Purpose of the study: The aim of this study is to demonstrate why metagovernance is not effective in increasing the democratic legitimacy of networks; to this end, an articulated map will be presented to describe how interactions occur within metagoverned environments.
Methodology/approach: To construct the macro-model of analysis, the methodology of Quivy and Campenhoudt (2005) was used. To consolidate the knowledge involved in the theoretical approach, the Knowledge Development Process-Constructivist (Proknow-C) method by Ensslin, Dutra and Ensslin (2000)
was used. Such a proposal allowed a multidisciplinary perspective, capturing important concepts from economics and organizational theory to apply them to the meta-governed environment.
Originality/Relevance: Metagovernance systems suggest some ability to provide democratic plurality to a social environment, in that we need to understand "if" and "how" this applies; metagovernance is recent in academia and is under discussion; we need to understand its impact in countries with developing institutional environments.
Key findings: Metagoverned systems involve multiple players; difficulty of reconciliation raises transaction costs, both ex-ante - to achieve consensus in the network - and ex-post - when creating mechanisms to deal with disgruntled actors. Such a scenario leads key players to effect coalitions to 'narrow the road' to their own interests, and practice corporate political activity seeking to influence decision making. Actions will focus on impacting the public agent designated as metagovernor, in order to influence possible changes in the environment (regulation).
Theoretical/methodological contributions: An articulated map has been proposed, presenting the cycle of interactions within a metagoverned environment. It shows that sometimes the decisions taken are not the most democratic ones, but those of interest to coalitions.
Social contributions / to management: From a legitimacy perspective, it is necessary to understand how the outcome of networked decision-making can become more democratic, and how metagoverned environments can become less susceptible to harmful corporate political activity, especially in developing democracies.
Albareda, L., & Waddock, S. (2018). Networked CSR governance: A whole network approach to meta-governance. Business & Society, v. 57, n. 4, p. 636-675.
Ayres, S. (2014). Place-based leadership: Reflections on scale, agency and theory. Regional Studies, Regional Science, v. 1, n. 1, 21–24.
Ayres, S., Sandford, M., & Coombes, T. (2017). Policy-making ‘front’ and ‘back’ stage: Assessing the implications for effectiveness and democracy. British Journal of Politics and International Relations, v. 19. N. 4, p. 861-876.
Back, D., & Allen, D. B. (2010). What every CEO needs to know about nonmarket strategy. MIT Sloan Management Review, v. 51, n. 2, p. 40-49.
Bakker, F., Groenewegen, P., & Hond, F. (2005). A bibliometric analysis of 30 years or research and theory on corporate social responsibility and Corporate Social Performance. Business & Society, v. 44, n. 3, p. 283-317.
Barbosa, C. P. (2019). Economia da Estratégia. In: Abdalla et al (Org). Administração Estratégica. 1. ed. São Paulo: Atlas, p. 199-219.
Barley, S. R. (2010). Building an Institutional Field to Corral a Government: A Case to Set an Agenda for organization studies.
Organization Studies, v. 31, p. 777-805.
Baron, D. P. (1995). Integrated Strategy: Market and Nonmarket Components. Califórnia Management Review, v. 37, n. 2, p. 47-65.
Barron, A. (2010). Unlocking the mindsets of Government Affairs Managers: Cultural dimensions of corporate political activity.
Cross Cultural Management: an International Journal, v. 17, n. 2, p. 101-117.
Barron, A. (2011). Exploring national culture's consequences on international business lobbying. Journal of World Business, v. 46, n. 3, p. 320-327.
Bator, F. M. (1958). The Anatomy of Market Failure. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, v. 72, n. 3, p. 351-379.
Bekker, M. C. (2014). Project Governance: 'Schools of Thought". South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences, v. 17, n. 1, p. 22-32.
Bernanke, B., & Kuttner, K. (2005). What explains the Stock Market´s Reaction to Federal Reserve Policy? The Journal of Finance, v. LX, n. 3, p. 1221-1257.
Bourdieu, P. (2005). Principles of an Economic Anthropology. In: Smelser, N. J., & Swedberg, R. (Ed.). The handbook of economic sociology. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2a ed., p. 75-89.
Bogason, P., & Musso, J. (2006). The Democratic Prospects of Network Governance. American Review of Public Administration, v. 36, n. 1, p. 3-18.
Buchanan, J., & Tullock, G. (1965). The Calculus of Consent: Logical Foundations of Constitutional Democracy. 3. ed. Indianápolis: Liberty Fund.
Campos, H. A. (2008). Falhas de Mercado e falhas de governo: uma revisão de literatura sobre regulação econômica. Prismas: Direito, Políticas Públicas e Mundialização, v. 5, p. 281-303.
Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: evolution of a definitional construction. Business & Society, v.38, n.3, p.268-295.
Coase, R. (1960). The problem of social cost. The Journal of Law & Economics, v. 3, p. 1-44.
Costa, A. S. M., & Abdalla, M. (2019). Atividade Política Corporativa. In: Abdalla et al. (Org.). Administração Estratégica. 1. ed. São Paulo: Atlas, p. 177-198.
Curi, D. P. (2019). Responsabilidade Social Corporativa e Estratégia. In: Abdalla et al. (Org.). Administração Estratégica. 1. ed. São Paulo: Atlas, p. 177-198.
Dahl, R. A. (1961). Who governs? New Haven: Yale University Press.
Dutra, A., Ripool-Feliu, V. M. R., Fillol, A. G., Ensslin, S. R., & Ensslin, L. (2015). The construction of knowledge from the scientific literature about the theme seaport performance evaluation. The International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, v. 64, n. 2, p. 243-269.
Eberlein, B. (2019). Who fills the global governance gap? Rethinking the roles of business and government in global governance. Organization Studies, v. 40, 1125–1145.
Ensslin, L., Dutra, A., & Ensslin, S. R. (2000). MCDA: A constructivist approach to the management of human resources at a Governmental Agency. International Transactions in Operational Research - ITORS, v. 7, p. 79-100.
Entwistle, T., Bristow, G., Hines, F., Donaldson, S., & Martin, S. (2007). The dysfunctions of markets, hierarchies and networks in the meta-governance of partnership. Urban Studies, v. 44, n. 1, p. 63-79.
Eshuis, J., & Van Buuren, A. (2014). Innovations in water governance: the importance of time. International Review of Administrative Sciences, v. 80, n. 2, p. 401-420.
Evans, B. (2007). The Politics of Partnership: Urban Regeneration in New East Manchester. Public Policy and Administration, v. 22, n 2, p. 201–215.
Fairclough, N. (2001). Discurso e Mudança Social. Traduzido por Izabel Magalhães. Brasília: Editora Universidade de Brasília.
Fernandes, D. (2019). Na França, acordo entre UE e Mercosul enfrenta oposição e protestos de agricultores, ambientalistas e até ministros. BBC. Paris, 7 jul. 2019. Disponível em: https://www.bbc.com/portuguese/internacional-48845254
Fligstein, N., & Dauter, L. (2012). The Sociology of Markets. Annual Review of Sociology, v. 33, p. 105-128. Friedman, M. (1962). Capitalism and Freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Ge, L., & Brewster, C. A. (2016). Informational institutions in the agrifood sector: meta-information and meta-governance of environmental sustainability. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, v. 18, p. 73-81.
Gjaltema, J., Biesbroek, R., & Termeer, K. (2019). From government to governance… to metagovernance: a systematic literature review. Public Management Review, v. 22, n. 12, p. 1760-1780.
Hayek, F. A. (1990). O caminho da servidão. Tradução de Anna Maria Capovilla, José Ítalo Stelle e Liane de Morais Ribeiro, 5ª ed. Rio de Janeiro: Instituto Liberal.
Hayek, F. A. (2011). Desemprego e política monetária. Tradução de Francisco Leme, 2ª ed. São Paulo: Instituto Mises Brasil.
Hayek, F. A. (1985). A. Direito, Legislação e Liberdade. Tradução de Henry Maksoud, 1. ed. Goiânia: Editora Visão.
Hirst, P., & Thompson, G. (1998). Globalização em Questão: A Economia Internacional e as Possibilidades de Governabilidade. Petrópolis: Vozes.
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s Consequences – International Differences in Work-Related Values. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Holmen, A. K. T. (2011). Governance Networks in City-regions: In the Spirit of Democratic Accountability? Public Policy and Administration, v. 26, n. 4, p. 399-418.
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure.
Journal of Financial Economics, v. 3, n. 4, p. 305-360.
Jessop, B. (1998). The rise of governance and the risks of failure: The case of economic development. International Social Science Journal, v. 50, n. 155, p. 29–46.
Jevons, W. S. (1965). The theory of political economy. New York: Sentry Press.
Kar-Gupta, S., & Trompiz, G. (2019). Agricultores da França revoltados com acordos depredam escritórios de parlamentares.
Reuters. França, 8 ago. 2019. Disponível em: https://br.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idBRKCN1UY22O-OBRWD
Klakegg, O. J., Williams, T., Magnussen, O. M., & Glasspool, H. (2008). Governance frameworks for public project development and estimation. Project Management Journal, v. 39, n. S1, p. 27-42.
Keynes, J. M. (1996). A Teoria Geral do Emprego, do Juro e da Moeda. Tradução de Mário R. da Cruz, 6ª ed. São Paulo: Editora Nova Cultural.
Klijn, E. H., & Teisman, G. R. (2003). Institutional and strategic barriers to public–private partnership: An analysis of Dutch cases. Public Money & Management, v. 23, n. 3, p. 137–146.
Kwak, Y. H., Chih, Y. Y., & Ibbs, C. W. (2009). Towards a comprehensive understanding of public–private partnerships for infrastructure development. California Management Review, v. 51, n. 2, p. 51–78.
Li, B., Akintoye, A., Edwards, P. J. & Hardcastle, C. (2005). Critical success factors for PPP/PFI projects in the UK construction industry. Construction Management and Economics, v. 23, n. 5, p. 459–471.
Loch, M., & Gunther, H. F. (2015). Estratégias de não mercado: uma revisão integrativa. Revista de Administração FACES Journal, v. 14, n. 1, p. 88-94, jan./mar.
Mankiw, N.G. Introdução à Economia. 6ª Edição. São Paulo: Cengage, 2013.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms: the author(s) authorize(s) the publication of the text in the journal;
2. The author(s) ensure(s) that the contribution is original and unpublished and that it is not in the process of evaluation by another journal;
3. The journal is not responsible for the views, ideas and concepts presented in articles, and these are the sole responsibility of the author(s);
4. The publishers reserve the right to make textual adjustments and adapt texts to meet with publication standards.
5. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right to first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Atribuição NãoComercial 4.0 internacional, which allows the work to be shared with recognized authorship and initial publication in this journal.
6. Authors are allowed to assume additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (e.g. publish in institutional repository or as a book chapter), with recognition of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
7. Authors are allowed and are encouraged to publish and distribute their work online (e.g. in institutional repositories or on a personal web page) at any point before or during the editorial process, as this can generate positive effects, as well as increase the impact and citations of the published work (see the effect of Free Access) at http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html
• 8. Authors are able to use ORCID is a system of identification for authors. An ORCID identifier is unique to an individual and acts as a persistent digital identifier to ensure that authors (particularly those with relatively common names) can be distinguished and their work properly attributed.