Local Authorities and Non–elected Agencies: Strategic Responses and Organizational Networks

Painter, Chris; Isaac-Henry, Kester; Rouse, John E.

doi:10.1111/1467-9299.00058

Cited by 29 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 6 publications

(11 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The recent developments in more pluralist or more majority-based democracies like France and the United Kingdom show an increasing reliance on partnerships and collaborative decision making to reach policy outcomes, especially on the local and regional level (Lowndes and Skelcher 1998;Painter, Isaac-Henry and Rouse 1997;De Jong 1999). The question does not seem to be whether we have to rely more on collaborative decision making, partnerships, interactive decision making and so on, but how we can organize them.…”

Section: Endmentioning

confidence: 99%

Politicians and Interactive Decision Making: Institutional Spoilsports or Playmakers

Klijn

Koppenjan

2000

Public Administration

134

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years interactive decision making has become quite popular in The Netherlands, especially at the level of local government. It involves new forms of participation of citizens, consumers of public services and interest groups in the process of policy formation. Workshops, panels, internet discussions and a lot of other techniques are used to arrive at innovative and supported solutions for existing problems. The ambitions are high: these new forms of participation should result in better government both in the sense of providing better policies, but also in bridging the democratic gap between local government and citizens.However, these new forms of participation in local government are not without problems. Recent experiences suggest that one of the major problems is the challenge interactive decision making constitutes for the existing practice of representative politics. On the basis of two cases -the decision-making process concerning the expansion of the Rotterdam Harbour and the discussion about a new administrative structure for the Rotterdam region -this article illustrates that one of the barriers that stands in the way of the success of such processes is the ambiguous attitude of elected politicians. Although politicians often initiate interactive decision-making processes, they do not actively support these processes when they are in progress. The outcomes of interactive decision-making progress are often not used in the formal political procedures that follow. Because elected politicians fear that these new forms of participation threaten their political primacy, they find it hard to play a constructive role in these processes.In this paper we suggest that if politicians are serious about interactive decision making, they should reflect on their own role in it. Building upon empirical insights of the cases and on a discussion of two possible approaches to democracy, we suggest alternative roles for politicians. The prevailing substantive definition of primacy of politics should be redefined in order to allow politicians to fulfil the role of catalyst and facilitator of the public debate. In this way the eroded role of politicians in societal decision making may gain a new meaning.

show abstract

Section: Endmentioning

confidence: 99%

Politicians and Interactive Decision Making: Institutional Spoilsports or Playmakers

Klijn

Koppenjan

2000

Public Administration

134

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Local authorities are working alongside other agencies to the extent that one can argue for a change from "local government" to "local governance" [21-23]. Thus, we can expect that actors and networks outside the hospitals and the RHA will attempt to influence their decisions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The politics of local hospital reform: a case study of hospital reorganization following the 2002 Norwegian hospital reform

Tjerbo

2009

BMC Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe Norwegian hospital reform of 2002 was an attempt to make restructuring of hospitals easier by removing politicians from the decision-making processes. To facilitate changes seen as necessary but politically difficult, the central state took over ownership of the hospitals and stripped the county politicians of what had been their main responsibility for decades. This meant that decisions regarding hospital structure and organization were now being taken by professional administrators and not by politically elected representatives. The question raised here is whether this has had any effect on the speed of restructuring of the hospital sector.MethodThe empirical part is a case study of the restructuring process in Innlandet Hospital Trust (IHT), which was one of the largest enterprise established after the hospital reform and where the vision for restructuring was clearly set. Different sources of qualitative data are used in the analysis. These include interviews with key actors, observational data and document studies.ResultsThe analysis demonstrates how the new professional leaders at first acted in accordance with the intentions of the hospital reform, but soon chose to avoid the more ambitious plans for restructuring the hospital structure and in fact reintroduced local politics into the decision-making process. The analysis further illustrates how local networks and engagement of political representatives from all levels of government complicated the decision-making process surrounding local structural reforms. Local political representatives teamed up with other actors and created powerful networks. At the same time, national politicians had incentives to involve themselves in the processes as supporters of the status quo.ConclusionBecause of the incentives that faced political actors and the controversial nature of major hospital reforms, the removal of local politicians and the centralization of ownership did not necessarily facilitate reforms in the hospital structure. Keeping politics at an arm's length may simply be unrealistic and further complicate the politics of local hospital reforms.

show abstract

“…4 See, for example, Prime Minister and Minister for the Cabinet Of ce (1999), Ferlie and Pettigrew (1996), Kickert (1993Kickert ( , 1997, Kickert, Klijn and Koppenjan (1997), Klijn, Koppenjan and Termeer (1995), Klijn (1997), Kooiman (1993), Leach and Percy-Smith (2001), O'Toole (1997) and Painter, Rouse and Isaac-Henry (1997). There is also a growing literature on holistic governance that seeks to devise strategies for managing networks in British government: see, for example, Goss (2001), Perri 6 (1997), Perri 6 et al (2002), Stoker (1998) and Wilkinson and Applebee (1999).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Putting People Back into Networks

Rhodes¹

2002

Australian Journal of Political Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article argues that political scientists should spend more time observing policy networks, using ethnographic tools to capture the meaning of everyday activities. The rst section reviews brie y the literature on policy networks, arguing for an ethnographic approach. To show how individual actors construct networks, the second section looks at the experience of consumers, managers and permanent secretaries of living and working in networks. The nal section comments on what the eldwork tells us about both network theory and ethnographic methods.

show abstract

Local Authorities and Non–elected Agencies: Strategic Responses and Organizational Networks

Cited by 29 publications

References 6 publications

Politicians and Interactive Decision Making: Institutional Spoilsports or Playmakers

Politicians and Interactive Decision Making: Institutional Spoilsports or Playmakers

The politics of local hospital reform: a case study of hospital reorganization following the 2002 Norwegian hospital reform

Putting People Back into Networks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About