Suchergebnisse

call for policy innovation. A new strand of research in public innovation points to collaboration between public authorities and relevant and affected stakeholders as an important driver of public innovation. A case study of collaborative policy innovation in the area of mental health care in Denmark indicates that collaboration can contribute to qualify the politicians' understanding of wicked policy problems, and to fostering new creative policy solutions. The study also shows, however, that the new problem understandings and policy ideas produced in collaborative governance arenas are not diffused to the formal political institutions of representative democracy because the participating politicians only to a limited extent function as boundary spanners between the collaborative governance arena and the decision making arenas in representative democracy. ; Governments all over the Western world currently face wicked problems that call for policy innovation. A new strand of research in public innovation points to collaboration between public authorities and relevant and affected stakeholders as an important driver of public innovation. A case study of collaborative policy innovation in the area of mental health care in Denmark indicates that collaboration can contribute to qualify the politicians' understanding of wicked policy problems, and to fostering new creative policy solutions. The study also shows, however, that the new problem understandings and policy ideas produced in collaborative governance arenas are not diffused to the formal political institutions of representative democracy because the participating politicians only to a limited extent function as boundary spanners between the collaborative governance arena and the decision making arenas in representative democracy.

Support for the "democratization of the policy sciences" has led to the development of a number of frameworks and theories to enhance the normative, multidisciplinary approach to policy analysis. However, this approach has been challenged for failing to produce the objective empirical and normative standards implied by its scientific aspirations. One consideration that has been advanced under a variety of rubrics is "participatory policy analysis." This is a methodological proposal that expands the range of actors/stakeholders involved in the making and execution of public policy in a discursive or deliberative mode. While much of the research on policy networks is focused on the management and coordination of such networks (i.e., collaborative management), there is little attention on analysis of networks as a participatory policy analytical approach. We propose a theory of "collaborative policy networks" that examines not only the stakeholder composition of a group or the partnerships between any two stakeholders but also the way these stakeholders are embedded in various degrees of institutionalized structure and the discursive tendencies of exchange among them that leads to policy initiative, implementation, evaluation, and possibly termination. Collaborative policy networks are characterized by discursive properties, specifically reciprocity, representation, equality, participatory decision making, and collaborative leadership. We suggest that the results of such research can identify structural signatures of collaborative policy networks that serve as "stamps" of the common nature of such networks that, if fostered, can inform and improve the attempt of networks of partners to achieve policy goals.

Explores the roles that an agency plays in a collaborative policy-making process such as regulatory negotiation. Three regulatory negotiation cases are examined to determine the perceived roles of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) officials & other participants, & the study suggests a number of findings. (1) The EPA fulfills a number of different roles (Expert, Analyst, Stakeholder, Facilitator & Leader) in a negotiation process. (2) The EPA is expected to be an active participant in the negotiations, not simply an overseer or facilitator of interests. (3) The EPA interprets its primary role much more narrowly -- as that of an expert -- than do other participants. Nonagency participants view EPA's primary role as a leader, which combines technical, substantive, &process components. Where previously & in the theoretical literature, agencies exercise leadership through statutory authority or technical expertise, this study suggests that there are additional dimensions to that leadership role. In a collaborative process such as regulatory negotiation, the agency finds itself in a realm that demands that it effectively merge the roles of expert, analyst, & stakeholder into a more complex leadership role than has been suggested in the past. 1 Table, 81 References. Adapted from the source document.

Arguments for collaborative rather than adversarial approaches to governance rest partly on two axioms: first, that collaborative approaches mitigate conflict to intermediate levels and second, that collaborative approaches help integrate science and values through various joint fact‐finding strategies. Using questionnaire data in 1984 and 2001 of policy participants involved in Lake Tahoe water quality policy, this article investigates whether a shift from an adversarial to a collaborative policy subsystem is associated with (i) convergence in beliefs regarding water quality problems and policy proposals; and (ii) an increase in the use of science‐based empirical beliefs and a decrease in the use of normative beliefs in supporting policy proposals. The findings send a mixed message to policymakers and researchers about science and collaboration. The analysis suggests that collaborative policy subsystems are associated with convergence in some beliefs between rival coalitions, but it also suggests that policy participants are no more likely to rely on science‐based, empirical beliefs in collaborative than in adversarial policy subsystems.

This paper presents a theory of the role of culture in collaborative policy networks. It builds on the literature that analyzes the factors related to the formation, maintenance, and dissolution of collaborative arrangements by demonstrating the importance of hitherto undertheorized cultural factors. Cultural theory indicates that actors with different cultural viewpoints have distinct and predictable biases in terms of their expectations of collaboration and their preferences concerning how collaborative policy networks are structured. These biases, in turn, shape how collaborative partners are chosen and how collaborative relationships are maintained over time. The theory is illustrated with a case study of the rise and dissolution of a coalition within a housing policy network in Los Angeles. The case illustrates that cultural differences can impede collaboration even when organizations share similar policy goals.

Rural areas in Europe are at risk due to depopulation, failing generation renewal, and a multitude of influences ranging from market-based, regulatory, to societal and climate changes. As a result, current rural policy is no longer keeping pace with these changes. We propose an advanced rural policy development framework in order to deliver more accurate foresight for rural regions, contributing to new and enhanced policy interventions. The proposed framework combines new quantitative and qualitative epistemological approaches, previously unused unstructured data with traditional research information, grassroot perspective with expert knowledge, current situation analysis with forward looking activities. We argue that by using the proposed methods, policy teams will be able to enhance the effectiveness of their policy making processes, while rural stakeholders will be given the opportunity to become valuable policy influencers and solution co-creators. The ability to quickly experiment and understand the impact of a variety of policy solutions will result in saved time and costs. The framework is part of an ongoing experimental verification and testing in twelve pilot regions across Europe and Israel.

Over the past decades, most countries have witnessed an increase in collaborative arrangements for engaging stakeholders in collective decision‐making processes. Despite the fact that the role of the state in the collaborative structures has been one of the highly debated issues, there is still a need for a more comprehensive understanding of how governmental agencies affect the performance of collaborative actions. This article develops a framework for systematic analyses of collaborative effects on policy performance. Using PROCESS OLS regression, the authors apply the framework to project‐level Cohesion Policy implementation in Finland – that is, to collaborative arrangements embedded in a rather fragmented and complex administrative context. The typical state characteristics of a Nordic country make Finland an interesting case for studying the interaction in collaborative arrangements between the administration and external agencies in a modern welfare state. The results presented in this article show that government agencies have a considerable moderating impact on the relationships between collaborative qualities and performance. The impact is, however, dependent on the responsiveness of the external agent to the bureaucratic rationale. The results underline the importance of more holistic approaches for analyzing complex collaborative constellations, focusing particularly on interaction effects between potential explanatory factors.

Over the past decades, most countries have witnessed an increase in collaborative arrangements for engaging stakeholders in collective decision‐making processes. Despite the fact that the role of the state in the collaborative structures has been one of the highly debated issues, there is still a need for a more comprehensive understanding of how governmental agencies affect the performance of collaborative actions. This article develops a framework for systematic analyses of collaborative effects on policy performance. Using PROCESS OLS regression, the authors apply the framework to project‐level Cohesion Policy implementation in Finland – that is, to collaborative arrangements embedded in a rather fragmented and complex administrative context. The typical state characteristics of a Nordic country make Finland an interesting case for studying the interaction in collaborative arrangements between the administration and external agencies in a modern welfare state. The results presented in this article show that government agencies have a considerable moderating impact on the relationships between collaborative qualities and performance. The impact is, however, dependent on the responsiveness of the external agent to the bureaucratic rationale. The results underline the importance of more holistic approaches for analyzing complex collaborative constellations, focusing particularly on interaction effects between potential explanatory factors. ; Peer reviewed