A Coevolutionary Revision of Decision Making Processes: An Analysis of Port Extensions in Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands

By Gerritts, Lasse | Public Administration Quarterly, Fall 2011 | Go to article overview

A Coevolutionary Revision of Decision Making Processes: An Analysis of Port Extensions in Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands


Gerritts, Lasse, Public Administration Quarterly


INTRODUCTION

Decision making is often embedded in the implicit or explicit assumption that human decision makers have considerable freedom to steer the system they want to change. This type of thinking is dominant in decision making over physical systems such as rivers, coastal zones, nature parks, etc. Considerable resources are spent on research and planning procedures in order to develop a comprehensive plan for an area. As long as the physical system responds in predictable ways, there are no obvious reasons to challenge this assumption. But often, the responses are erratic and, sometimes, unfavorable (cf. Gunderson, 2001).

Although unfavorable consequences are often attributed to poor planning strategies and faulty decision making, they are not a proof that decision makers have made intentional errors. Rather, it shows that decision making take place in a capricious world that is prone to ignore steering incentives. This is manifestly so in the case of decision making over physical systems such as ports and their maritime access. From the case studies presented in this article, it appears that decision makers are often surprised by the outcomes of their decisions, sometimes unpleasantly. The first step in understanding how seemingly sound decisions can lead to unintended or even unwanted effects on physical systems is to understand that decisions and the actors who make these decisions are an integral part of a chain of causes and consequences that drives physical change (cf. Hook, 1999; Turner 2000). This calls for a contingent analysis of the dynamics of steering physical systems.

The purpose of this article is to analyze that chain of causes and consequences in order to explain unexpected outcomes in decision making over physical systems. Central to this analysis is the concept of coevolution. This concept forms the heart of a conceptual model of decision making processes that is presented in the following section. This model is then used to analyze two case studies about decision making over seaport extensions in fragile estuaries in Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands. The longitudinal analysis of the cases shows that decisions made under pressure backfire in the long run. This analysis leads to the formulation of five propositions about complex decision making processes in the final section of this article.

A COMPLEX SYSTEMS PERSPECTIVE

There is ample research about the workings of physical systems such as the estuaries discussed in this article. However, public decision making is still generally regarded as a black box from the perspective of natural sciences as little is understood about the dynamics of decision making and the impact of those dynamics on physical systems. On the other hand, while the dynamics of decision making are the core subjects in Public Administration, less is known from that perspective about the physical effects of decisions on the systems and how these effects in turn influence decision makers. In Public Administration, it is the physical system that is the black box.

A number of authors identify the need to understand the connections and dynamic interactions between physical systems and public decision making processes but a thorough empirical understanding of these relationships has hitherto been lacking (Folke, 2006; Gual & Norgaard, 2010; Kalis & Norgaard, 2010; Kotchen & Young, 2007; O'Sullivan, Manson, Messina, & Crawford, 2006). In order to understand these relations, one has first to assume a systemic point of departure for analysis. Unintended changes may occur as a result of an incorrect decision but could also be caused by a (physical) development elsewhere in the environment or a combination of factors. Isolating the object of research from its context is unhelpful as this context is necessary for a better understanding of the relationships. Secondly, such an analysis should take into account that the causal relationships between systems are circular as systems respond to changes from other systems, i. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

A Coevolutionary Revision of Decision Making Processes: An Analysis of Port Extensions in Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.