Alejandra Burchard-Levine, Dave Huitema, Nicolas W. Jager, Iris Bijlsma
{"title":"Consultancy firms’ roles in policy diffusion: a systematic review from the environmental governance field","authors":"Alejandra Burchard-Levine, Dave Huitema, Nicolas W. Jager, Iris Bijlsma","doi":"10.1007/s11077-024-09540-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Since the 1980’s, the growing involvement of private consultancy firms in the public sector worldwide has instigated concerns about the outsourcing of public policy advising to market-driven actors. Although these firms participate in spreading policy ideas, their roles have not received sustained attention, despite being observed by a few scholars. Against this background, the aim of this paper is threefold. First, from established policy concepts relating to policy diffusion, we identify the potential roles that consultancy firms may take on in spreading policy ideas. Second, we use a systematic literature review to collect and distil what is currently known about what different roles consultancy firms fulfil, and what kinds of tensions arise in their interactions with both clients and other actors. Third, we draft an agenda for future research on consultancy firms’ impact in governance processes. To focus our study, our review hones in on environmental governance, more specifically water governance, a significant area of activity for such firms where they play an important in-between role in providing policy ideas. We found indications that consultancy firms possess six types of capabilities (trusted facilitators, reactors to environmental policies, shapers of environmental policies, market drivers, interest navigators, and managers of public participation), and face various dilemmas around biases, decontextualized global practices, market interests, and manipulative practices. We conclude that more attention should be given to empirically refining capabilities involved in shaping policies and markets and to further highlighting how consultancy firms impact the diffusion of governance ideas in and beyond the water and environmental sectors.</p>","PeriodicalId":51433,"journal":{"name":"Policy Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Policy Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-024-09540-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Since the 1980’s, the growing involvement of private consultancy firms in the public sector worldwide has instigated concerns about the outsourcing of public policy advising to market-driven actors. Although these firms participate in spreading policy ideas, their roles have not received sustained attention, despite being observed by a few scholars. Against this background, the aim of this paper is threefold. First, from established policy concepts relating to policy diffusion, we identify the potential roles that consultancy firms may take on in spreading policy ideas. Second, we use a systematic literature review to collect and distil what is currently known about what different roles consultancy firms fulfil, and what kinds of tensions arise in their interactions with both clients and other actors. Third, we draft an agenda for future research on consultancy firms’ impact in governance processes. To focus our study, our review hones in on environmental governance, more specifically water governance, a significant area of activity for such firms where they play an important in-between role in providing policy ideas. We found indications that consultancy firms possess six types of capabilities (trusted facilitators, reactors to environmental policies, shapers of environmental policies, market drivers, interest navigators, and managers of public participation), and face various dilemmas around biases, decontextualized global practices, market interests, and manipulative practices. We conclude that more attention should be given to empirically refining capabilities involved in shaping policies and markets and to further highlighting how consultancy firms impact the diffusion of governance ideas in and beyond the water and environmental sectors.
期刊介绍:
The policy sciences are distinctive within the policy movement in that they embrace the scholarly traditions innovated and elaborated by Harold D. Lasswell and Myres S. McDougal. Within these pages we provide space for approaches that are problem-oriented, contextual, and multi-method in orientation. There are many other journals in which authors can take top-down, deductive, and large-sample approach or adopt a primarily theoretical focus. Policy Sciences encourages systematic and empirical investigations in which problems are clearly identified from a practical and theoretical perspective, are well situated in the extant literature, and are investigated utilizing methodologies compatible with contextual, as opposed to reductionist, understandings. We tend not to publish pieces that are solely theoretical, but favor works in which the applied policy lessons are clearly articulated. Policy Sciences favors, but does not publish exclusively, works that either explicitly or implicitly utilize the policy sciences framework. The policy sciences can be applied to articles with greater or lesser intensity to accommodate the focus of an author’s work. At the minimum, this means taking a problem oriented, multi-method or contextual approach. At the fullest expression, it may mean leveraging central theory or explicitly applying aspects of the framework, which is comprised of three principal dimensions: (1) social process, which is mapped in terms of participants, perspectives, situations, base values, strategies, outcomes and effects, with values (power, wealth, enlightenment, skill, rectitude, respect, well-being, and affection) being the key elements in understanding participants’ behaviors and interactions; (2) decision process, which is mapped in terms of seven functions—intelligence, promotion, prescription, invocation, application, termination, and appraisal; and (3) problem orientation, which comprises the intellectual tasks of clarifying goals, describing trends, analyzing conditions, projecting developments, and inventing, evaluating, and selecting alternatives. There is a more extensive core literature that also applies and can be visited at the policy sciences website: http://www.policysciences.org/classicworks.cfm. In addition to articles that explicitly utilize the policy sciences framework, Policy Sciences has a long tradition of publishing papers that draw on various aspects of that framework and its central theory as well as high quality conceptual pieces that address key challenges, opportunities, or approaches in ways congruent with the perspective that this journal strives to maintain and extend.Officially cited as: Policy Sci