Refine
Document Type
- Working Paper (6)
- Article (2)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (9)
Despite claims of a paradigmatic shift toward the increased role of networks and partnerships as a form of governance—driven and enabled by digital technologies—the relation of “Networked Governance” with the pre-existing paradigms of “Traditional Weberian Public Administration” and “New Public Management” remains relatively unexplored. This research aims at collecting systematic evidence on the dominant paradigms in digitalization reforms in Europe by comparing the doctrines employed in the initial and most recent digitalization strategies across eight European countries: Estonia, France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Norway, Spain, and the United Kingdom. We challenge the claim that Networked Governance is emerging as the dominant paradigm in the context of the digitalization of the public sector. The findings confirm earlier studies indicating that information and communication technologies tend to reinforce some traditional features of administration and the recentralization of power. Furthermore, we find evidence of the continued importance of key features of “New Public Management” in the digital era.
This paper seeks to better understand the paradigm shift towards ‘networked governance’ in digitalisation discourse. Little is known about the link between digitalisation reforms and the main reform paradigms in public management studies. By analysing French and German national digitalisation strategies over time, we find that neo-Weberian, new public management, and networked governance discourses co-exist within the digital era, although networked governance rhetoric is increasingly influential. However, a closer examination reveals that this shift in discourse is unrelated to the increased integration of nonstate actors in actual decision-making and service delivery.
This thesis examines the causal process that led to policy change in the field of impact assessment (IA) in France, Germany and Italy since the mid-2000s. I seek to understand whether changes to the goals and/or ends of IA may be explained by symbolic politics or by a domestic learning process. Additionally, I aim to find out how and under which conditions policy learning results in policy change, and how the policy process affects the type of policy change that is adopted. Based on the policy diffusion literature, the policy learning framework and the Multiple Streams Framework, I operationalise three different causal mechanisms: symbolic politics, problem-oriented learning and power-oriented learning. Using document analysis and expert interviews, I trace the causal process that resulted in nine selected cases of policy change.
I find that in most cases policy changes resulted from a domestic learning process, whereby domestic entities defined policy problems and/or goals, acquired and diffused knowledge, and adopted measures to implement and enforce the policy change. This shows that France, Germany and Italy have gone beyond the symbolic phase in the implementation of IA. In Germany and Italy, recent policy changes may be explained by problem-oriented learning. Domestic entrepreneurs identified problems in the implementation of IA and aimed at improving the performance of the instrument. In these two countries stable organisations with a mandate to evaluate IA were the main policy entrepreneurs. They facilitated the acquisition of knowledge on IA, acted as learning fora, and largely contributed to disseminating knowledge and setting the policy agenda.
With respect to how and under which conditions policy lessons may be translated into policy change, findings show that this depends on the ability of policy entrepreneurs to use windows of opportunities such as changes of government to translate the acquired knowledge into policy change. I find that because the type of causal mechanism affects who learns and what is learnt, problem-oriented learning tends to result in incremental change of the means of IA, while power-oriented learning is more conducive to redefining the ends of IA.
The process of digitalising government is rapidly gaining speed, resulting in a pressing need for increased inter-governmental integration and challenging the traditional silo structures of government. This has sparked the adoption of inter-governmental collaborative working arrangements and efforts to develop joint standards and solutions; yet little is known about how exactly this manifests itself in the context of ambitious digitalisation projects. This report provides new empirical evidence on the challenges and dynamics of collaboration within and between public organisations in order to drive digital transformation. The report begins with a literature review on collaborative management with a particular focus on collaboration in the context of government digitalisation. This literature serves as a basis for developing a set of five propositions regarding how intergovernmental collaborative digitalisation projects can be best designed and managed. Following the conceptual framework of the TROPICO project deliverable 6.3 developed by Rackwitz et al. (2020), the report investigates the interplay between system context, collaboration challenges and dynamics (i.e. complexity, risk and power imbalances), public management interventions (i.e. institutional design and leadership) as well as outcomes. Emphasis is placed upon the role of institutional design and leadership in order to cope with the challenges inherent to collaborative governance approaches. The framework and related propositions are then verified through the use of empirical findings from ten comparative case studies from five European countries (Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, Germany, and the United Kingdom). The case studies, presented in detail in TROPICO deliverable 6.3, examine the development of national government-wide online portals, as well as the implementation of municipal Smart City initiatives. The cases show that the system dynamics and challenges of digitalisation projects, such as size and scope, tend to generate resource-intensive and demanding working conditions. Creating hybrid structures that incorporate both network and hierarchical approaches has been a common approach to handling these conditions and balancing the demands of inter-departmental collaboration with the inherent accountabilities and existing working cultures of public organisations. At the steering level, a central coordinator with collaborative leadership skills was found to be key to driving the projects forward and achieving outcomes. Participatory, network-style approaches at the working group level were successful in balancing the demands of all collaborative partners and encouraging wide-scale engagement. In addition, opting for wide-scale inclusion, setting ground rules and clear processes as well as a focus on trust and social capital development proved essential. While most leadership approaches still maintain elements of transactional leadership in managing projects, collaborative leadership approaches such as bringing stakeholders together, mediating problems, and guiding and steering the process were used in many instances to handle the complexities inherent in the project objectives. In the conclusion of the report, contributions are discussed, followed by an outline for future research avenues.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A large body of literature claims that ICT and digitalisation have triggered broad organisational and cultural changes in public organisations. These changes have led many to conclude that a new era has begun that is characterised by collaboration within intra-and intersectoral networks and this has become a key paradigm for public sector governance and innovation. Yet, empirical evidence of a shift towards “Networked Governance” remains limited, and few have explored further the linkages between digitalisation and collaboration in the public sector. Work Package 6 of the TROPICO project addresses this void by providing a meta-analysis of the design, coordination, and implementation of national digitalisation strategies in eight European countries with different administrative traditions (Estonia, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Spain, and UK). By coding the countries’ first significant and most recent strategies, we examine whether there is evidence supporting the argument of a paradigmatic shift with respect to public sector governance and collaboration. The final analysis is based on 8496 codes and on an additional questionnaire filled out by the relevant TROPICO partners’ country teams. Based on our results we cannot conclude that a Networked Governance is emerging in the era of digital government, but rather find confirmation that all reform paradigms are present in governments’ digitalisation efforts. In fact, the way in which digital transformation of the public sector is put forward in the strategies may strengthen hierarchical patterns of command and control. Findings further indicate that over time collaboration has changed regarding scope and motives, while its intensity has remained relatively weak. Moreover, administrative traditions do not serve as explanatory approach for country variations in the context of digitalisation strategies. Rather, divergences are explained by the different geneses and purposes of the documents. However, we observe similarities in the perceived success factors: a common vision, cultural change, accessibility, leadership and trust are main recurring themes. Furthermore, we find no conclusive evidence that governance paradigms and collaborative arrangements in the digitalisation strategies influencethe performance of digital government. Lastly, in the conclusion of the report, we address some recommendations to practitioners for designing and implementing digitalisation strategies
Hintergrund
Eine Vereinfachung und Verbesserung von Förderverfahren stellt angesichts der hohen Bedeutung von Förderungen für Unternehmen und Kommunen ein wichtiges Unterfangen zur Stärkung von Wettbewerbsfähigkeit und Standortqualität dar. Die Sächsische Staatsregierung verfolgt in der aktuellen Legislaturperiode das politische Ziel einer Vereinfachung der Regelungen für Mittelempfänger und Verwaltungsbehörden und insbesondere einer Bürokratieentlastung kleinerer Kommunen bei Förderverfahren. Sie hat sich in ihrer Eckwerteklausur März 2018 entschieden, zur Vereinfachung und Verbesserung von Förderverfahren eine Kommission mit sachkundigen Experten einzusetzen. Die „Kommission zur Vereinfachung und Verbesserung von Förderverfahren“ wurde am 15. Mai 2018 auf Vorschlag des Staatsministers der Finanzen eingesetzt. Es ist vorgesehen, dass sie der Staatsregierung bis 31. Mai 2019 einen Abschlussbericht vorlegt.
Die Kommission soll der Staatsregierung konkrete Vorschläge zur Vereinfachung von Förderprogrammen unterbreiten. Hierbei soll es vor allem um Pauschalierung von Zuschüssen, Flexibilisierung und Entbürokratisierung der Förderverfahren, Vereinfachungsmöglichkeiten landesrechtlicher Vorschriften und um Vorschläge zur Verbesserung und Bündelung der Förderung gehen. Insbesondere sollen Erleichterungen für Fördermittelempfänger im Fokus stehen. Die vorliegende Studie soll mit Hilfe internationaler Erfahrungen ausländischer Verwaltungen in der Reform von Fördermanagementprozessen ein weiterer Baustein bei der Entwicklung konkreter Vereinfachungsvorschläge sein. Dafür werden im Folgenden sechs zum Teil weitreichende Reformen des Fördermanagementprozesses in den Niederlanden, Kanada, Flandern (Belgien), Schweden, Wales (Großbritannien) und Irland ihrem Inhalt nach beschrieben und auf Ihre Auswirkungen hin untersucht. Es werden die wesentlichen Trends im internationalen Reformgeschehen rund um das Thema Förderprozessmanagement identifiziert und Handlungsempfehlungen für die Kommission abgeleitet.