020). Interactive governance: Advancing the paradigm. Administration, 68(3), 63-68.‏
  8. Demir, T., & Nyhan, R. C. (2008). The politics–administration dichotomy: An empirical search for correspondence between theory and practice. Public Administration Review, 68(1), 81-96.‏
  9. Edelenbos, J. (2005). Institutional Implications of Interactive Governance: Insights from Dutch Practice. Governance, 18(1), 111–134. doi:1111/j.1468-0491.2004.00268.x
  10. Edelenbos, J., & Van Meerkerk, I. (2016). Introduction: Three reflecting perspectives on interactive governance. In Critical reflections on interactive governance (pp. 1-28). Edward Elgar Publishing.‏
  11. Edelenbos, J., & van Meerkerk, I. (2022). Normative considerations of interactive governance: effectiveness, efficiency, legitimacy and innovation. In Handbook on theories of governance (pp. 429-444). Edward Elgar Publishing.‏
  12. Edelenbos, Jurian. 2000. Proces in vorm: Procesbegeleiding van interactieve beleidsvorming over lokale ruimtelijke projecten. Utrecht: Uitgeverij Lemma BV.
  13. Farah-Gol, Pouria and Khoshab, Sepideh (2021), Scientometrics of Islamic Governance Based on the Citation Database of Web.A. Science, Jahan Novin Quarterly, 3 (15), 75-60. [In Persian]
  14. Ferry, Nicolas & Hofman, Paul,. (2024). Governance and Regulation Specifics. Sustainable development goals series, 227-230. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-62332-5_22
  15. Gholami, Reza and Esmalizadeh, Somayeh (2023), Fundamentals of Scientometrics in the Humanities and the Necessity of Forming a Scientometric School in It, Science and Religion Studies, 14 (1), 109-97. [In Persian]
  16. Hendriks, F., & Tops, P. (2005). Everyday fixers as local heroes: a case study of vital interaction in urban governance. Local government studies, 31(4), 475-490.‏
  17. Hofstad, H., & Torfing, J. (2015). Collaborative innovation as a tool for environmental, economic and social sustainability in regional governance.‏
  18. Jakobsen, M., James, O., Moynihan, D., & Nabatchi, T. (2019). JPART virtual issue on citizen-state interactions in public administration research. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 29(4), e8-e15.‏
  19. Jäntti, A., Paananen, H., Kork, A.-A., & Kurkela, K. (2023). Towards Interactive Governance: Embedding Citizen Participation in Local Government. Administration & Society, 55(8), 1529-1554. https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997231177220
  20. Jentoft, S., Van Son, T. C., & Bjørkan, M. (2007). Marine protected areas: a governance system analysis. Human ecology, 35, 611-622.‏
  21. Knill, C., & Tosun, J. (2020). Public policy: A new introduction. Bloomsbury Publishing.‏
  22. Kooiman, J. (2016). Interactive governance and governability. In Critical reflections on interactive governance (pp. 29-50). Edward Elgar Publishing.‏ doi:10.4337/9781783479078.00007.
  23. Kooiman, J., Bavinck, M., Chuenpagdee, R., Mahon, R., & Pullin, R. (2008). Interactive governance and governability: an introduction. The journal of transdisciplinary environmental studies, 7(1), 1-11.‏
  24. Mikalsen, K. H., Hernes, H. K., & Jentoft, S. (2007). Leaning on user-groups: The role of civil society in fisheries governance. Marine Policy, 31(2), 201-209.‏
  25. Mirbagheri, Seyed Mohsen and Jalili, Seyed Mustafa (2023). Research trend in the field of participatory governance: Mapping the simultaneity and co-occurrence of terms. Public Management, 15(4), 782-806. [In Persian]
  26. Montazeri, Zahra; Mohammadi, Mahmoud (2024). Drawing a Knowledge Map of the Governance Approach Based on Research in the Country. Public Policy Quarterly, 10(1), 221-207. [In Persian]
  27. Nouzari, E., Hartmann, T., & Spit, T. (2022). Organizing support through interactive governance within flood risk management. Water International, 47(3), 400-418.‏
  28. Otsuka, K. (2019). Interactive governance of water environment in taihu lake basin: a challenge of legitimacy under the authoritarian regime in China. Interactive approaches to water governance in Asia, 103-122.‏
  29. Price, D. J. de Solla. (1965). Networks of scientific papers. Science, 149(3683), 510-515.
  30. Satumantpan, S., & Chuenpagdee, R. (2022). Interactive Governance for the Sustainability of Marine and Coastal Resources in Thailand: 10.32526/ennrj/20/202200115. Environment and Natural Resources Journal, 20(6), 543-552.
  31. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2019). Research methods for business students. Pearson Education Limited.
  32. Sayari, Soroush; Pirizadeh, Mohammad and Rezaei, Nakisa. (2023). Knowledge Map of Political Branding in the World: A Scientometric Approach. Management Research in Iran, 46(27), 183-208. [In Persian]
  33. Shams, Leila. (2023). Public Governance: Challenges and Issues. Bi-Quarterly Journal of Humanities Development, 4(7), 157-174. doi: 22047/hsd.2023.182092. [In Persian]
  34. Sierdovski, M., Pilatti, L. A., & Rubbo, P. (2022). Organizational Competencies in the Development of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Criteria in the Industrial Sector. Sustainability, 14(20), 13463. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142013463
  35. Sørensen, E. (2013). Institutionalizing interactive governance for democracy. Critical Policy Studies, 7(1), 72–86. doi:10.1080/19460171.2013.766024
  36. Sørensen, E. (2020). Interactive political leadership: The role of politicians in the age of governance. Oxford University Press, USA.‏
  37. Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2005). Network Governance and Post-Liberal Democracy. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 27(2), 197–237. doi:10.1080/10841806.2005.11029489 
  38. Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2005). The democratic anchorage of governance networks. Scandinavian political studies, 28(3), 195-218.‏
  39. Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2018). The democratizing impact of governance networks: From pluralization, via democratic anchorage, to interactive political leadership. Public Administration, 96(2), 302–317. doi:10.1111/padm.12398
  40. Swain, A. (1998). Beyond Market and Hierarchy: Interactive Governance and Social Complexity. Regional Studies, 32(6), 579.‏
  41. Torfing, J. Guy Peters, B. Pierre, J & Sørensen, E (2012). Interactive governance: Advancing the paradigm. Oxford University Press, USA.
  42. Torfing, J., & Sørensen, E. (2014). The European debate on governance networks: Towards a new and viable paradigm?. Policy and Society, 33(4), 329-344.‏
  43. Triantis, G. G., & Daniels, R. J. (1995). The role of debt in interactive corporate governance. Calif. L. Rev., 83, 1073-1114.
  44. Uhlin, A., & Levland, J. (2001). Innovation and interactive governance. In The case of Båtsfjord, ponencia en 2nd Research Conference on University and Society Co-operation, Universidad de Halmstad, Suecia (pp. 9-11).‏
  45. van Buuren, A., Edelenbos, J., & Klijn, E. H. (2007). Interactive governance in the Netherlands: The case of the Scheldt Estuary. In Democratic network governance in Europe (pp. 150-173). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.‏
  46. Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a software program for bibliometric visualization. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523-538.
  47. Yi, C. (2015). Advancing the Research on Interactive Governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(4), 1310–1314. doi:10.1093/jopart/muv014.
Iranian Journal of Public Policy
Volume 11, Issue 4
December 2025
Pages 206-223

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics