Addressing the Present and the Future in Government and Governance: Three approaches to Organising Public Action

Abstract

Because public action matters in all countries and political systems, how it is organised now and in the future must exercise the minds of policy-makers in and beyond government. In response, we argue that there is considerable merit in having a widely applicable analytical lens through which to look at and assess present arrangements and future possibilities. The lens has multiple dimensions, which we address here in terms of three broad approaches to organising public action. We label these approaches as 'statism', 'state-market dualism' and 'state-market-civil society synergism'. Their components and distinctive features are discussed, followed by a consideration of significant application issues and concerns. A fundamental matter is how best to balance the demands of public action and organised responses with the requirements of publicness and legitimacy as systems of government and governance are maintained and reformed.

Local authorities and the engagement of private actors in climate change adaptation

“…Both cities take a prominent position in providing adaptation as a good of public interest, which is well in line with the Nordic tradition of the welfare state and a 'statism' governance approach (Thynne and Peters, 2015). Both cities take on many responsibilities by publicly implementing new ways of storm water management, e.g.…”

“…O'Hare et al (2016) use the term 'responsibilisation' for this shift of responsibilities from the public sector to private actors. This responsibilisation can strongly rely on market-oriented elements and incentives for adaptation, and builds on contractual relations between the involved actors (O'Hare et al, 2016;Taylor and Harman, 2016;Thynne and Peters, 2015) or it is a deliberative process that strives towards consensus and a synergetic relation between actors, stressing the public interest in adaptation. The advantages of this approach are seen in the prevention of inequalities, and the protection and inclusion of those individuals and groups with limited possibilities to adapt (Brink et al, 2016;Penning-Rowsell and Pardoe, 2015;Phadke et al, 2015;Thynne and Peters, 2015).…”

Network structure and collaborative innovation processes—A comparative analysis of two elderly service networks in Shanghai

“…For government‐funded service networks to be effective, they have to be able to sustain government resource support on one hand and to maintain the potential for bottom‐up service innovation on the other (Thynne & Peters, ). We conjecture that the governance structure of service networks is a key independent variable affecting the networks' ability to reconcile the two imperatives.…”

The Influence of Administrative Traditions and Governance on Private Involvement in Urban Climate Change Adaptation

“…Second, administrative traditions are unequally conducive to the emergence of governance approaches and the development of relationships between the state, market, and civil society (Peters & Pierre, ). Thynne and Peters () identify three approaches in understanding governance, in terms of roles and means of organizing public action. In each of these approaches, public administration takes a specific organizational form and role.…”

“…We argue that these emerging public‐private cooperations in adaptation will be influenced by prevailing administrative traditions that condition existing governance approaches (Harman, Taylor, & Lane, ; Kuronen, Junnila, Majamaa, & Niiranen, ; Taylor & Harman, ; Thomann, Lieberherr, & Ingold, ). Focusing on how administrative traditions influence governance approaches, it is possible to examine how the implementation of adaptation proceeds and what actors become involved and with what policy instruments (Adger, Quinn, Lorenzoni, Murphy, & Sweeney, ; Thynne & Peters, ).…”