Externalization and politicization in policy advisory systems: a case study of contestable policy-making 2010–2015

Abstract

Those policy-makers and practitioners who have contact with civil servants and Ministers need to comprehend the more fluid and unpredictable policy environment that is emerging at various tiers of UK governance, shaped by a multiplicity of actors sitting within, and outside, the formal boundaries of the state. The diverse ecology of policy-making institutions includes think-tanks, research institutes, non-governmental organisations, charities, community groups, management consultancies, and professional services companies, all of whom are involved to an unprecedented extent in directly providing policy advice to Ministers. The 'monopoly' over policy-making traditionally enjoyed by the Whitehall civil service can no longer be taken for granted. A subtle but perceptible shift is occurring whereby elected politicians and their advisers are gaining greater control over the policy-making processes of the UK state.

Open Policy Making in the UK – to Whom Might Policy Formulation be ‘Opening Up’?

“…xi https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-commissioning-academy-information xii The CPF matched Civil Service departmental spending up to £500,000 where departments applied having commissioned policy reviews. Eighteen projects received funding between 2012 and 2015 (Diamond, 2020).…”

“…Cuts to civil service headcount are described as rendering increased outsourcing 'necessary' and here Diamond (2020) notably argues that reducing permanent bureaucracy does create 'window[s] of opportunity for external policy actors to acquire influence ' (p.44). At the same time, cuts and outsourcing also likely reflect at least some desire on governments' part to shrink state structures, 'attacking' the traditional civil service (ibid).…”

“…Social, political and economic elites control government decision making through the exercise of covert and latent power (Mills, 1956;Lukes, 1974;Miliband, 1969). Literature on policy networks and the growth of governance beyond the state in recent decades has moreover often highlighted the stratified nature of such change and the way it empowers some more than others (Marsh and Rhodes, 1992;Newman et al, 2004;Swyngedouw, 2005;Rhodes, 2011;Ball and Junemann, 2012;Torfing and Ansell, 2017;Diamond, 2020). Big business dominates (Crouch, 2011;Farnsworth and Holden, 2006) and powerful network insiders constrain what counts as valid policy knowledge and expertise (Shore and Wright, 1997).…”

“…Ministers have additionally become expected to commission external advice directly (Civil Service, 2013b; 2013c), fostering umediated relationships with outside experts compared with a past where civil servants acted as a 'filter/ blocker of policy advice' (Civil Service, 2012: 15). Initiatives such as Extended Ministerial Offices have reflected 'externalising' agendas (Diamond, 2020). The National Audit Office found that in 2014-15 the UK Government spent up to £1.3 billion on consultants -a figure £400m-£600m higher than in 2011-12 (NAO, 2016).…”

A Theoretical Perspective on the Roles of Political Scientists in Policy Advisory Systems

“…Coupled with marketization, the externalization of policy advice has created fertile grounds for commercial consultant companies, particularly in countries such as the UK, New Zealand, Canada, and Australia (Saint-Martin, 2017). Furthermore, analysts see an entrenchment of partisan advisers in interfaces between ministers and their traditionally neutral civil servants (Diamond, 2020;Shaw & Eichbaum, 2018). But also in consensus style democracies and variations of neo-corporatist systems, advice since long is produced by more external to government organizations, or in interfaces between government and civil society actors, with an involvement of interest-based organizations with representational monopolies in specific policy sectors.…”