Metagovernance and Collaboration Networks in the Defense Sector: The Case of the Naval Technological Cluster

DOI:  https://doi.org/10.12804/revistas.urosario.edu.co/desafios/a.15378

Article Sidebar

HTML (Español (España)) XML (Español (España)) PDF

Published: May 21, 2026
Issue: Vol. 38 No. 1 (2026): Libertarianismo en America Latina
Section General Section


Keywords: Public governance Collaboration Leadership Metagovernance Defense

Main Article Content

Authors

  Érica Raschendorfer
COPPEAD-UFRJ
Ariane Cristine Roder Figueira

Abstract

Motivated by the challenges inherent to integration and coordination in collaborative public governance—particularly in sectors traditionally concentrated in state actors, such as National Defense—this article aims to analyze how relationships are configured among actors operating under different logics and embedded in distinct institutional arrangements, across multiple decision-making layers. To this end, a case study was conducted in the Naval Technological Cluster of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The research findings indicate the need to consider new structures capable of shaping actors' behavior and decision-making processes, emphasizing the importance of participatory and effective government, where collaboration plays a central role in constructing socially shared values. Furthermore, the study highlighted that leadership plays a crucial role in addressing structural gaps in managing actors' activities, providing tools for their organization and coordination, and guiding actions within governance arrangements and subsystems. In this context, the research contributes to advancing knowledge on public governance mechanisms, with metagovernance, institutional leadership, and political entrepreneurship emerging as essential foundations for strengthening intersectoral relations.

How to Cite
Raschendorfer, Érica, & Roder Figueira, A. C. (2026). Metagovernance and Collaboration Networks in the Defense Sector: The Case of the Naval Technological Cluster. Desafíos, 38(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.12804/revistas.urosario.edu.co/desafios/a.15378
References

Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 543–571. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum032 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum032

Bandeira, P., & Ferraro, A. (2017). Integrating participatory institutions into the traditional representative and bureaucratic model of public governance. International Political Science Review, 38(5), 642–658. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512116646822 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512116641815

Bao, G., Wang, X., Larsen, G. L., & Morgan, D. F. (2013). Beyond New Public Governance. Administration & Society, 45(4), 443–467. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399713481601 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399712464952

Barbosa Júnior, I. (2012). Oceanopolítica: conceitos fundamentais - Amazônia Azul. Amazônia Azul: Política Estratégica e Direito para o Oceano do Brasil (pp. 205–231). Fundação de Estudos do Direito Marítimo.

Benish, A., & Mattei, P. (2020). Accountability and hybridity in welfare governance. Public Administration, 98(2), 281–290. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12633 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12640

Bitencourt Neto, E. (2017). Transformações do Estado e a administração pública no século XXI. Revista de Investigações Constitucionais, 4(1), 207–220. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5380/rinc.v4i1.49773

Brasil. (1993). Lei nº 8.617, de 4 de janeiro de 1993. Dispõe sobre o mar territorial, a zona contígua, a zona econômica exclusiva e a plataforma continental brasileiros. Disponível em: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/LEIS/L8617.htm

Brasil. (1994). Decreto nº 1.265, de 11 de outubro de 1994. Política Marítima Nacional (PMN). Disponível em: https://www.icmbio.gov.br/cepsul/images/stories/legislacao/Decretos/1994/dec_1265_1994_politicamaritimanacional.pdf

Brasil. (2005). Decreto nº 5.484, de 30 de junho de 2005. Política de Defesa Nacional. Disponível em: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2004-2006/2005/decreto/d5484.htm

Brasil. (2020). Plano Estratégico da Marinha (PEM 2040). Brasília, DF: Marinha do Brasil. Disponível em: https://www.marinha.mil.br/sites/all/modules/pub_pem_2040/book.html

Christiansson, M. (2020). Defense planning beyond rationalism: The third offset strategy as a case of metagovernance. In Defence Planning as Strategic Fact (pp. 10–26). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2017.1335581 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367817268-2

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Investigação qualitativa e projeto de pesquisa: Escolhendo entre cinco abordagens. Penso Editora.

De Andrade da Silva, L. M., Medeiros, S. E., & Queiroz, M. P. (2019). Innovation and decision-making in defense: Introductory considerations to the capability-based planning. Revista de Relaciones Internacionales, Estrategia y Seguridad, 14(1), 189–203.

Gjaltema, J., Biesbroek, R., & Termeer, K. (2020). From government to governance… to meta-governance: A systematic literature review. Public Management Review, 22(12), 1760–1780. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2019.1648697 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2019.1648697

Grossi, G., & Pianezzi, D. (2018). The new public corruption: Old questions for new challenges. In Accounting Forum (pp. 86–101). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accfor.2016.05.002

Hamann, R. (2019). Dynamic de-responsibilization in business–government interactions. Organization Studies, 40(8), 1193–1215. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840618815927

Håkenstad, M., & Larsen, K. K. (2012). Long-term defence planning: A comparative study of seven countries. Defence Studies.

Hartley, J., Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2013). Collaborative innovation: A viable alternative to market competition and organizational entrepreneurship. Public Administration Review, 73(6), 821–830. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12136

Howlett, M., Kekez, A., & Poocharoen, O. O. (2017). Understanding co-production as a policy tool: Integrating new public governance and comparative policy theory. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 19(5), 487–501. https://doi.org/10.1080/13876988.2016.1217903 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13876988.2017.1287445

Janowski, T., Estevez, E., & Baguma, R. (2018). Platform governance for sustainable development: Reshaping citizen-administration relationships in the digital age. Government Information Quarterly, 35(4), S1–S16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2018.09.002

Laitinen, I., Kinder, T., & Stenvall, J. (2018a). Local public service productivity and performance measurement. International Journal of Knowledge-Based Development, 9(1), 49. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJKBD.2018.090501

Laitinen, I., Kinder, T., & Stenvall, J. (2018b). Street-level new public governances in integrated services-as-a-system. Public Management Review, 20(6), 845–872. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2017.1340506

Liddle, J. (2018). Aligning vertical structures and horizontal relationships: Collaborative leadership and accountability mechanisms to enhance economic growth in England. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 84(4), 659–674. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852316651694

Mangan, A., et al. (2018). The challenges of police-community collaboration: Identity manoeuvres and power struggles in a neighbourhood-based meeting. Public Management Review, 20(9), 1353–1373. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2017.1383718

McCaffrey, M., & Salerno, J. T. (2011). A theory of political entrepreneurship. Modern Economy, 2(4), 552–560. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4236/me.2011.24061

McMullin, C. (2021). Challenging the necessity of New Public Governance: Co‐production by third sector organizations under different models of public management. Public Administration, 99(1), 5–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12672

Medeiros, S. E., & Moreira, W. S. (2017). Maritime co-operation among South Atlantic countries and repercussions for the regional community of security practice. Contexto Internacional, 39, 281–304. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/s0102-8529.2017390200005

Medeiros, F., et al. (2022). O IRAMUTEQ como ferramenta no processamento de dados em pesquisa qualitativa. Revista Diálogos em Saúde Pública, 1(2), e000026–e000026.

Mills, D. E., Bradley, L., & Keast, R. (2021). NPG and stewardship theory: Remedies for NPM privatization prescriptions. Public Management Review, 23(4), 501–522. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2019.1695883

Norheim-Martinsen, P. M. (2016). New sources of military change–armed forces as normal organizations. Defence Studies, 16(3), 312–326. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2016.1195234

Osborne, S. P., & Strokosch, K. (2013). It takes two to tango? Understanding the co-production of public services by integrating the services management and public administration perspectives. British Journal of Management, 24(S1), S31–S47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12010

Osborne, S. P., Radnor, Z., & Strokosch, K. (2016). Co-production and the co-creation of value in public services: A suitable case for treatment? Public Management Review, 18(5), 639–653. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2015.1111927

Pereira, B. A. D., & Ckagnazaroff, I. B. (2021). Contribuições para a consolidação da New Public Governance: Identificação das dimensões para sua análise. Cadernos EBAPE.BR, 19, 111–122. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/1679-395120200104

Pot, W. D. (2021). The governance challenge of implementing long-term sustainability objectives with present-day investment decisions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 280, 124475. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124475

Rakšnys, A. V., Valickas, A., & Vanagas, R. (2020). Challenges of creation and implementation of collaborative innovations in public sector organisations. Public Policy and Administration, 19(1), 9–21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.ppaa.19.1.25989

Ratchev, V. (2009). Gobernanza, gestión, mando, liderazgo: Fijando el contexto para estudios de la gestión de la defensa. In H. Bucur-Marcu, P. Fluri, & T. Tagarev (Eds.), Gestión de la defensa: Una introducción (pp. 13–32). Centro de Ginebra para el Control Democrático de Fuerzas Armadas (DCAF).

Raschendorfer, E. V., & Roder Figueira, A. (2024). New Paths for Public Governance: Literature Review, Content Analysis, and Proposed Conceptual Framework for an Integrative View. Administration & Society, 56(7), 803-829. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997241263094

Raza, S. (2012). Cooperação interagências: Porque e como funciona um estudo de modelos organizacionais nas relações internacionais? Brazilian Journal of International Relations, 1(1), 6–37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36311/2237-7743.2012.v1n1.p06-37

Soares, J., et al. (2022). The defence performance measurement framework: Measuring the performance of defence organisations at the strategic level. Defence Studies, 22(1), 99–122. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2021.1994394

Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2012). Introduction: Collaborative innovation in the public sector. The Innovation Journal, 17(1), 1–16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.58235/sjpa.v16i1.16204

Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2021). Accountable government through collaborative governance? Administrative Sciences, 11(4), 127. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci11040127

Souza, M. A. R., et al. (2018). O uso do software IRAMUTEQ na análise de dados em pesquisas qualitativas. Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da USP, 52, e03353. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/s1980-220x2017015003353

Stenvall, J., Kinder, T., & Laitinen, I. (2018). Unlearning and public services—A case study with a Vygotskian approach. Journal of Adult and Continuing Education, 24(2), 188–207. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1477971418818570

Torfing, J., & Triantafillou, P. (2013). What’s in a name? Grasping New Public Governance as a political-administrative system. International Review of Public Administration, 18(2), 9–25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/12294659.2013.10805250

Torfing, J., Sørensen, E., & Røiseland, A. (2019). Transforming the public sector into an arena for co-creation: Barriers, drivers, benefits, and ways forward. Administration & Society, 51(5), 795–825. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399716680057

Young, S. L., Wiley, K. K., & Searing, E. A. M. (2020). “Squandered in real time”: How public management theory underestimated the public administration–politics dichotomy. The American Review of Public Administration, 50(6–7), 480–488. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074020941669

Query Statistics

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Publcation metrics

0




 

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Los derechos de autor serán de la Universidad del Rosario. Cuando el autor quiera publicar el manuscrito en otra publicación, deberá pedir a la Editorial de la Universidad del Rosario los permisos correspondientes. De igual forma, cuando la Revista esté interesada en publicar artículos que ya han sido publicados en otras revistas, procederá a solicitar los permisos correspondientes en la editorial donde se realizó la primera publicación. Bajo una Creative Commons Attribution License, los autores pueden compartir el trabajo con un reconocimiento de la autoría del trabajo y la publicación inicial en esta revista.