Policy Learning and Adaptation in governance; a Co-evolutionary Perspective

Abstract

This paper introduces the concepts and ideas that frame this special issue on co-evolution in governance, and their implications for policy learning and adaptation. It offers a brief overview of co-evolutionary approaches to governance and their elementary connections with systems theories, post-structuralism, institutionalism, and actor-network theory, and explores how they are connected to co-evolution in governance. Co-evolutionary approaches differ from other influential understandings of knowledge and learning in policy and governance. It furthermore presents a typology of learning in governance and systematically discusses how each type is affected by patterns of coevolution in governance.

Interactive Learning and Governance Transformation for Securing Blue Justice for Small-Scale Fisheries

“…Adaptive, stepwise learning through experiementation is preferable to path dependency. However, Van Assche et al (2021) offer a warning: “The experiment has to be, by definition, loosely coupled from the rest of the system if it wants to be a real experiment.” (p. 19). If not, the experimentation may stir contention and cause resistance, and hence inhibit learning.…”

“…Learning to build a stock of knowledge is therefore pivotal for the implementation of the SSF Guidelines and the realization of SDG 16. It is an iterative, time-consuming, and recursive governance process of trial and error and adaptation, “as a consequence of unintentional mistakes, surprises, or misunderstandings” (Van Assche et al, 2021, p. 2).…”

“…As a co-evolutionary process, the implementation of the SSF Guidelines requires interactive and transdisciplinary learning as an inherent aspect of building “strong institutions” as per SDG 16 (Chuenpagdee & Jentoft, 2018a). Drawing on years of research on small-scale fisheries and the learning thus far from the implementation of the SSF Guidelines globally (Chuenpagdee & Jentoft, 2018a; Jentoft & Chuenpagdee, 2015, 2017; Kooiman et al, 2005), this paper explores the relationship between creating strong institutions that are just, on one hand, and interactive learning as a co-evolutionary process (Van Assche et al, 2021) in the Blue Economy/Growth on the other. When putting the SSF Guidelines into governance practice and in the realization of the SDGs, considerable overlaps between the SDGs and the SSF Guidelines are noted (Said & Chuenpagdee, 2019).…”

Relationality as a Lens for Policy Analysis: Preserving Harmony in a Triangular Cooperation Project to Strengthen Gender Mainstreaming in Fiji

“…This timidity on the part of a donor is puzzling at first, but may be explained by the proposition that Indonesia has been interested in visible activity as a donor rather than in achieving a developmental impact through its projects. True to its role as a pivot, Indonesia facilitated multi-stakeholder meetings, and arranged evaluations, therefore providing space for dialectical learning through discussion with the other actors (van Assche et al, 2021). This proposition is only informed by the analysis of Indonesia’s South-South Cooperation reports that, unlike USAID’s, stress activity and Indonesian efforts as a donor much more than impacts of developmental interventions on the ground (Alta, 2019).…”

“…We claim that harmony in SGM was achieved as a result of learning that emerged from interaction of the three actors and the desire to project a success narrative to the outer world. This outcome was made possible by various types of learning that came together in the project: dialectical learning from interaction of actors, learning from other places in the world, and learning from the past (van Assche et al, 2021).…”