@article{Hustedt, author = {Hustedt, Thurid}, title = {Studying policy advisory systems: beyond the Westminster-bias?}, series = {Policy Studies}, journal = {Policy Studies}, doi = {10.1080/01442872.2018.1557627}, abstract = {Research on policy advisory systems has rapidly proliferated over the last decade and now focuses on advisory system change dynamics. Yet, empirical studies predominantly focus on the study of policy advisory systems in Westminster systems and it is those studies upon which theorization relies. This paper argues that this Westminster-prevalence resulted in a Westminster-bias of our understanding of policy advisory systems and directs attention to more abstract or general analytical dimensions that may be relevant for the comparative study of policy advisory systems and research on advice systems in transitional and developing countries.}, language = {en} } @article{RackwitzHustedtHammerschmid, author = {Rackwitz, Maike and Hustedt, Thurid and Hammerschmid, Gerhard}, title = {Digital transformation: From hierarchy to network-based collaboration? The case of the German "Online Access Act".}, series = {dms - der moderne staat - Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Public Policy, Recht und Management}, volume = {14}, journal = {dms - der moderne staat - Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Public Policy, Recht und Management}, number = {1}, doi = {10.3224/dms.v14i1.05}, pages = {101 -- 120}, abstract = {To unlock the full potential of ICT-related public sector innovation and digital transformation, governments must embrace collaborative working structures and leadership, is commonly argued. However, little is known about the dynamics of such collaborations in contexts of hierarchy, silo cultures, and procedural accountability. A widely voiced but empirically insufficiently substantiated claim is that bringing cross-cutting digital endeavours forward requires more lateral, network-based approaches to governance beyond traditional Weberian ideals. We test this claim by shedding light on three distinct challenges (complexity, risk, and power imbalance) encountered when implementing the specific collaborative case of the German Online Access Act (OAA) and by examining how they have been addressed in institutional design and leadership. Our analysis, which combines desk research and semi-structured expert interviews, reveals that flexible, horizontal approaches are on the rise. Taking a closer look, however, vertical coordination continues to serve as complementary means to problem-solving capability.}, language = {en} } @article{TreinBiesbroekBolognesietal., author = {Trein, Phillip and Biesbroek, Robbert and Bolognesi, Thomas and Cejudo, Guillermo M. and Duffy, Robert and Hustedt, Thurid and Meyer, Iris}, title = {Policy Coordination and Integration: A Research Agenda}, series = {Public Administration Review}, journal = {Public Administration Review}, issn = {1540-6210}, doi = {10.1111/puar.13180}, abstract = {Coordinating and integrating different policies and public sector organizations is a major challenge for practitioners and a continuing topic of interest for researchers. We argue that existing research on this topic needs reorientation to provide better insights for practice and theory of policymaking as well as policy implementation. We offer four suggestions on how future research could advance: (1) combining existing conceptual and epistemological approaches more systematically; (2) complementing case studies and surveys with large-N analyses and novel research tools and methods; (3) more systematic analysis of the causal mechanisms in policy coordination and integration; (4) more thorough study of the real-world impact of policy coordination and integration.}, language = {en} } @article{HustedtSeyfried, author = {Hustedt, Thurid and Seyfried, Markus}, title = {Inside the EU Commission: Evidence on the perceived relevance of the Secretariat General in Climate Policy-Making}, series = {JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies}, volume = {56}, journal = {JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies}, number = {2}, issn = {1468-5965}, doi = {10.1111/jcms.12605}, pages = {368 -- 384}, abstract = {This article studies the perception of the EU Commission's Secretariat General in policy-making. Recently, research on EU institutions devotes increasing attention to analyzing structures and procedures of decision-making in EU institutions, most notably the EU Commission. Conventionally, the EU Commission is portrayed as a fragmented organization, divided along the lines of staff nationality, sectoral responsibilities and cabinets and General Directorates (DGs). The Secretariat General has long been viewed a weak actor that is hardly able or motivated to steer internal decision-making. However, recent research indicates a changing role of the Secretariat General as a pro-active broker and last arbiter. This article studies how the Secretariat General is perceived by the DGs in policy coordination and argues that this perception depends on the pattern of political authority, bureaucratic roles and the relevance and the alternatives prevailing in the policy field. The article is based on data from a survey among Commission officials.}, language = {en} } @article{HustedtDanken, author = {Hustedt, Thurid and Danken, Thomas}, title = {Institutional logics in inter-departmental coordination: Why actors agree on a joint coordination output.}, series = {Public Administration}, volume = {95}, journal = {Public Administration}, number = {3}, issn = {1467-9299}, doi = {10.1111/padm.12331}, pages = {730 -- 743}, abstract = {By investigating two German inter-departmental committees, this article shows that the policy output of these coordination bodies depends on the specific institutional logic evoked throughout the coordination process. While in one of the groups a policy logic prevailed and a joint coordination output was achieved, the other was dominated by a political logic and proved unable to achieve agreement. The article contributes to research on government coordination by showing that actor orientations are crucial for explaining inter-organizational coordination. The results direct attention to the behavioural implications of coordination structures.}, language = {en} } @article{HustedtSalomonsen, author = {Hustedt, Thurid and Salomonsen, Heidi Houlberg}, title = {Politikberatung durch die Ministerialverwaltung: Funktionale Differenzierung oder Integration unterschiedlicher Wissensformen}, series = {der moderne staat (dms)}, volume = {Sonderheft 1/2013}, journal = {der moderne staat (dms)}, isbn = {9783847401179}, pages = {203 -- 221}, language = {de} } @article{HustedtSalomonsen, author = {Hustedt, Thurid and Salomonsen, Heidi H.}, title = {Political Control of Coordination? The Roles of Ministerial Advisers in Government Coordination in Den-mark and Sweden.}, series = {Public Administration}, volume = {95}, journal = {Public Administration}, number = {2}, edition = {Special Issue: Symposium: Ministerial advisers in executive government}, issn = {1467-9299}, doi = {10.1111/padm.12312}, pages = {393 -- 406}, abstract = {Ministerial advisers are said to strengthen the political control of bureaucracy. Using a comparative case design, this article investigates this claim by studying the roles of ministerial advisers in government coordination in Denmark and Sweden. The article demonstrates how the roles of advisers differ in coordination: Swedish advisers directly control government coordination through hierarchical authority. The roles of advisers and bureaucrats are functionally differentiated in coordination. In contrast, Danish advisers play a more indirect role in coordination. Rather than controlling coordination, they serve to reproduce the functional politicization of the permanent bureaucracy in government coordination. The findings underline the relevance of including advisers in the future study of government coordination. The analysis is based on 48 interviews with advisers and top civil servants in Denmark and Sweden.}, language = {en} } @article{HustedtKolltveitSalomonsen, author = {Hustedt, Thurid and Kolltveit, Kristoffer and Salomonsen, Heidi Houlberg}, title = {Ministerial advisers in executive government: Out from the dark and into the limelight.}, series = {Public Administration}, volume = {95}, journal = {Public Administration}, number = {2}, edition = {Special Issue: Symposium: Ministerial advisers in executive government}, issn = {1467-9299}, doi = {10.1111/padm.12329}, pages = {299 -- 311}, abstract = {Ministers increasingly rely on advisers for support and advice. In many countries, these political aides are labelled differently. Generally, they serve as close confidants to their political masters and operate in the 'shadowland' between politics and bureaucracy. Scholarship has dragged the ministerial advisers out of the dark and described their background and functions. Still, the field of scholarship has a Westminster bias, is characterized by single case studies, and remains under-theorized. The lack of comparative focus and theoretical underpinnings can be explained by the complex nature of ministerial advisers. This introductory article suggests a definition for ministerial advisers and reviews the extant literature on these important actors. The main argument is that the extent and relevance of ministerial advisers in executive government merits integration into mainstream public administration and political science theory and research.}, language = {en} } @article{VeitHustedtBach, author = {Veit, Sylvia and Hustedt, Thurid and Bach, Tobias}, title = {Dynamics of change in internal policy advisory systems: the hybridization of advisory capacities in Germany}, series = {Policy Sciences}, volume = {50}, journal = {Policy Sciences}, number = {1}, issn = {0032-2687 (print), 1573-0891 (online)}, doi = {10.1007/s11077-016-9266-9}, pages = {85 -- 103}, abstract = {Recent scholarship on advisory systems has focussed on the externalization of advisory capacities and sectoral dynamics of change, whereas changes of internal policy advisory systems have not yet been approached systematically. This article proposes an analytical concept for exploring change dynamics in internal policy advisory systems by means of three logics for assessing policy advice (political salience, credibility and representativeness). The approach is illustrated by analysing changes within the internal policy advisory system of the German federal government (1990-2015). The analysis relies on three original datasets on ministerial departments, research agencies and governmental advisory bodies. We find that the internal advisory system of the German federal government is characterized by a differentiated hybridization of advisory logics, which has changed the nature of policy advice.}, language = {en} } @article{RadtkeHustedtKlinnert, author = {Radtke, Ina and Hustedt, Thurid and Klinnert, Anne}, title = {Inter-Ministerial Working Groups as a Panacea for Coordination Problems?}, series = {der moderne staat (dms)}, volume = {9}, journal = {der moderne staat (dms)}, number = {1}, issn = {1865-7192}, doi = {10.3224/dms.v9i1.23641}, pages = {65 -- 81}, abstract = {Based on a comparative design, the article shows that inter-ministerial working groups do not generally represent panaceas for coordination problems as is usually assumed by the literature. The analysis compares three inter-ministerial working groups in the German federal government. The article asks which factors influence the mode of coordination in inter-ministerial working groups. The analysis reveals that it is affected by the organisational structure of these bodies and the negotiation mode for solving conflict among its members, which leads to variance in its capacity to establish positive coordination.}, language = {en} }