Triggered by the recent inquiries into the Fukushima nuclear disaster, this article reflects on the challenges of developing and operating risk regulation and crisis management regimes in an era of highly complex and tightly interconnected socio‐technical systems. These challenges are not just technical and professional but fundamentally institutional and cultural. The article identifies three key paradoxes and challenges of contemporary risk and crisis management, signals a range of recurrent problems in governments' efforts to cope with these challenges, problematizes current patterns of societal learning from crises, and sketches an agenda for public administration research in this area.
In this article, we reconstruct and interpret the Adenauer–Erhard leadership rivalry in the CDU. This leadership struggle culminated in Erhard replacing Adenauer in 1963 and Adenauer's continued 'guerrilla' warfare against Erhard's leadership, which was one of the contributing factors to the brevity of Erhard's tenure. The case is of intrinsic historical interest but also provides a muster for recent and ongoing leadership succession predicaments in governing parties in Germany and elsewhere. The article presents a conceptual framework of party leadership succession, and zooms in on the (mis)match between the tactical choices made by the incumbent leader and key succession candidates as a key factor explaining the nature and impact of successions. The framework is then applied to the case, and the implications of the findings are placed in a broader comparative context.
Triggered by the collapse of the US mortgage market, the global financial crisis (GFC) of 2007–08 hit most of the Western world hard and fast, presenting governments and citizens with a set of stark, undeniable and immediate realities. This article examines the attempts of three prime ministers "Gordon Brown in the UK, Brian Cowen in Ireland and Kevin Rudd in Australia to meet the key leadership challenge set up by the GFC: to publicly assess, explain and account for the GFC and the accompanying economic turbulence and uncertainty as financial markets went from boom to bust. By focussing on meaning making we examine how the leaders responded to the public expectation to explain: How bad is the situation? How did it occur? Who or what is to be held responsible? What needs to be done to cope with it? Using both qualitative and quantitative methods we compare the rhetorical impacts of these leaders.
With so much media and political criticism of their shortcomings and failures, it is easy to overlook the fact that many governments work pretty well much of the time. Great Policy Successes turns the spotlight on instances of public policy that are remarkably successful. It develops a framework for identifying and assessing policy successes, paying attention not just to their programmatic outcomes but also to the quality of the processes by which policies are designed and delivered, the level of support and legitimacy they attain, and the extent to which successful performance endures over time. The bulk of the book is then devoted to 15 detailed case studies of striking policy successes from around the world, including Singapore's public health system, Copenhagen and Melbourne's rise from stilted backwaters to the highly liveable and dynamic urban centres they are today, Brazil's Bolsa Familia poverty relief scheme, the US's GI Bill, and Germany's breakthrough labour market reforms of the 2000s. Each case is set in context, its main actors are introduced, key events and decisions are described, the assessment framework is applied to gauge the nature and level of its success, key contributing factors to success are identified, and potential lessons and future challenges are identified. Purposefully avoiding the kind of heavy theorizing that characterizes many accounts of public policy processes, each case is written in an accessible and narrative style ideally suited for classroom use in conjunction with mainstream textbooks on public policy design, implementation, and evaluation.
Governing by Looking Back examines how governments investigate and learn in a more ad-hoc fashion, from parts of their past that already have become labelled as a 'success' or a 'failure' in professional, public and political arenas. The imperative in learning from a problematic past ('failure') is to avoid its repetition, and to examine carefully whether a failure is due to implementation problems or inherent in an erroneous theory of change that underpins the design of the policy. Conversely, the rationale for looking back at successes is to learn positive lessons about designs and practices that can be emulated, reinforced and transplanted, whilst not ignoring the role played by incidental highly conducive circumstances which are impossible to replicate. The main argument of the paper is that there is a structural imbalance in how the political system and the APS are tuned to detect and attend to government 'failures' (intensely so, and mostly in terms of accountability and blame) as opposed to 'successes' (much more sporadically, and when it occurs mostly in the form of unreflective desires to 'copy' and 'roll out'). This imbalance manifests itself both at the 'supply side' (the provision of performance information and the operation of accountability mechanisms) and at the 'reception side' (APS attitudes and practices in anticipating and responding to such feedback). The first section of the paper conceptualizes 'success' and 'failure' in public policy and describes the distinctive opportunities and challenges that each presents for institutional learning. Inevitably reputational and political considerations, power relations and ingrained organizational cultures and routines shape the ways in which public agencies interrogate their pasts and those of other agencies at home and abroad as well as their appetite for and styles of learning from this engagement with past practices. In the second section we focus specifically on the feedback systems in and around the APS, and how they construe, diagnose and draw ...
The processes of replacement of party leaders are well-published events in media outlets across the world's democracies, but are scarcely analysed by political scientists. In this article we examine the extent to which incumbent party leaders are able to control their own fate in the face of various types of challenges that herald a possible end to their rule. It discusses three related research questions derived from this main objective: (1) what makes incumbents quit? (2) How do incumbents respond to various types of triggers heralding a possible end to their rule? (3) To what extent does incumbent behaviour prior to and following succession affect the fortunes of their successors and their party? We draw on a four-country–eight-party data set of leadership successions between 1945 and 2005, and on findings of in-depth studies of Australian cases to show that not only do Australian leaders get challenged and replaced more frequently than do other leaders, but they are also forced to combat more internal rivalry than their counterparts elsewhere.
This paper reports the results of a comprehensive, qualitative (100 interviews; 9 interactive workshops) study among Dutch ministers and top departmental officials. Its key question is how both groups conceive of their respective roles and working relationships. This question became a high‐profile issue in the late 1990s after a series of overt clashes between senior political and bureaucratic executives. To what extent does the old, Weberian set of norms and expectations concerning the interaction between politics and bureaucracy still govern the theories and interaction patterns in use among ministers and top officials within the core executive? What new role conceptions are in evidence, and how can we explain their occurrence and diffusion in the Dutch core executive?
Leadership succession in democratic governments and political parties is an ubiquitous but relatively understudied phenomen, where the political becomes intensely personal and vice versa. This article outlines the puzzles that leadership succession poses to political analysts, reviews the literature, and offers a conceptual framework deconstructing the process in terms of a flow from succession contexts and triggers via the role choices of key participants (incumbents and aspiring successors) through to the eventual succession outcomes. It concludes by presenting a series of testable hypotheses to describe and explain leadership successions.
Crisis management (prevention, preparedness, response, and reconstruction) is a tough task for political and bureaucratic leaders. This article documents the persistent tensions between the expectations and realities of crisis leadership. It explores the popular notion that crises provide key opportunities for reform. The very occurrence of a crisis is then thought to expose the status quo as problematic, making it easier to gain momentum for alternative policies and institutions. We argue that the opportunities for reform in the wake of crisis are smaller than often thought. The prime reason is that the requisites of crisis leadership are at odds with the requirements of effective reform.
This article seeks to enhance the actor perspective on major policy reforms. It builds upon the literature on "policy entrepreneurs" and addresses its explanatory vagueness by specifying five hypotheses outlining the actions that proponents of major policy change need to take in order to be effective in forging departures from existing, path‐dependent policies and to overcome entrenched opposition to reforms. These hypotheses on "reformist political leadership" (after Blondel) are applied to the four attempts to reform key aspects of macroeconomic policy in Australia under the first two Labor governments led by Robert J. Hawke.
When societies are confronted with major, disruptive emergencies, the fate of politicians and public policies hangs in the balance. Both government actors and their critics will try to escape blame for their occurrence, consolidate/strengthen their political capital, and advance/defend the policies they stand for. Crises thus generate framing contests to interpret events, their causes, and the responsibilities and lessons involved in ways that suit their political purposes and visions of future policy directions. This article dissects these processes and articulates foundations for a theory of crisis exploitation. Drawing on 15 cases of crisis-induced framing contests, we identify potentially crucial factors that may explain both the political (effects on incumbent office-holders/institutions) and policy (effects on programs) impacts of crises.
This article offers a conceptual framework that broadens and enhances our understanding of the role of 'history' in contemporary governance and the attempts by policy‐makers to 'manage' critical issues. Building upon the literature on historical analogies in policy‐making, we distinguish three dimensions that clarify how the past may emerge in and affect the current deliberations, choices and rhetoric of policy‐makers. We apply this in a comparative examination of two cases of crisis management where historical analogies played an important part: the Swedish response to (alleged) submarine intrusions in 1982, and the European Union sanctions against Austria in 1999. We induce from the case comparison new concepts and hypotheses for unders
This open access book presents case studies of twelve organisations which the public have come to view as institutions. From the BBC to Doctors Without Borders, from the Amsterdam Concertgebouw Orchestra to CERN, this volume examines how some organisations rise to prominence and remain in high public esteem through changing and challenging times. It builds upon the scholarly tradition of institutional scholarship pioneered by Philip Selznick, and highlights common themes in the stories of these highly diverse organizations; demonstrating how leadership, learning, and luck all play a role in becoming and remaining an institution. This case study format makes this volume ideal for classroom use and practitioners alike. In an era where public institutions are increasingly under threat, this volume offers concrete lessons for contemporary organisation leaders.
Amidst the general mood of skepticism about the problem-solving capacity of governments in the face of 'wicked problems', it is easy to overlook that at times governments do manage to design and implement public policies and programs quite successfully. In this paper, we build on an emerging area of 'positive evaluation' research into public policy successes (Bovens et al 2001; McConnell 2010; Nielsen et al 2015). Using the conceptual tools emanating from this research and drawing on a corpus of 33 such cases (Compton and 't Hart 2019; Luetjens et al, 2019), we draw inferences about the contexts, strategies, and practices that are conducive to policy success. We find compelling evidence that process inclusivity is a pivotal factor, but certainly not the only one, on the path to policy success. Variation in the degree of innovation and the pace of change also emerge as interdependent and important factors.
