Negotiating autonomy in the public sector and nonprofits “collaborations” in politically contested fields

IF 2.6 3区 管理学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Francesca Caló, Dino Numerato, Ilona Bontenbal, Nikos Kourachanis, Fulvio Scognamiglio
{"title":"Negotiating autonomy in the public sector and nonprofits “collaborations” in politically contested fields","authors":"Francesca Caló,&nbsp;Dino Numerato,&nbsp;Ilona Bontenbal,&nbsp;Nikos Kourachanis,&nbsp;Fulvio Scognamiglio","doi":"10.1111/gove.12831","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Nonprofits are increasingly involved in cross-sectoral collaborations with the public sector. However, we know little about the dynamics behind these collaborations and what happens to them in politically contested fields where actors may have divergent positions. In this article, a multi-country comparison of data gathered from semi-structured interviews (<i>n</i> = 68) with representatives of nonprofits involved in the labor market inclusion of newcomers is presented. Our findings indicate that, in politically contested fields, the possibility of participating in cross-sectoral collaborations (political autonomy) is influenced by nonprofits' financial and ideological autonomy. Welfare models and migration regimes play a fundamental role in shaping the inclusion of these organizations in collaborations, and in most cases, the collaborations are based on latent conflicts. Our article discusses that if the costs of autonomy associated with cross-sectoral collaborations are not offset, the collaboration in a politically contested field becomes a liability for nonprofits (and their beneficiaries).</p>","PeriodicalId":48056,"journal":{"name":"Governance-An International Journal of Policy Administration and Institutions","volume":"37 4","pages":"1205-1229"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/gove.12831","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Governance-An International Journal of Policy Administration and Institutions","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gove.12831","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Nonprofits are increasingly involved in cross-sectoral collaborations with the public sector. However, we know little about the dynamics behind these collaborations and what happens to them in politically contested fields where actors may have divergent positions. In this article, a multi-country comparison of data gathered from semi-structured interviews (n = 68) with representatives of nonprofits involved in the labor market inclusion of newcomers is presented. Our findings indicate that, in politically contested fields, the possibility of participating in cross-sectoral collaborations (political autonomy) is influenced by nonprofits' financial and ideological autonomy. Welfare models and migration regimes play a fundamental role in shaping the inclusion of these organizations in collaborations, and in most cases, the collaborations are based on latent conflicts. Our article discusses that if the costs of autonomy associated with cross-sectoral collaborations are not offset, the collaboration in a politically contested field becomes a liability for nonprofits (and their beneficiaries).

协商公共部门和非营利组织在有政治争议领域的 "合作 "自主权
非营利组织越来越多地参与到与公共部门的跨部门合作中。然而,我们对这些合作背后的动力,以及在政治上有争议的领域中这些合作的情况知之甚少,因为在这些领域中,参与者的立场可能存在分歧。本文通过对参与新移民劳动力市场融入工作的非营利组织代表进行半结构式访谈(n = 68),对收集到的数据进行了多国比较。我们的研究结果表明,在政治上有争议的领域,参与跨部门合作的可能性(政治自主性)受到非营利组织的财务和意识形态自主性的影响。福利模式和移民制度在影响这些组织参与合作的过程中起着根本性的作用,在大多数情况下,合作是建立在潜在冲突的基础上的。我们的文章论述了如果与跨部门合作相关的自主性成本不能被抵消,那么在一个有政治争议的领域开展合作就会成为非营利组织(及其受益人)的负担。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
10.30%
发文量
91
期刊介绍: Governance provides a forum for the theoretical and practical discussion of executive politics, public policy, administration, and the organization of the state. Published in association with International Political Science Association''s Research Committee on the Structure & Organization of Government (SOG), it emphasizes peer-reviewed articles that take an international or comparative approach to public policy and administration. All papers, regardless of empirical focus, should have wider theoretical, comparative, or practical significance.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信