Currently, important efforts are being made to improve governability and governance by combining the monopoly of state decisions with the collaboration of diverse actors in public practice. Based on the above, the purpose of this article is to analyze the evolution of conceptual approaches to both terms over the last 23 years, examining scientific production by author authors, journals, and countries. The methodology was based on a bibliometric analysis: First, the WoS and Scopus databases were searched. Subsequently, scientometric techniques and the Science Tree methodology were used to identify patterns, structures, and trends, to understand the progress and behavior of scientific production, and to measure the quantity and quality of research that has addressed these issues from different perspectives. This study examined governability and governance publications and their annual citations to assess their impact and analyzed the total output of both datasets to identify similarities and differences in governability and governance research. The findings reveal that the number of publications and citations in this field is increasing, with the United States being the most academically influential country and the journal Marine Policy being the most prominent in ranking. These data provide key information for decision-makers, researchers, and academics for future debate and discussion toward operationalizing the concepts at the practical level of action, management, and the functioning of government structures.

1. Abbasi, A., Altmann, J., Hossain, L. (2011). Identifying the effects of co-authorship networks on the performance of scholars: A correlation and regression analysis of performance measures and social network analysis measures. Journal of Informetrics, 5(4), 594–607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2011.05.007
2. Aguilar Villanueva, L. F. (2023). Nueva gobernanza pública: Un panorama conceptual. Perfiles Latinoamericanos, 32(63). https://doi.org/10.18504/pl3263-001-2024
3. Aguilar, L. F. (2007). El aporte de la política pública y de la nueva gestión pública a la gobernanza. *Revista del CLAD Reforma y Democracia, 39*, 5–32. https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=357533693001 Aguirre, K. A., Cuervo, D. P. (2023). Water safety and water governance: A scientometric review. Sustainability, 15(9), 7164. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097164
4. Aguilar, L. F. (2010). Gobernanza: El nuevo proceso de gobernar. Fundación Friedrich Naumann para la Libertad. https://repositorio.21.edu.ar/handle/ues21/12820
5. Amore, A., Hall, C. M. (2016). From governance to meta-governance in tourism? Re-incorporating politics, interests and values in the analysis of tourism governance. Tourism Recreation Research, 41(2), 109–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2016.1151162
6. Ansell, C., Gash, A. (2008), “Collaborative Governance in Theory and Practice”, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 543–571, en: https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum032
7. Barragán-Paladines, M. J. (2019). Exploring the governability of small-scale fisheries in ecuador and galapagos islands under the buen vivir principle. In S. Salas, M. J. Barragán-Paladines, & R. Chuenpagdee (Eds.), Viability and Sustainability of Small-Scale Fisheries in Latin America and The Caribbean (Vol. 19, pp. 513–539). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76078-0_22
8. Bassoli, M. (2010). Local governance arrangements and democratic outcomes (With some evidence from the italian case). Governance, 23(3), 485–508. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0491.2010.01491.x
9. Bavinck, M., Jentoft, S., Pascual-Fernández, J. J., Marciniak, B. (2015). Interactive coastal governance: The role of pre-modern fisher organizations in improving governability. Ocean & Coastal Management, 117, 52–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2015.05.012
10. Bekkers, V., Dijkstra, G., Fenger, M. (2016). Governance and the democratic deficit (0 ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315585451
11. Biermann, F. (2007). Earth system governance as a crosscutting theme of global change research. *Global Environmental Change, 17*(3–4), 326–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.11.010
12. Bouckaert, G., Dooren, W. V., Verschuere, B., et al. (2002). Trajectories for modernizing local governance: Revisiting the flanders case. Public Management Review, 4(3), 309–342. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616670210151603
13. Chuenpagdee, R. (2011). Interactive governance for marine conservation: An illustration. Bulletin of Marine Science, 87(2), 197–211. https://doi.org/10.5343/bms.2010.1063
14. Chuenpagdee, R., Jentoft, S. (2009). Governability assessment for fisheries and coastal systems: A reality check. Human Ecology, 37(1), 109–120. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40603006
15. Coppedge, M. (2002). Venezuela: Popular sovereignty versus liberal democracy | kellogg institute for international studies. Kellogg Institute. https://kellogg.nd.edu/documents/1587
16. Crozier, M. J., Huntington, S. P., Watanuki, J. (2012). The crisis of democracy. Report on the governability of democracies to the trilateral commission. Sociología Histórica, 1. https://revistas.um.es/sh/article/view/165241
17. Di Lucia, L. (2013). Too difficult to govern? An assessment of the governability of transport biofuels in the EU. Energy Policy, 63, 81–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.08.080
18. Dilla Alfonso, H. (2001). Los recursos de la gobernabilidad en la Cuenca del Caribe: ¿Hay Alternativas? Canadian Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies / Revue Canadienne Des Études Latino-Américaines et Caraïbes, 26(52), 245–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/08263663.2001.10874512
19. Do Carmo, G., Felizardo, L. F., De Castro Alcântara, V., et al. (2023). The impact of Jürgen Habermas’s scientific production: A scientometric review. Scientometrics, 128(3), 1853–1875. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04625-x
20. Dring, C. C., Newman, L., Wittman, H. (2023). Assessing governability of agricultural systems: Municipal agricultural planning in Metro Vancouver, Canada. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 6, 855684. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2022.855684
21. Edelenbos, J., Van Meerkerk, I. (Eds.). (2016). Critical reflections on interactive governance: Self-organization and participation in public governance. Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781783479078
22. Fernández-Vidal, D., Muiño, R. (2014). Fact or fiction? Assessing governance and co-management of marine reserves of fishing interest in cedeira and lira (Nw spain). Marine Policy, 47, 15–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2014.01.016
23. Frosini, T. E. (2014). Una ley electoral que protege la bipolaridad y favorece la gobernabilidad = An electoral law that protects and promotes bipolarity governance. Teoría y Realidad Constitucional, 34, 425. https://doi.org/10.5944/trc.34.2014.14092
24. García-Lillo, F., Úbeda-García, M., Marco-Lajara, B. (2015). Estructura intelectual de la investigación sobre dirección de recursos humanos: Un análisis bibliométrico aplicado a la revista The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 2000-2012. Revista Europea de Dirección y Economía de la Empresa, 24(3), 149–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.redee.2015.07.001
25. García-Lorenzo, I., Varela-Lafuente, M. M. (2019). Interacciones de gobernanza en las pesquerías a pequeña escala de Galicia: Percepciones y dinámicas en las cofradías de pescadores. Studies of Applied Economics, 37(3), 42–59. https://doi.org/10.25115/eea.v37i3.2772
26. Gerhardinger, L. C., Andrade, M. M. D., Corrêa, M. R., Turra, A. (2020). Crafting a sustainability transition experiment for the brazilian blue economy. Marine Policy, 120, 104157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.104157
27. Gerhardinger, L. C., Holzkämper, E., De Andrade, M. M., et al. (2022). Envisioning ocean governability transformations through network-based marine spatial planning. Maritime Studies, 21(1), 131–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40152-021-00250-1
28. Goetz, K. H. (2008). Governance as a path to government. West European Politics, 31(1–2), 258–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402380701835066
29. Grisales A. M., Robledo, S., Zuluaga, M. (2023). Topic modeling: Perspectives from a literature review. IEEE Access, 11, 4066–4078. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3232939
30. Hovik, S., Bjørn Stokke, K. (2007). Network governance and policy integration—The case of regional coastal zone planning in norway. European Planning Studies, 15(7), 927–944. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654310701356647
31. Howlett, M., Ramesh, M. (2014). The two orders of governance failure: Design mismatches and policy capacity issues in modern governance. Policy and Society, 33(4), 317–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polsoc.2014.10.002
32. Hurtado-Marín, V. A., Agudelo-Giraldo, J. D., Robledo, S., Restrepo-Parra, E. (2021). Analysis of dynamic networks based on the Ising model for the case of study of co-authorship of scientific articles. Scientific Reports, 11(1), 5721. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-85041-8
33. Jäntti, A., Paananen, H., Kork, A.-A., Kurkela, K. (2023). Towards interactive governance: Embedding citizen participation in local government. Administration & Society, 55(8), 1529–1554. https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997231177220
34. Jentoft, S. (2007). Limits of governability: Institutional implications for fisheries and coastal governance. Marine Policy, 31(4), 360–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2006.11.003
35. Jentoft, S., Bavinck, M. (2014). Interactive governance for sustainable fisheries: Dealing with legal pluralism. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 11, 71–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2014.10.005
36. Jentoft, S., Chuenpagdee, R. (2009). Fisheries and coastal governance as a wicked problem. Marine Policy, 33(4), 553–560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2008.12.002
37. Jentoft, S., Chuenpagdee, R. (2015). Enhancing the Governability of Small-Scale Fisheries Through Interactive Governance. In: Jentoft, S., Chuenpagdee, R. (eds) Interactive Governance for Small-Scale Fisheries. MARE Publication Series, vol. 13. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17034-3_37
38. Jentoft, S., Chuenpagdee, R. (Eds.). (2015b). Interactive governance for small-scale fisheries: Global reflections (Vol. 13). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17034-3
39. Jentoft, S., Chuenpagdee, R., Bundy, A., & Mahon, R. (2010). Pyramids and roses: Alternative images for the governance of fisheries systems. *Marine Policy, 34*(6), 1315–1321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2010.06.004
40. Jentoft, S., Van Son, T. C., Bjørkan, M. (2007). Marine protected areas: A governance system analysis. Human Ecology, 35(5), 611–622. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-007-9125-6
41. Johnsen, J. P. (2014). Is fisheries governance possible? Fish and Fisheries, 15(3), 428–444. https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12024
42. Kemp, R., Parto, S., Gibson, R. B. (2005). Governance for sustainable development: Moving from theory to practice. International Journal of Sustainable Development, 8(1/2), 12. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSD.2005.007372
43. Kersbergen, K., & Waarden, F. (2004). ‘Governance’ as a bridge between disciplines: Cross-disciplinary inspiration regarding shifts in governance and problems of governability, accountability, and legitimacy. European Journal of Political Research, 43(2), 143-171. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.2004.00149.x
44. Kjær, A. M. (2014). Debate on governance in africa: An emerging political economy paradigm. In G. Mudacumura & G. Morçöl (Eds.), Challenges to Democratic Governance in Developing Countries (pp. 19–35). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-03143-9_2
45. Koch, P. (2013). Overestimating the shift from government to governance: Evidence from swiss metropolitan areas. Governance, 26(3), 397–423. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0491.2012.01600.x
46. Kooiman, J. (2016). Interactive governance and governability. En J. Edelenbos & I. van Meerkerk (Eds.), Critical reflections on interactive governance (pp. 29–50). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781783479078.00007
47. Kooiman, J., Bavinck, M., Chuenpagdee, R., Mahon, R., & Pullin, R. (2008). Interactive governance and governability: an introduction. Journal of Transdisciplinary Environmental Studies, 7(1).
48. Lafferty, W. M. (2004). "Chapter 1: Introduction: Form and Function in Governance for Sustainable Development". In Governance for Sustainable Development. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781845421700.00009
49. Le Galès, P. (2001). Urban governance and policy networks: On the urban political boundedness of policy networks. A french case study. Public Administration, 79(1), 167–184. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9299.00251
50. Limaymanta, C. H., Zulueta-Rafael, H., Restrepo-Arango, C., Alvarez-Muñoz, P. (2020). Análisis bibliométrico y cienciométrico de la producción científica de Perú y Ecuador desde Web of Science (2009-2018). Información, Cultura y Sociedad, 43, 31–52. https://doi.org/10.34096/ics.i43.7926
51. Lin, W., Chan, P. W. K., & Xie, X. (2023). Network governance in Chinese education: The case study of schools in civil aviation industry. *Chinese Education & Society, 56*(3–4), 244–259. https://doi.org/10.1080/10611932.2023.2269814
52. Linke, S., Jentoft, S. (2013). A communicative turnaround: Shifting the burden of proof in European fisheries governance. Marine Policy, 38, 337–345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2012.06.011
53. Lopes, J. (2021). Engagement of csos in the collaborative governance of education policy process in cabo verde. Cadernos de Estudos Africanos, 41, 91–117. https://doi.org/10.4000/cea.6336
54. Lorenzi, M. R., Chuenpagdee, R. (2020). Technological entropy and its implications to fisheries governability. Science of The Total Environment, 724, 137973. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137973
55. Mahon, R., Fanning, L., McConney, P. (2009). A governance perspective on the large marine ecosystem approach. Marine Policy, 33(2), 317–321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2008.07.013
56. Malinauskaite, L., Cook, D., Ariza, E., et al. (2022). Interactive governance of whale ecosystem services: Governability assessment of three case studies in the Arctic. Ecology and Society, 27(2), art22. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-13307-270222
57. Marsh, I. (2005). Neo-liberalism and the decline of democratic governance in australia: A problem of institutional design? Political Studies, 53(1), 22–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2005.00515.x
58. Mayntz, R. (1993). Modernization and the logic of interorganizational networks. Knowledge and Policy, 6(1), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02692798
59. Munévar, M. V. W. (2010). ¿Qué es la gobernanza y para qué sirve? Revista Análisis Internacional (Cesada a partir de 2015), 2, 219–236. https://revistas.utadeo.edu.co/index.php/RAI/article/view/24
60. Papadopoulos, Y., Tortola, P. D., Geyer, N. (2024). Taking stock of the multilevel governance research programme: A systematic literature review. Regional & Federal Studies, 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/13597566.2024.2334470
61. Peters, B. G., Pierre, J., Sørensen, E., Torfing, J. (2022). A Research Agenda for Governance, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing.
62. Pierre, J. (2000). Debating governance: Authority, steering, and democracy. Oxford University PressOxford. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198295143.001.0001
63. Restrepo-Medina, M.-A., Nieto-Rodríguez, M.-A. (2020). Governability or governance in water resource management. The colombian case. Revista Republicana, 28, 159–178. https://doi.org/10.21017/Rev.Repub.2020.v28.a81
64. Robledo, S., Zuluaga, M., Valencia-Hernandez, L.-A., Arbelaez-Echeverri, O. A.-E., Duque, P., & Alzate-Cardona, J.-D. (2022). Tree of science with scopus: A shiny application. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship, 100. https://doi.org/10.29173/istl2698
65. Shan, D., Neis, B., Sorensen, J. (2023). Introduction to special issue on governance and fishing health and safety in the North Atlantic. Marine Policy, 155, 105729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2023.105729
66. Song, A. M., Johnsen, J. P., Morrison, T. H. (2018). Reconstructing governability: How fisheries are made governable. Fish and Fisheries, 19(2), 377–389. https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12262
67. Sørensen, E. (2006). Metagovernance: The changing role of politicians in processes of democratic governance. The American Review of Public Administration, 36(1), 98–114. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074005282584
68. Sørensen, E., Torfing, J. (2021). Radical and disruptive answers to downstream problems in collaborative governance? Public Management Review, 23(11), 1590–1611. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2021.1879914
69. Valencia-Hernandez, D. S., Robledo, S., Pinilla, R., et al. (2020). Sap algorithm for citation analysis: An improvement to tree of science. Ingeniería e Investigación, 40(1), 45–49. https://doi.org/10.15446/ing.investig.v40n1.77718
70. Warren, M. E. (2009). Governance-driven democratization. Critical Policy Studies, 3(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/19460170903158040
71. Zhang, Y., Ong, T. S., Kamarudin, F. (2024). Environmental regulation and corporate environmental performance: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Infrastructure, Policy and Development, 8(4). https://doi.org/10.24294/jipd.v8i4.3149
72. Zuluaga, M., Robledo, S., Arbelaez-Echeverri, O., et al. (2022). Tree of science - tos: A web-based tool for scientific literature recommendation. Search less, research more! Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship, 100. https://doi.org/10.29173/istl2696