More than just experts for hire: A conceptualization of the roles of consultants in public policy formulation

Abstract

Consultants are increasingly a part of public policy formulation, and their policy involvement draws extensive interest in research and public debate. However, there is a gap in how we think about their formulation role: they are often conceptualized as a type of expert, while their actual interaction with and contribution to policy formulation is much more varied. This paper develops a conceptualization of consultants' formulation roles. It demonstrates that rather than just informing policy formulation, consultants take multiple roles and interact with policymaking and makers in multiple ways. Using a policy network/subsystem distinction and a substance/process distinction as the main axes for analysis, the paper develops four role categories: (1) experts and knowledge brokers, in which consultants provide policy advice and analysis; (2) seeing for the government, in which they construct a picture of the policy field; (3) legitimizers and validators, in which they provide symbolic capital to policy; and (4) channels for stakeholders' policy preferences, in which they manage deliberation and synthesize actors' policy preferences. The paper provides much‐needed clarity on how consultants engage with policy formulation and policymakers and forwards our understanding of how consultants exert their policy influence.

CITIES AND THEIR GURUS: The Role of Superstar Consultants in Post‐political Urban Governance

“…I do this using four theoretical steps. First, I describe the various roles of consultants in municipal policy formulation using a common distinction defined by public policy literature between roles related to the ‘substance’ of policy or to its ‘processes’ (Marciano, 2022b). Second, I use this distinction to review the post‐political municipal governance literature and to differentiate between consultants’ involvement in introducing neoliberal and standardized substance, and a form of involvement on their part that includes pushing an obscure and somewhat deceptive political process.…”

“…Their influence is often depicted as ‘post‐political urban governance’—a wide set of planning and political processes, ranging from privatization to participatory planning, which are seen as flattening political debates and thus narrowing democracy (Metzger, 2018). To organize the various types of influence that consultants have, I use Marciano's (2022b) distinction between two roles that consultants assume in policy formulation processes: first, roles related to ‘substance’—the generation of ideas and content related to the goals, objectives and instruments of the policy; second, roles related to ‘process’ — the establishment of legitimation and support for the idea. This distinction will help differentiate between various post‐political aspects and highlight how consultants in particular take part in them.…”

“…2 This article examines Florida's interaction with Toronto, explaining the failure of a seemingly win-win situation-Toronto collaborating with a globally renowned urbanist, and Florida enjoying success in an urban setting that had adopted his ideas-not as a 'tell all' tabloid study, but rather a sociological analysis that unpacks the social construction of the 'guru' concept. In the theoretical section, I provide a framework with which to analyze the roles of the guru, building on public policy literature which distinguishes between consultants' 'substance-related' and 'processrelated' roles (Marciano, 2022b) and its consequent post-political characteristics. Using examples from studies of urban gurus, I propose how the effects of gurus on cities may be distinct from those of 'lay' consultants.…”

Theorising policy advisory system management: approaches and practice

“…Historically, externalisation featured as part of larger public sector reforms, with the intent to diversify sources of advice to decisionmakers and overcome issues of responsiveness from the public service (Dent 2002;Pollit and Bouckaert 2017;Halligan 2020). On a smaller scale, it functions as a lever in managing PAS, as it enables governments to supplement lacunes in policy capacity, legitimise policy by providing external credibility, and bypass or create alternatives to in-house advisers (Abelson and Lindquist 2017;MacDermott, 2008;Marciano 2023;Martin 1998;Momani and Khirfan 2013). In Australia and Britain, the use of such external advice often depends on the party in power and issue at hand, with some governments drawing on think tanks for policy advisory purposes whereas the comparatively smaller think tank landscape in Canada and New Zealand features their less pronounced regular involvement in policymaking (Abelson 2018;Craft and Halligan 2020;Pautz 2017).…”

Editorial introduction: Exploring theories and subtleties of the policy process

“…While consultants are often seen only as experts, in practice, their interaction with and contribution to policy formulation is much broader. In her article “More than Just Experts for Hire: A Conceptualization of the Roles of Consultants in Public Policy Formulation,” Marciano (2023) develops a conceptualization of consultants' formulation roles by demonstrating that they interact with policymakers in several ways. Her article uses two main axes for analysis: a policy network/subsystem distinction and a substance/process distinction, developing four role categories.…”