‘Arm’s Length but Hands On’. Mapping the New Governance: The Department of National Heritage and Cultural Politics in Britain

Taylor, Andrew J.

doi:10.1111/1467-9299.00069

Cited by 37 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The second perspective argues that, despite the reality of fragmentation and the rhetoric of letting go, government through partnership has allowed the introduction of new techniques of hierarchical control (Bache, 2000(Bache, , 2003Davies, 2002;Taylor, 1997;Hoggett, 1991Hoggett, , 1996Morgan et al, 1999). Fragmented delivery-focused organisations may prove more tractable than the old bureaucracies they replaced.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Dysfunctions of Markets, Hierarchies and Networks in the Meta-governance of Partnership

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Governments increasingly see partnerships as their delivery instrument of choice. There is disagreement, however, about how the proliferation of these institutions should be understood. One interpretation sees ungovernability, instability and unaccountability in the fragmented institutions of local governance. Another maintains that the new approaches to co-ordination have allowed for the reassertion of hierarchical control. On the basis of a theoretical exposition of the logic of co-ordination and a study of 10 partnerships in Wales, this paper presents evidence which suggests that partnerships suffer principally from the dysfunctional effects of hierarchical and market co-ordination.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Dysfunctions of Markets, Hierarchies and Networks in the Meta-governance of Partnership

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Marsh (, p. 251) points to ‘the continued importance’ of hierarchy, arguing indeed that it ‘remains a, perhaps the, dominant mode of governance’ (Marsh , p. 80). Taylor (, p. 442) suggests that ‘complex networks may increase central control as the centre sheds costly and time consuming implementation tasks to concentrate on core functions of policy determination, monitoring and evaluation’. Davies (, p. 316) describes the new partnerships to emerge from this landscape as little more than ‘the bureaucratic conduits of government policy’.…”

Section: From Two To Five Ways Of Governingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reframing Governance: Competition, Fatalism and Autonomy in Central–local Relations

Entwistle

Guarneros‐Meza

Martin

et al. 2015

Public Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Much of the work on contemporary governance points either to a strong central government that continues to operate hierarchically or else to a relatively weak centre which relies on network forms of coordination. In place of the choice between hierarchy and networks, the cultural theory pioneered by Mary Douglas draws our attention to five distinctive 'social environments' characterized in terms of hierarchy, individualism, egalitarianism, fatalism and autonomy. Based on an analysis of survey data collected from 488 local government managers across England, Scotland and Wales, this article uses the Douglas framework to understand patterns of governance. While the data lend support to the strong centre theorists in revealing little evidence of a central-local partnership and continuing reliance on regulatory-type instruments, we find this more a recipe for competition and fatalism than hierarchy. Our data also point to significant differences in governance style both across services and between countries.

show abstract

“…Like other departments, it adopted this principle to avoid being drawn into the pressures of being directly engaged in the implementation of policy. Despite appearances, the DNH is still able to exert considerable control over policy networks (Taylor, 1997, pp. 451–2).…”

Section: The Anglo‐governance School: a New Orthodoxy?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although there seems to be a level of cohesion at the very centre, the core is still dependent on a range of agents and agencies to deliver policy. The governance perspective looks upon the political process as being preoccupied with managing the proliferation of complex functional interdependencies between actors and policy networks (Taylor, 1997, p. 447). That said, recent studies of street‐level actors and local policy agencies highlight the ability of governments to monitor and steer these.…”

Section: The Anglo‐governance School: a New Orthodoxy?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Governing beyond the Centre: A Critique of the Anglo-Governance School

2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the more intriguing theoretical discussions of recent years involves the concept of governance. There is now a substantial body of work concerning the way governance has affected the contribution of central government to the policy process. Possibly the most prominent and influential account of governance theory in British political science is offered by Rod Rhodes. His most recent writings have employed governance theory to explore the institutions, actors and processes of change within the core executive. His 'Anglo-governance' model has emerged as a prevalent and authoritative account of how new methods of governing have emerged in society. Significantly, it is maintained that a distinct shift has taken place in government, from a hierarchical organisation to a fragmented and decentralised entity that is heavily reliant on a range of complex and independent policy networks. There is undoubted evidence that government is a fractured institution that is dependent on state and non-state actors beyond the centre. This paper questions whether such features entail the emergence of a new form of governance. Central government is still highly resourced and has, at its disposal, a range of powers with which to retain influence over public sector agencies. Historical evidence also shows that the British polity has long been decentralised. Thus, it is difficult to see how recent developments have in any way transformed the capacities of the core executive. It seems that alternative ways of conceptualising the institutions, actors and processes of change in government are required. Recent efforts to develop 'organising perspectives', within the intellectual parameters of governance theory, offer a more 'conceptually cautious' treatment of the central state. Gamble (1990) claims that theory generation is not a particular 'brand feature' of British political science. The preference is for empiricism over theorising. This might seem a little caricatured or even unfair; he acknowledges that 'it is hard for political scientists to avoid general theories altogether' (Gamble, 1990, p. 406). One of the more intriguing theoretical discussions of recent years involves the concept of governance. There is now a substantial body of work concerning the way governance has affected the contribution of central government to the policy process. There are different definitions of what is meant by 'governance' and distinct analytical interpretations as to its impact in government.Possibly the most prominent and influential account of governance theory in British political science is offered by Rod Rhodes. His more recent writings embrace governance theory to explore theoretically the institutions, actors and processes of change within the core executive. His 'Anglo-governance' model has formed into an authoritative theory of how new methods of governing society have emerged. As part of this analysis, he examines the contribution made by actors and institutions beyond the central state to the process of governance. This theoretical con...

show abstract

‘Arm’s Length but Hands On’. Mapping the New Governance: The Department of National Heritage and Cultural Politics in Britain

Cited by 37 publications

References 2 publications

The Dysfunctions of Markets, Hierarchies and Networks in the Meta-governance of Partnership

The Dysfunctions of Markets, Hierarchies and Networks in the Meta-governance of Partnership

Reframing Governance: Competition, Fatalism and Autonomy in Central–local Relations

Governing beyond the Centre: A Critique of the Anglo-Governance School

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About