What Do We Know About Wicked Problems After Nearly 52 Years? Tracing the DNA of Wicked Problems through A Bibliometric Study

Guy Peters et al.

Administration and Society2026https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997251415534article
AJG 2ABDC B
Weight
0.50

Abstract

This bibliometric study maps 52 years of scholarship on “wicked problems,” tracing the field’s evolution from Rittel and Webber’s foundational framing to contemporary debates on super-wicked problems, clumsy solutions, and adaptive governance. We identify four dominant thematic clusters: collaborative governance, sustainability, policy implementation, and crisis management. Co-citation and co-word analyses reveal two emerging fault lines—one emphasizing networked, deliberative governance and another critiquing collaborative feasibility—and point to novel research frontiers, including joined-up government, pragmatic experimentation, and temporal governance for time-urgent challenges. We propose a typology of wicked problems and outline four governance paradigms to guide practitioners.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997251415534

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{guy2026,
  title        = {{What Do We Know About Wicked Problems After Nearly 52 Years? Tracing the DNA of Wicked Problems through A Bibliometric Study}},
  author       = {Guy Peters et al.},
  journal      = {Administration and Society},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997251415534},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

What Do We Know About Wicked Problems After Nearly 52 Years? Tracing the DNA of Wicked Problems through A Bibliometric Study

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.