THE ROLE OF CROSS-SECTORAL PARTNERSHIPS IN BUILDING FAMILY DIGITAL SECURITY: A PUBLIC AND NETWORK GOVERNANCE PERSPECTIVE

Authors

  • Patryk Chmielarz University of the National Education Commission in Krakow, Institute of Law, Economics and Administration Author
  • Grzegorz K. Sudoł University of the National Education Commission in Krakow, Institute of Law, Economics and Administration, Department of Administration and Public Management Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17512/znpcz.2026.3.02

Keywords:

collaborative governance, cross-sectoral partnership, digital resilience, family digital security, metagovernance, network governance, public value, Safety by Design, stakeholder management, wicked problems

Abstract

This article examines cross-sectoral partnerships for family digital security from the perspective of management and quality sciences. It conceptualizes cyberbullying, online grooming, identity theft, and related online harms as wicked problems that exceed the capacity of any single sector. Drawing on selected scholarship on collaborative governance, network governance, public value, stakeholder mapping, and digital safety by design, the article develops a conceptual typology of three partnership models: standard-setting partnerships, capacity-building networks, and incident-response networks. It argues that their effectiveness depends on metagovernance, the management of institutional collective-action dilemmas, and the integration of Safety by Design. The article contributes an analytical framework and stakeholder power/interest matrix for interpreting family digital 
resilience as a public value.

References

Achard, P. O. (2019). Strategic management of public–private partnerships: Actors, aims, and capabilities. In R. M. Clark & S. Hakim (Eds.), Public private partnerships: Construction, protection, and rehabilitation of critical infrastructure (pp. 261-280). Springer.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-24600-6_13

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

Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Bloomberg, L. L. (2014). Public value governance: Moving be-yond traditional public administration and the new public management. Public Administra-tion

Review, 74(4), 445-456. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12238

Cosma, A., Molcho, M., & Pickett, W. (2024). A focus on adolescent peer violence and bullying in Europe, central Asia and Canada: Health Behaviour in School-aged Children interna-tional

report from the 2021/2022 survey: Volume 2. World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe. https://iris.who.int/handle/10665/376323

Dedkova, L., Smahel, D., & Just, M. (2022). Digital security in families: The sources of infor-mation relate to the active mediation of internet safety and parental internet skills. Behav-iour & Information Technology, 41(5), 1052-1064. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2020.1851769

eSafety Commissioner. (2019, May). Safety by design overview.

https://www.esafety.gov.au/sites/default/files/2019-10/SBD%20-%20Overview%20May19.pdf

Emerson, K., Nabatchi, T., & Balogh, S. (2012). An integrative framework for collaborative gov-ernance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(1), 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mur011

European Parliament and Council of the European Union. (2022). Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of 19 October 2022 on a Single Market for Digital Services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC (Digital Services Act). Official Journal of the European Union, L 277, 1-102.

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/2065/oj

Feiock, R. C. (2013). The institutional collective action framework. Policy Studies Journal, 41(3), 397-425. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12023

Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman.

Head, B. W., & Alford, J. (2015). Wicked problems: Implications for public policy and manage-ment. Administration & Society, 47(6), 711-739. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399713481601

INHOPE Association. (2025). Annual report 2024. https://inhope.org/media/pages/action-awareness/ publications/publications/7e41953043-1767864139/inhope-annual-report-2024.pdf

Jessop, B. (2004). Multi-level governance and multi-level metagovernance: Changes in the Euro-pean Union as integral moments in the transformation and reorientation of contemporary statehood. In I. Bache & M. Flinders (Eds.), Multi-level governance (pp. 49-74). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/0199259259.003.0004

Medina, A., Hernández, J. C., Muñoz-Cerón, E., & Rus-Casas, C. (2020). Identification of educa-tional models that encourage business participation in higher education institutions. Sustain-ability, 12(20), Article 8421. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12208421

Mendelow, A. (1991). Stakeholder mapping. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Information Systems (pp. 10-24). Prentice-Hall.

Moore, M. H. (1997). Creating public value: Strategic management in government. Harvard University Press.

OECD. (2021). Recommendation of the Council on Children in the Digital Environment

(OECD/LEGAL/0389). OECD Legal Instruments.

https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0389

OECD. (2024). Towards digital safety by design for children (OECD Digital Economy Papers

No. 363). OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/

towards-digital-safety-by-design-for-children_c167b650-en.html

Provan, K. G., & Kenis, P. (2008). Modes of network governance: Structure, management, and effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(2), 229-252. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum015

Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci-ences, 4(2), 155-169. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01405730

Schütze, H. (2025). Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and public health. In S. R. Quah (Ed.), International encyclopedia of public health (3rd ed., Vol. 6, pp. 460-464). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-99967-0.00170-8

Senigaglia, R. (2022). Social media, mobile apps and children protection. In R. Senigaglia, C. Irti, & A. Bernes (Eds.), Privacy and data protection in software services (pp. 35-45). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-3049-1_4

Smahel, D., Machackova, H., Mascheroni, G., Dedkova, L., Staksrud, E., Ólafsson, K., Living-stone, S., & Hasebrink, U. (2020). EU Kids Online 2020: Survey results from 19 countries. EU Kids Online, The London School of Economics and Political Science. https://doi.org/10.21953/lse.47fdeqj01ofo

Tagarev, T., & Davis, B. Á. (2020). Towards the design of a cybersecurity competence network: Findings from the analysis of existing network organisations. In A. Dziech, W. Mees,

& A. Czyżewski (Eds.), Multimedia communications, services and security: MCSS 2020

(pp. 37-50). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-59000-0_4

Vayaliparampil, M., Page, F., & Wolterstorff, E. (2021). The missing ingredient for successful multi-stakeholder partnerships: Cooperative capacity. Societies, 11(2), Article 37. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc11020037

Yanakiev, Y., & Tagarev, T. (2020). Governance model of a cybersecurity network: Best practic-es in the academic literature. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Com-puter Systems and Technologies (pp. 27-34). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3407982.3407992

Downloads

Published

2026-09-30

Issue

No. 63 (2026)

Section

Artykuły

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Patryk Chmielarz, Grzegorz K. Sudoł (Autor)

Creative Commons License

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

Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits others to share the work with appropriate acknowledgment of the authorship and initial publication in this journal.