政策一体化的边缘化:官僚主义外围的一体化政策制定动态

IF 2.9 4区 管理学 Q1 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Hans Joosse, A. van Buuren
{"title":"政策一体化的边缘化:官僚主义外围的一体化政策制定动态","authors":"Hans Joosse, A. van Buuren","doi":"10.1177/09520767231175917","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Governmental organizations face the challenge to integrate different sectoral policy perspectives and interests to deal effectively with the wicked issues of late-modern societies. This article delves into attempts of governmental organizations to realize such integrated policies and unravels the intra-organizational dynamics of collaborating on policy integration. Based on two in-depth case studies from The Netherlands, one focusing on public transport for specific target groups in the city of Rotterdam and the other focusing on a national policy program for criminal youth groups, we show how attempts at policy integration take place in the periphery of bureaucracies by temporary program teams. After the abolishment of the program team, the integrated policy easily volatilizes because of the lack of foothold and ownership in the line organization. Ironically, policy integration becomes a differentiated activity in the margins of public organizations rather than a joint exercise of sectoral organizational units. We present three explanatory hypotheses of this dynamic of marginalization. First, from a system-psychodynamic perspective, the line organization and the program team maintain distance from each other to reduce the tensions that are inherent in policy integration. Second, from an institutional perspective, the line organization marginalizes policy integration to protect their sectoral and vested interests. Third, from an innovation perspective, however, innovative policy integration does need the margins of organizations to protect itself against conservative reflexes from bureaucracies at risk of becoming marginalized and alienated. To facilitate a productive dynamic of policy integration in governmental organizations, this article concludes with providing the components for such an organizational design.","PeriodicalId":47076,"journal":{"name":"Public Policy and Administration","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The marginalization of policy integration: Dynamics of integrated policymaking in the periphery of bureaucracy\",\"authors\":\"Hans Joosse, A. van Buuren\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09520767231175917\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Governmental organizations face the challenge to integrate different sectoral policy perspectives and interests to deal effectively with the wicked issues of late-modern societies. This article delves into attempts of governmental organizations to realize such integrated policies and unravels the intra-organizational dynamics of collaborating on policy integration. Based on two in-depth case studies from The Netherlands, one focusing on public transport for specific target groups in the city of Rotterdam and the other focusing on a national policy program for criminal youth groups, we show how attempts at policy integration take place in the periphery of bureaucracies by temporary program teams. After the abolishment of the program team, the integrated policy easily volatilizes because of the lack of foothold and ownership in the line organization. Ironically, policy integration becomes a differentiated activity in the margins of public organizations rather than a joint exercise of sectoral organizational units. We present three explanatory hypotheses of this dynamic of marginalization. First, from a system-psychodynamic perspective, the line organization and the program team maintain distance from each other to reduce the tensions that are inherent in policy integration. Second, from an institutional perspective, the line organization marginalizes policy integration to protect their sectoral and vested interests. Third, from an innovation perspective, however, innovative policy integration does need the margins of organizations to protect itself against conservative reflexes from bureaucracies at risk of becoming marginalized and alienated. To facilitate a productive dynamic of policy integration in governmental organizations, this article concludes with providing the components for such an organizational design.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47076,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public Policy and Administration\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public Policy and Administration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09520767231175917\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Policy and Administration","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09520767231175917","RegionNum":4,"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

摘要

政府组织面临的挑战是整合不同部门的政策观点和利益,以有效地处理晚期现代社会的邪恶问题。本文探讨了政府组织实现这种整合政策的尝试,并揭示了政策整合合作的组织内部动态。基于荷兰的两个深入案例研究,一个关注鹿特丹市特定目标群体的公共交通,另一个关注针对犯罪青年群体的国家政策项目,我们展示了临时项目团队如何在官僚机构的外围进行政策整合的尝试。取消项目团队后,由于在线路组织中缺乏立足点和所有权,集成策略很容易发生波动。具有讽刺意味的是,政策一体化成为公共组织边缘的一种差别活动,而不是部门组织单位的联合活动。我们提出了这种边缘化动态的三个解释性假设。首先,从系统心理动力学的角度来看,线路组织和项目团队彼此保持距离,以减少政策整合中固有的紧张关系。其次,从制度角度看,一线组织为了保护自身的行业利益和既得利益,将政策整合边缘化。第三,从创新的角度来看,然而,创新的政策整合确实需要组织的边缘来保护自己免受官僚机构的保守反应,这些官僚机构有被边缘化和疏远的风险。为了促进政府组织中政策整合的生产动态,本文最后提供了这种组织设计的组成部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The marginalization of policy integration: Dynamics of integrated policymaking in the periphery of bureaucracy
Governmental organizations face the challenge to integrate different sectoral policy perspectives and interests to deal effectively with the wicked issues of late-modern societies. This article delves into attempts of governmental organizations to realize such integrated policies and unravels the intra-organizational dynamics of collaborating on policy integration. Based on two in-depth case studies from The Netherlands, one focusing on public transport for specific target groups in the city of Rotterdam and the other focusing on a national policy program for criminal youth groups, we show how attempts at policy integration take place in the periphery of bureaucracies by temporary program teams. After the abolishment of the program team, the integrated policy easily volatilizes because of the lack of foothold and ownership in the line organization. Ironically, policy integration becomes a differentiated activity in the margins of public organizations rather than a joint exercise of sectoral organizational units. We present three explanatory hypotheses of this dynamic of marginalization. First, from a system-psychodynamic perspective, the line organization and the program team maintain distance from each other to reduce the tensions that are inherent in policy integration. Second, from an institutional perspective, the line organization marginalizes policy integration to protect their sectoral and vested interests. Third, from an innovation perspective, however, innovative policy integration does need the margins of organizations to protect itself against conservative reflexes from bureaucracies at risk of becoming marginalized and alienated. To facilitate a productive dynamic of policy integration in governmental organizations, this article concludes with providing the components for such an organizational design.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Public Policy and Administration
Public Policy and Administration PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION-
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
6.50%
发文量
18
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Public Policy and Administration is the journal of the UK Joint University Council (JUC) Public Administration Committee (PAC). The journal aims to publish original peer-reviewed material within the broad field of public policy and administration. This includes recent developments in research, scholarship and practice within public policy, public administration, government, public management, administrative theory, administrative history, and administrative politics. The journal seeks to foster a pluralistic approach to the study of public policy and administration. International in readership, Public Policy and Administration welcomes submissions for anywhere in the world, from both academic and practitioner communities.
×
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