An Organizational Approach to Public Governance

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Morten Egeberg ◽  
Jarle Trondal
Keyword(s):  
Organizational Design ◽  
Organizational Factors ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Public Governance ◽  
Policy Choices ◽  
Governance Challenges ◽  
The One ◽  
Governance Processes ◽  
National Governments ◽  
Organizational Approach

Political science is often criticized for being insufficiently relevant for coping with governance challenges of our time. This book aims to fill this void by launching a general organizational approach to public governance. To achieve this, the book outlines key theoretical dimensions that cut across governance structures and processes horizontally as well as vertically, thus paving the way for integrating separate empirical analyses into a coherent theoretical whole. Moreover, the organizational (independent) variables outlined in this book represent classical dimensions in the organization literature that are generic in character. This allows for generalizations across time and space. The volume addresses how organizational characteristics of the governmental apparatus (within international organizations, the European Union, national governments, and sub-governments) systematically enable, constrain, and shape public governance processes, thus making some policy choices more likely than others. The second ambition of the volume is to focus on (organizational) design implications: By building systematic knowledge on how organizational factors shape governance processes on the one hand, and how organizational factors themselves might be deliberately changed on the other, the book offers a knowledge base for organizational design.

An Organizational Approach to Public Governance

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Morten Egeberg ◽  
Jarle Trondal
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Base ◽  
Organizational Design ◽  
Organizational Factors ◽  
The Other ◽  
Public Governance ◽  
Independent Variables ◽  
The One ◽  
Governance Processes ◽  
Systematic Knowledge ◽  
Organizational Approach

This chapter launches a general organizational approach to public governance. It outlines key theoretical dimensions that cut across governance structures and processes horizontally as well as vertically, thus paving the way for integrating separate empirical analyses into a coherent theoretical whole. Moreover, the organizational (independent) variables outlined represent classical dimensions in the organization literature that are generic in character. This allows for generalizations across time and space. The chapter also highlights the potential for organizational design that follows from our approach. By building systematic knowledge on how organizational factors shape governance processes on the one hand, and how organizational factors themselves might be deliberately changed on the other, the chapter offers a framework for developing a knowledge base for organizational design.

The Organizational Basis for Public Governance

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Morten Egeberg ◽  
Jarle Trondal
Keyword(s):  
Organization Theory ◽  
Organizational Design ◽  
Organizational Factors ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Public Governance ◽  
Full Account ◽  
Nation States ◽  
Reform Processes ◽  
Organizational Architecture ◽  
Governance Processes

An organizational approach to public governance focuses on the organizational architecture of public organizations and contributes to explaining governance processes by the organizational characteristics of such organizations. The dependent variable “public governance” is defined as the process through which the steering of society takes place. Such steering of society can unfold directly (“governance”) as well as indirectly (“meta-governance”), the latter denoting the process of organizing the apparatus within which governance happens. Governance is not only about making formal decisions, but also about agenda setting, development of alternative policy directions, implementation, and learning. In practice, it is about hammering out legislation, budgets, policy programs, and law application (“governance”), as well as organizing, staffing, and locating the machinery of government (“meta-governance”). Organization structure, organization demography, and organization locus make up the key independent variables. Such a partial model is not thought to provide a full account of what happens in governance processes, but the organizational factors are expected to intervene and bias governance processes systematically and significantly. Since these factors are, arguably, relatively amenable to deliberate change, they constitute at the same time potential design tools. However, rational organizational design also depends on knowledge about the conditions under which the organizational factors themselves may be changed (“meta-governance”). Knowledge about these two relationships is, arguably, ultimately a prerequisite for (rational) organizational design. Public organization literature has largely neglected theorizing meta-governance and conditions for institutional (re)design. Organizational factors may influence meta-governance in two ways: first, existing organization structures, demographics, and locations may affect reform processes; secondly, reform processes themselves may be deliberately organized on a temporary basis to achieve particular goals. Organization theory is helpful in dissecting how different ways of organizing reform processes may produce different reform trajectories and outcomes. The idea sees reform processes as decision-making processes that allocate attention, resources, capabilities, roles, and identities. Reform organizations have structures, demographics, and locations that distribute rights and obligations, power and resources, and normally do so unevenly. Yet, when considering organizational (re-)design, its limitations should be considered as well. Organizational designers might benefit from being aware of the potential stickiness of existing organizational arrangements and the influence of environmental demands, as well as temporal sorting of events. Moreover, the limits to design are greater in complex organizational orders with nested rules such as in nation states, meta-organizations, and supranational institutions such as the European Union, than in single organizations such as government ministries and agencies.

The concept of ‘flexicurity’: a new approach to regulating employment and labour markets

2004 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 166-186 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ton Wilthagen ◽  
Frank Tros
Keyword(s):  
Trade Unions ◽  
Industrial Relations ◽  
Labour Markets ◽  
Vulnerable Groups ◽  
Work Organisation ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
New Approach ◽  
The One ◽  
National Governments

This article deals with the new policy concept of ‘flexicurity’ in view of the emerging flexibility-security nexus currently faced by the European Union, national governments, sectors of industry, individual companies and workers. On the one hand there is a strong demand to make labour markets, employment and work organisation more flexible. At same time, an equally strong demand exists for providing security to employees – especially vulnerable groups – and for preserving social cohesion in our societies. Policy-makers, legislators, trade unions and employers’ organisations have a strong need for new theory-inspired policy models and concepts that promise to reconcile these goals of enhancing both flexibility and security that at first sight seem incompatible. This article discusses the origins, conditions and potential of ‘flexicurity’ as policy or strategy at various levels of industrial relations. It also outlines a research agenda.

scholarly journals EUROPEAN INTEGRATION AND GOVERNANCE – CHALLENGES AND PERSPECTIVES

2018 ◽  
pp. 186-213
Keyword(s):  
European Integration ◽  
Economic Governance ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Governance Model ◽  
Standards Of Living ◽  
Governance Challenges ◽  
Decision Making System ◽  
The One ◽  
The Eu

European integration is largely seen as a process that has delivered stability and peace, as well as the economic prosperity of the Member States of the European Union (EU). It has helped to raise standards of living and build an internal market. But, there are more and more arguments that the EU decision-making system is not effective and the governance model is obsolete. Some are pointing out increasingly rising divergence on crucial EU policy matters. Others are arguing that the EU has been confronted with the challenge of heterogeneity, stressing the issue of immigration as the one of the most contentious policy matters currently facing the EU. Besides those controversial issues inside EU and different positions among member states there is Brexit. The paper analyses in particular the issue of EU economic governance and one of its main pillars – the European Semester. The Country Specific Recommendations, as the integral part of the economic governance model are presented in a view of the new framework envisaged to tighten budgetary coordination and keep the deficit and debt levels in accordance to the EU rules.

scholarly journals Governing European Affairs

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-23
Author(s):  
Jarle Trondal ◽  
Nadja Kühn
Keyword(s):  
Organization Theory ◽  
National Level ◽  
Organizational Factors ◽  
Theory Approach ◽  
Public Governance ◽  
Organizational Variables ◽  
Decision Making Behavior ◽  
Governance Processes ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThe aim of this article is to examine the role of ministerial officials in an integrated European multilevel administrative order. This study argues that organizational variables at the national level constitute a decisive filtering factor regarding how decision premises emanating from European Union (EU)-level institutions are received by domestic government institutions and officials. The study contributes to the literature in two main ways: Empirically it provides a comprehensive study of the role of Norwegian ministerial officials in the EU multilevel administrative order over a time period of 20 years (n = 3562). Secondly, it applies an organization theory approach to explain variation in actual decision-making behavior. The article discusses factors of general relevance to political science applicable beyond the case at hand. The study shows that ministerial officials are deeply involved with the EU multilevel administration. Moreover, it confirms the pivotal role of organizational factors in public governance processes.

scholarly journals The Political Geography of the Eurocrisis

2020 ◽  
Vol 72 (4) ◽  
pp. 639-678
Author(s):  
Pablo Beramendi ◽  
Daniel Stegmueller
Keyword(s):  
The Political ◽  
Political Tolerance ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
Risk Pooling ◽  
Mixed Response ◽  
Institutional Organization ◽  
The 2008 Financial Crisis ◽  
The One ◽  
National Governments

ABSTRACTThe European Union provided a mixed response to the 2008 financial crisis. On the one hand, it refused to pursue fiscal integration through a common budget; on the other, it introduced significant transfers between countries that were designed to produce financial stabilization. The authors analyze this response as the outcome of democratic constraints on EU leaders. Given the EU’s current institutional structure, citizens’ preferences pose a binding constraint on what leaders can do as these preferences limit the scope of risk-pooling among members and the degree of political tolerance for different courses of action. The authors show that citizens’ preferences reflect differences in the geography of income, production regimes, and institutional organization. The heterogeneity of constituencies’ redistribution preferences combined with a diverse economic geography helps to explain why political constraints on national governments prevent them from engaging in further fiscal integration. By contrast, externalities among member states shift the preferences of citizens who may experience negative effects and make international redistribution politically feasible. The authors analyze these two mechanisms and present novel empirical results on the determinants of preferences for fiscal integration and international redistribution in the aftermath of the eurocrisis.

Organizing Public Governance

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Morten Egeberg ◽  
Jarle Trondal
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Organization Theory ◽  
Organizational Factors ◽  
Design Approach ◽  
Middle Ground ◽  
Organization Studies ◽  
Public Governance ◽  
Science Understanding ◽  
Organizational Approach

Chapter 9 concludes the volume by offering the contours of a design approach in political science. The ambition is to use insights from the volume to set out design implications from an organizational approach to public governance. The chapter thus draws a middle ground in an old turf war in organization studies and public administration between science and craft. Insights into how organizational factors affect public governance is a necessary precondition for using organization theory to meta-govern. This concluding chapter advocates that organization theory as craft requires organization theory as science. Understanding and design are thus complementary and not opposed, as is too often assumed.

scholarly journals Borderlands

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raffaella A. Del Sarto
Keyword(s):  
Complex Dynamics ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Authoritarian Rule ◽  
Economic Relations ◽  
Trade Relations ◽  
Policy Choices ◽  
Fortress Europe ◽  
And Migration ◽  
The One ◽  
Two Sides

The book proposes a profound rethink of the complex relationship between Europe—defined here as the European Union and its members—and the states of the Mediterranean Middle East and North Africa (MENA), Europe’s ‘southern neighbours’. These relations are examined through a borderlands prism that conceives of this interaction as one between an empire of sorts that seeks to export its order beyond the border, and the empire’s southern borderlands. Focusing on trade relations on the one hand, and the cooperation on migration, borders, and security on the other, the book revisits the historical origins and modalities of Europe’s selective rule transfer to MENA states, the interests underwriting these policies, and the complex dynamics marking the interaction between the two sides over a twenty-year period (1995–2015). It shows that within a system of structurally asymmetric economic relations from which Europe and MENA elites benefit the most, single MENA governments have been co-opted into the management of border and migration control where they act as Europe’s gatekeepers. Combined with specific policy choices of MENA governments, Europe’s selective expansion of its rules, practices, and disaggregated borders have contributed to rising socio-economic inequalities and the strengthening of authoritarian rule in the ‘southern neighbourhood’, with Europe tacitly tolerating serious violations of the rights of refugees and migrants at its fringes. Challenging the self-proclaimed benevolent nature of European policies and the notion of ‘Fortress Europe’ alike, the findings of this study contribute to broader debates on power, dependence, and interdependence in the discipline of international relations.

‘If you shoulder a rifle […] let it be for Ireland’: James Connolly's War on War

2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 364-381
Author(s):  
Margot Gayle Backus ◽  
Spurgeon Thompson
Keyword(s):  
World War I ◽  
The Body ◽  
Party Leader ◽  
Irish Nationalism ◽  
British Imperialism ◽  
Communications Networks ◽  
Easter Rising ◽  
Trade Unionist ◽  
The One ◽  
National Governments

As virtually all Europe's major socialist parties re-aligned with their own national governments with the outbreak of World War I, Irish socialist and trade unionist James Connolly found himself internationally isolated by his vociferous opposition to the war. Within Ireland, however, Connolly's energetic and relentless calls to interrupt the imperial transportation and communications networks on which the ‘carnival of murder’ in Europe relied had the converse effect, drawing him into alignment with certain strains of Irish nationalism. Connolly and other socialist republican stalwarts like Helena Molony and Michael Mallin made common cause with advanced Irish nationalism, the one other constituency unamenable to fighting for England under any circumstances. This centripetal gathering together of two minority constituencies – both intrinsically opposed, if not to the war itself, certainly to Irish Party leader John Redmond's offering up of the Irish Volunteers as British cannon fodder – accounts for the “remarkably diverse” social and ideological character of the small executive body responsible for the planning of the Easter Rising: the Irish Republican Brotherhood's military council. In effect, the ideological composition of the body that planned the Easter Rising was shaped by the war's systematic diversion of all individuals and ideologies that could be co-opted by British imperialism through any possible argument or material inducement. Although the majority of those who participated in the Rising did not share Connolly's anti-war, pro-socialist agenda, the Easter 1916 Uprising can nonetheless be understood as, among other things, a near letter-perfect instantiation of Connolly's most steadfast principle: that it was the responsibility of every European socialist to throw onto the gears of the imperialist war machine every wrench on which they could lay their hands.

Epilogue

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
José van
Keyword(s):  
Paradigm Shift ◽  
Information Age ◽  
The Other ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Checks And Balances ◽  
The Us ◽  
Autocratic Regime ◽  
Digital Strategy ◽  
National Governments ◽  
State Interference

The epilogue sketches a few scenarios on potential geopolitical consequences of the global paradigm shift toward multiple online platform “spheres.” Currently, the neoliberal US-based platform ecosystem dominates. This ecosystem revolves around the promotion of individualism and minimal state interference, leaving checks and balances to the market. On the other end of the ideological spectrum is the Chinese ecosystem, in which the autocratic regime controls the platform ecosystem via regulated censorship of tech corporations. Squeezed between the US and the Chinese models is the European Union, whose member states neither own nor operate any major platforms in either ecosystem. For European democracies to survive in the information age, its cities, national governments, and supranational legislature need to collaborate on a blueprint for a common digital strategy toward markets and public sectors.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document