A Risk Governance Model for Architectural Innovation in Public Infrastructure Projects

References

[1] Adewoyin, M.A., Ogunnowo, E.O., Fiemotongha, J.E., Igunma, T.O. & Adeleke, A.K., 2020. A Conceptual Framework for Dynamic Mechanical Analysis in High-Performance Material Selection. IRE Journals, 4(5), pp.137–144.

[2] Adewoyin, M.A., Ogunnowo, E.O., Fiemotongha, J.E., Igunma, T.O. & Adeleke, A.K., 2020. Advances in Thermofluid Simulation for Heat Transfer Optimization in Compact Mechanical Devices. IRE Journals, 4(6), pp.116–124.

[3] Adewoyin, M.A., Ogunnowo, E.O., Fiemotongha, J.E., Igunma, T.O. and Adeleke, A.K., 2020. A Conceptual Framework for Dynamic Mechanical Analysis in High-Performance Material Selection.

[4] Ajuwon A., Onifade O., Oladuji T.J., Akintobi A.O. Blockchain-Based Models for Credit and Loan System Automation in Financial Institution . Iconic Research and Engineering Journals 3 (10), 364 – 381

[5] Akpe, O.E., Mgbame, A.C., Ogbuefi, E., Abayomi, A.A. & Adeyelu, O.O., 2020 Bridging the Business Intelligence Gap in Small Enterprises: A Conceptual Framework for Scalable Adoption. IRE Journals, 4(2), pp.159-168. DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.26914438.

[6] Akpe, O.E., Mgbame, A.C., Ogbuefi, E., Abayomi, A.A. & Adeyelu, O.O., 2020.Barriers and Enablers of BI Tool Implementation in Underserved SME Communities. IRE Journals, 3(7), pp.211-220. DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.26914420.

[7] Akpe, O.E., Mgbame, A.C., Ogbuefi, E., Abayomi, A.A. and Adeyelu, O.O., 2020. Bridging the business intelligence gap in small enterprises: A conceptual framework for scalable adoption. IRE Journals, 4(2), pp.159–168.

[8] Alesch, D.J., Arendt, L.A. and Holly, J.N., 2009. Managing for long-term community recovery in the aftermath of disaster. Fairfax, VA: Public Entity Risk Institute.

[9] Alexander, C., 2002. The nature of order: An essay on the art of building and the nature of the universe. Berkeley: Center for Environmental Structure.

[10] Alexander, D.E., 2002. From civil defence to civil protection–and back again. Disaster Prevention and Management, 11(3), pp.209–213.

[11] Altshuler, A. and Luberoff, D., 2003. Mega-projects: The changing politics of urban public investment. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

[12] Argyris, C. and Schön, D.A., 1996. Organizational learning II: Theory, method and practice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

[13] Aven, T. and Renn, O., 2010. Risk management and governance: Concepts, guidelines and applications. Heidelberg: Springer Science & Business Media.

[14] Banerjee, S.B., 2008. Corporate social responsibility: The good, the bad and the ugly. Critical Sociology, 34(1), pp.51–79.

[15] Bason, C., 2010. Leading public sector innovation: Co-creating for a better society. Bristol: Policy Press.

[16] Beck, U., 1992. Risk society: Towards a new modernity. London: Sage Publications.

[17] Beck, U., 1999. World risk society. Cambridge: Polity Press.

[18] Bent Flyvbjerg, 2009. Survival of the unfittest: Why the worst infrastructure gets built—and what we can do about it. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 25(3), pp.344–367.

[19] Boin, A., McConnell, A. and ’t Hart, P., 2008. Governing after crisis: The politics of investigation, accountability and learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[20] Borins, S., 2001. Encouraging innovation in the public sector. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 2(3), pp.310–319.

[21] Bovaird, T., 2007. Beyond engagement and participation: User and community coproduction of public services. Public Administration Review, 67(5), pp.846–860.

[22] Bryson, J.M., Crosby, B.C. and Bloomberg, L., 2014. Public value governance: Moving beyond traditional public administration and the new public management. Public Administration Review, 74(4), pp.445–456.

[23] Chapin, F.S., Kofinas, G.P. and Folke, C., 2009. Principles of ecosystem stewardship: Resilience-based natural resource management in a changing world. New York: Springer.

[24] Christensen, C.M., 1997. The innovator’s dilemma: When new technologies cause great firms to fail. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

[25] Davoudi, S., 2006. Evidence-based planning: Rhetoric and reality. DisP - The Planning Review, 165(2), pp.14–24.

[26] Dekker, S., 2007. Just culture: Balancing safety and accountability. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing.

[27] Fischer, F., 2003. Reframing public policy: Discursive politics and deliberative practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[28] Flyvbjerg, B., Bruzelius, N. and Rothengatter, W., 2003. Megaprojects and risk: An anatomy of ambition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[29] Fuenfschilling, L. and Truffer, B., 2014. The structuration of socio-technical regimes—conceptual foundations from institutional theory. Research Policy, 43(4), pp.772–791.

[30] Gherardi, S., 2000. Practice-based theorizing on learning and knowing in organizations. Organization, 7(2), pp.211–223.

[31] Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P. and Trow, M., 1994. The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage Publications.

[32] Giddens, A., 2000. The third way and its critics. Cambridge: Polity Press.

[33] Grabher, G., 2004. Temporary architectures of learning: Knowledge governance in project ecologies. Organization Studies, 25(9), pp.1491–1514.

[34] Graham, S. and Marvin, S., 2001. Splintering urbanism: Networked infrastructures, technological mobilities and the urban condition. London: Routledge.

[35] Hajer, M. and Wagenaar, H., 2003. Deliberative policy analysis: Understanding governance in the network society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[36] Hajer, M.A., 2003. A frame in the fields: Policymaking and the reinvention of politics. In: M.A. Hajer and H. Wagenaar, eds. Deliberative Policy Analysis: Understanding Governance in the Network Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.88–110.

[37] Hall, J., Holt, R. and Purchase, D., 2003. Project risk management: Processes, techniques and insights. International Journal of Project Management, 21(8), pp.583–589.

[38] Hall, P., 2002. Urban and regional planning. 4th ed. London: Routledge.

[39] Hanseth, O. and Lyytinen, K., 2010. Design theory for dynamic complexity in information infrastructures: The case of building internet. Journal of Information Technology, 25(1), pp.1–19.

[40] Hartley, J., 2005. Innovation in governance and public services: Past and present. Public Money & Management, 25(1), pp.27–34.

[41] Healey, P., 2006. Transforming governance: Challenges of institutional adaptation and a new politics of space. European Planning Studies, 14(3), pp.299–320.

[42] Healey, P., 2007. Urban complexity and spatial strategies: Towards a relational planning for our times. London: Routledge.

[43] Hill, C. and Lynn, L.E., 2005. Is hierarchical governance in decline? Evidence from empirical research. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15(2), pp.173–195.

[44] Hood, C. and Peters, G., 2004. The middle aging of new public management: Into the age of paradox? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 14(3), pp.267–282.

[45] Hood, C., 2002. The risk game and the blame game. Government and Opposition, 37(1), pp.15–37.

[46] Hood, C., 2007. Intellectual obsolescence and intellectual makeovers: Reflections on the tools of government after two decades. Governance, 20(1), pp.127–144.

[47] Hood, C., Rothstein, H. and Baldwin, R., 2001. The government of risk: Understanding risk regulation regimes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[48] Hopkin, P., 2010. Fundamentals of risk management: Understanding, evaluating and implementing effective risk management. London: Kogan Page.

[49] Innes, J.E. and Booher, D.E., 2003. Collaborative policymaking: Governance through dialogue. In: M.A. Hajer and H. Wagenaar, eds. Deliberative policy analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.33–59.

[50] Jessop, B., 2001. Institutional re(turns) and the strategic-relational approach. Environment and Planning A, 33(7), pp.1213–1235.

[51] Jessop, B., 2002. The future of the capitalist state. Cambridge: Polity Press.

[52] Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A., 2000. Choices, values, and frames. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[53] Kelly, G., Mulgan, G. and Muers, S., 2002. Creating public value: An analytical framework for public service reform. London: Cabinet Office Strategy Unit.

[54] Kettl, D.F., 2000. The global public management revolution: A report on the transformation of governance. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

[55] Kingdon, J.W., 2003. Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. 2nd ed. New York: Longman.

[56] Kitchin, R., 2014. The real-time city? Big data and smart urbanism. GeoJournal, 79(1), pp.1–14.

[57] Kooiman, J., 1999. Social-political governance: Overview, reflections and design. Public Management Review, 1(1), pp.67–92.

[58] Kooiman, J., 2003. Governing as governance. London: Sage Publications.

[59] Kunreuther, H., 2002. Risk analysis and risk management in an uncertain world. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 22(4), pp.655–664.

[60] Latour, B., 2005. Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[61] Lawson, B., 2005. How designers think: The design process demystified. 4th ed. Oxford: Architectural Press.

[62] Lemos, M.C. and Morehouse, B.J., 2005. The co-production of science and policy in integrated climate assessments. Global Environmental Change, 15(1), pp.57–68.

[63] Lindblom, C.E., 2002. The market system: What it is, how it works, and what to make of it. New Haven: Yale University Press.

[64] Lowndes, V. and Wilson, D., 2001. Social capital and local governance: Exploring the institutional design variable. Political Studies, 49(4), pp.629–647.

[65] Luhmann, N., 2002. Risk: A sociological theory. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

[66] Mandell, M.P., 2001. Getting results through collaboration: Networks and network structures for public policy and management. Westport, CT: Quorum Books.

[67] March, J.G. and Olsen, J.P., 2006. The logic of appropriateness. In: M. Moran, M. Rein and R.E. Goodin, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.689–708.

[68] Mazzucato, M., 2013. The entrepreneurial state: Debunking public vs. private sector myths. London: Anthem Press.

[69] McLaughlin, K., Osborne, S.P. and Ferlie, E., 2002. New public management: Current trends and future prospects. London: Routledge.

[70] Meijer, A., 2014. Transparency. In: M. Bovens, R.E. Goodin and T. Schillemans, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Public Accountability. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.507–525.

[71] Moore, M.H., 1995. Creating public value: Strategic management in government. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

[72] Munro, E., 2009. Managing societal and institutional risks in child protection. Risk Analysis, 29(7), pp.1015–1023.

[73] Nelson, R.R. and Winter, S.G., 2002. An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

[74] Nilsson, M., Eckerberg, K. and Persson, Å., 2009. Introduction: Cross-sectoral policy integration for sustainable development. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 9(4), pp.397–403.

[75] North, D.C., 2005. Understanding the process of economic change. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

[76] Ogunnowo, E.O., Adewoyin, M.A., Fiemotongha, J.E., Igunma, T.O. & Adeleke, A.K., 2020. Systematic Review of Non-Destructive Testing Methods for Predictive Failure Analysis in Mechanical Systems. IRE Journals, 4(4), pp.207–215.

[77] Olajide, J.O., Otokiti, B.O., Nwani, S., Ogunmokun, A.S., Adekunle, B.I. and Efekpogua, J., 2020. Developing a financial analytics framework for end-to-end logistics and distribution cost control. IRE Journals, 4(7), pp.187–199.

[78] Osborne, S.P., 2006. The new public governance? Public Management Review, 8(3), pp.377–387.

[79] Ostrom, E., 2005. Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

[80] Ostrom, E., 2009. A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science, 325(5939), pp.419–422.

[81] Oyedokun, O.O., 2019. Green human resource management practices and its effect on the sustainable competitive edge in the Nigerian manufacturing industry (Dangote) (Doctoral dissertation, Dublin Business School).

[82] O’Brien, K. and O’Keefe, P., 2014. Managing adaptation to climate risk. In: G. C. Gallopin, ed. Resilience and Development. London: Routledge, pp.91–108.

[83] Parsons, T., 2007. The structure of social action. New York: Free Press.

[84] Parsons, W., 2001. Modernising policy-making for the twenty first century: The professional model. Public Policy and Administration, 16(3), pp.93–110.

[85] Perrow, C., 2007. The next catastrophe: Reducing our vulnerabilities to natural, industrial, and terrorist disasters. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

[86] Pezzullo, P.C., 2007. Toxic tourism: Rhetorics of pollution, travel, and environmental justice. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.

[87] Pollitt, C. and Bouckaert, G., 2011. Public management reform: A comparative analysis—New public management, governance, and the neo-Weberian state. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[88] Porter, M.E. and Kramer, M.R., 2006. Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), pp.78–92.

[89] Power, M., 2004. The risk management of everything: Rethinking the politics of uncertainty. London: Demos.

[90] Pressman, J.L. and Wildavsky, A., 1984. Implementation: How great expectations in Washington are dashed in Oakland. Berkeley: University of California Press.

[91] Quiggin, J., 2006. Economic behavior under uncertainty. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[92] Raco, M., 2005. Sustainable development, rolled-out neoliberalism and sustainable communities. Antipode, 37(2), pp.324–347.

[93] Ravetz, J., 2004. The post-normal science of precaution. Futures, 36(3), pp.347–357.

[94] Rayner, S. and Cantor, R., 1987. How fair is safe? The cultural approach to societal technology choice. Risk Analysis, 7(1), pp.3–9.

[95] Renn, O., 2008. Risk governance: Coping with uncertainty in a complex world. London: Earthscan.

[96] Rhodes, R.A.W. and Wanna, J., 2007. The limits to public value, or rescuing responsible government from the platonic guardians. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 66(4), pp.406–421.

[97] Rhodes, R.A.W., 1997. Understanding governance: Policy networks, governance, reflexivity and accountability. Buckingham: Open University Press.

[98] Rittel, H.W.J. and Webber, M.M., 1973. Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), pp.155–169.

[99] Roe, E.M., 2009. Making the most of mess: Reliability and policy in today’s management challenges. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

[100] Rosa, E.A., Renn, O. and McCright, A.M., 2014. The risk society revisited: Social theory and governance. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

[101] Sanderson, I., 2002. Evaluation, policy learning and evidence-based policy making. Public Administration, 80(1), pp.1–22.

[102] Scharpf, F.W., 1997. Games real actors play: Actor-centered institutionalism in policy research. Boulder: Westview Press.

[103] Schön, D.A., 1983. The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.

[104] Sclove, R.E., 2000. Reinventing technology assessment for the 21st century. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 20(4), pp.297–313.

[105] Scott, J.C., 1998. Seeing like a state: How certain schemes to improve the human condition have failed. New Haven: Yale University Press.

[106] Scott, W.R., 2001. Institutions and organizations. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

[107] Senge, P.M., 2006. The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday.

[108] Shove, E., 2003. Comfort, cleanliness and convenience: The social organization of normality. Oxford: Berg Publishers.

[109] Simon, H.A., 1996. The sciences of the artificial. 3rd ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

[110] Sorensen, E. and Torfing, J., 2005. Network governance and post-liberal democracy. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 27(2), pp.197–237.

[111] Stirling, A., 2007. Risk, precaution and science: Towards a more constructive policy debate. EMBO Reports, 8(4), pp.309–315.

[112] Stirling, A., 2010. Keep it complex. Nature, 468(7327), pp.1029–1031.

[113] Taleb, N.N., 2007. The black swan: The impact of the highly improbable. New York: Random House.

[114] Teisman, G.R. and Klijn, E.H., 2008. Complexity theory and public management. Public Management Review, 10(3), pp.287–297.

[115] Tierney, K., 2012. Disaster governance: Social, political, and economic dimensions. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 37, pp.341–363.

[116] Turnhout, E., Dewulf, A. and Hulme, M., 2016. What does policy-relevant global environmental knowledge do? Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 18, pp.65–72

[117] Tushman, M.L. and O’Reilly, C.A., 1996. Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review, 38(4), pp.8–30

[118] Van Buuren, A., 2009. Knowledge for governance, governance of knowledge: Inclusive knowledge management in collaborative governance processes. International Public Management Journal, 12(2), pp.208–235.

[119] Weber, M., 2004. The essential Weber: A reader. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

[120] Weick, K.E. and Sutcliffe, K.M., 2007. Managing the unexpected: Resilient performance in an age of uncertainty. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

@article{1710186,
      author = {Iboro Akpan Essien, Geraldine Chika Nwokocha, Eseoghene Daniel Erigha, Ehimah Obuse, Ayorinde Olayiwola Akindemowo},
      title = {A Risk Governance Model for Architectural Innovation in Public Infrastructure Projects},
      journal = {Iconic Research And Engineering Journals},
      year = {2020},
      volume = {3},
      number = {9},
      pages = {463-492},
      issn = {2456-8880},
      url = {https://www.irejournals.com/formatedpaper/1710186.pdf},
      abstract = {Public infrastructure projects are increasingly expected to embrace innovation, particularly in architecture, to meet evolving societal, environmental, and technological demands. However, the integration of architectural innovation in public projects often introduces complex risk profiles that challenge traditional governance structures. These risks span aesthetic divergence, stakeholder resistance, budgetary overruns, regulatory delays, and functional uncertainties?creating friction between creative freedom and institutional accountability. While innovation is frequently championed as a means to enhance value, its implementation within rigid public sector frameworks remains inadequately governed. This study addresses the pressing need for a structured approach to managing risks associated with architectural innovation in public infrastructure.The paper proposes a conceptual risk governance model that seeks to balance innovation objectives with the procedural and fiduciary demands of public accountability. Drawing from interdisciplinary theories in governance, architecture, and public policy, the study employs a qualitative case study approach involving selected infrastructure projects that attempted design innovation under public scrutiny. Through data collection techniques including stakeholder interviews, documentary analysis, and thematic coding, key risk categories are identified and mapped. The model integrates adaptive governance principles with project lifecycle stages to offer a scalable framework for innovation risk management. The resulting governance model introduces a tiered structure for early-stage risk identification, mid-stage stakeholder negotiation, and late-stage regulatory alignment?facilitating dynamic decision-making while preserving architectural integrity. Importantly, the study finds that successful innovation governance depends not solely on technical tools but also on institutional willingness to accommodate uncertainty, redefine performance metrics, and foster collaborative planning. The proposed model was validated through expert consultations, ensuring relevance for practitioners in both design and policy roles.This research contributes to the emerging discourse on innovation governance in the built environment and offers practical guidance for policymakers, architects, and infrastructure managers seeking to responsibly advance public architectural innovation without compromising project feasibility, equity, or compliance.
},
      keywords = {Architectural Innovation, Risk Governance, Public Infrastructure, Design Risk, Innovation Management, Public Sector Projects, Conceptual Model.},
      month = {March},
  }