Contains definitions of terms used in eGovPoliNet partly based on DCMI Metadata Terms.

 Hierarchic Governance
Hierarchic governance structures constitute the traditional mode of governance in a country based on hierarchy of authority or power and is characterized by centralized state control represented through a central government (Atkinson and Coleman 1989). Governments are shifting - either voluntarily or through coercion from hierarchic modes of governance to networked modes of governance (Dijk & Winters-van Beek, 2009; Kettl, 2002; Hamza , 2013). But dismissing formal hierarchies as systems of governance is too risky, for several reasons (Atkinson and Coleman 1989). Hierarchic modes of governance are consistently applied, now in combination with other modes of governance, in our political systems (Kettl & Jones, 1995). However, it is important to understand the different structures in play (networks and hierarchies) and how these are applied (Thompson, 2003).
Atkinson, M. & Coleman, W., (1989), Strong States and Weak States: Sectoral Policy Networks in Advanced Capitalist Economies, British Journal of Political Science, 14(1), pp.46-67.
Dijk, J. & Winters-van Beek, A., (2009), The Perspective of Network Government: The Struggle Between Hierarchies, Markets and Networks as Modes of Governance in Contemporary Government, Innovation and the Public Sector, 14, pp.235-55.
Hamza, K., (2013), The Impact of Social Media and Network Governance on State Stability in Time of Turbulences: Egypt After 2011 Revolution, PhD Thesis. Brussels, Vrije Universiteit Brussel Institute for European Studies.
Kettl, D., (2002), The Transformation of Governance. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Kettl, D. & Jones, B., (1995), Sharing Power: Public Governance and Private Markets. Journal of Politics, 57(1), pp.246-48.
Thompson, G., (2003), Between hierarchies and markets. The logic and limits of network forms of organization. New York: Oxford University Press.
The word hypothesis comes from the Ancient Greek ὑπόθεσις, (hupothesis) meaning "to put under" or "to suppose". A hypothesis "is a proposition, or set of propositions, set forth as an explanation for the occurrence of some specified group of phenomena, either asserted merely as a provisional conjecture to guide investigation or accepted as highly probable in the light of established facts" (Webster dictionary).
Scientists generally base scientific hypotheses on previous observations that cannot satisfactorily be explained with the available scientific theories. A scientific hypothesis is a proposed explanation of a phenomenon which still has to be rigorously tested (Wise Geek, 2012).
In common usage, in the 21st century, a hypothesis refers to a provisional idea whose merit requires evaluation. For proper evaluation, the framer of a hypothesis needs to define specifics in operational terms. A hypothesis requires work by the researcher in order to either confirm or disprove it. In due course, a confirmed hypothesis may become part of a theory or occasionally may grow to become a theory itself.
In Policy Making theories, an example of rational expectations hypothesis has been used to support some strong conclusions about economic policy making, the the Policy Ineffectiveness Proposition developed by Thomas Sargent (Sargent, T. J., 1987).
Webster’s Encyclopaedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language, Gramercy books (1989)
Wise Geek (2012). What is the Difference between a Theory and a Hypothesis?. Wise Geek. Retrieved 17 December 2012.
Sargent, T. J. (1987). Rational expectations, The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics, v. 4, pp. 76–79.