STRUCTURAL DYNAMIC OF THE PUBLIC SECTOR AND MULTILEVEL GOVERNANCE: BETWEEN HIERARCHIES, MARKET AND NETWORK FORMS

In the current economic, social and political context, the problem of the competitiveness reform in public sector lies in the assumption of strategic approaches focused on meeting the public interest, with the lowest cost for society. The philosophy management which governs public sector reform tends to create new paradigms and contributes to shaping a new way of thinking and behavior. Central idea of this paper is that the two dominant models of administration: bureaucracy and governance, provides a range of institutional opportunities but also raises a number of barriers to strategic approaches to emerging public sector. Bureaucracy is for example, criticized because the lack of prioritization skills and lack of goals and also because lacks to stimulate innovation in the public sector. Bureaucracy leads to uniformity, flattening of public services. Governance model contains a number of similarities with the strategic approach in the public sector, when we talk about networks, interdependence and self-organizing nature of public administration. The issue that we are trying reveal to your attention is that the current institutional conditions are more complex than two models mentioned are able to cover. These new demands require the types of organizational structures based on flexible, decentralized structure to replace the traditional centralized, which now is totally inapplicable. Institutional framework may, for example, to provide an opportunity for the New Public Management, but also create a barrier to governance.bureaucracy, governance, public policy, networks, multilevel governance.

Dare we jump off Arnstein's ladder? Social learning as a new policy paradigm

Participation is now a central consideration of policy discourses at EU; national and local levels, particularly in relation to environmental resources. As it becomes a social expectation so the form, meaning and purpose of participation has diversified. While Arnstein’s ladder of citizen participation (Arnstein, 1969) revealed that much ‘participation’ does little to broker a reassignment of power, this paper argues that it is perhaps time to jump off the ladder. In doing so, we suggest that an emphasis on social learning constitutes a paradigm shift in the thinking and practices of policy-making. Our rationale is based on findings from several research projects on social learning for water resource management in the EU and UK. These suggest conventional policy responses to environmental problems (regulation; fiscal instruments; information) are only effective where there is pre-existing agreement on the nature of the problem and its resolution. In practice, many resource management issues are best described as ‘messes’ (Ackoff, 1974), with high degrees of interdependency; complexity; uncertainty; and multiple stakeholding. These characteristics challenge notions of participation because no single group can pinpoint with confidence the nature of the problem and its solution. We explore how the term social learning rather than participation more accurately embodies the new kinds of roles, relationships and sense of purpose which will be required to progress complex, messy issues. The discussion leads to the conclusion that social learning can be understood as an emerging governance mechanism to promote concerted action, thereby enabling transformation of complex natural resource management situations

Technic and Collaboration Breakdown Structures: Drivers of collaborative problem solving approaches in a supply chain context

Problem Solving Methodologies have been par excellence a cornerstone element of the firms’ strategy on achieving effective continuous improvement. But the enterprise evolution towards an extended environment characterized by network-based organization has radically changed the problem solving paradigms. This paper aims to propose a generic and collaborative methodology addressing more complex and distributed problems, dealing with Supply Chain issues and having a key role as a driver for building global competitive advantages and create superior performances at a Supply Chain level

Interdependent policy instrument preferences: a two-mode network approach

In policymaking, actors are likely to take the preferences of others into account when strategically positioning themselves. However, there is a lack of research that conceives of policy preferences as an interdependent system. In order to analyse interdependencies, we link actors to their policy preferences in water protection, which results in an actor-instrument network. As actors exhibit multiple preferences, a complex two-mode network between actors and policies emerges. We analyse whether actors exhibit interdependent preference profiles given shared policy objectives or social interactions among them. By fitting an exponential random graph model to the actor-instrument network, we find considerable clustering, meaning that actors tend to exhibit preferences for multiple policy instruments in common. Actors tend to exhibit interdependent policy preferences when they are interconnected, that is, they collaborate with each other. By contrast, actors are less likely to share policy preferences when a conflict line divides them

Competing Claims on Natural Resources: What Role for Science?

Competing claims on natural resources become increasingly acute, with the poor being most vulnerable to adverse outcomes of such competition. A major challenge for science and policy is to progress from facilitating univocal use to guiding stakeholders in dealing with potentially conflicting uses of natural resources. The development of novel, more equitable, management options that reduce rural poverty is key to achieving sustainable use of natural resources and the resolution of conflicts over them. Here, we describe an interdisciplinary and interactive approach for: (i) the understanding of competing claims and stakeholder objectives; (ii) the identification of alternative resource use options, and (iii) the scientific support to negotiation processes between stakeholders. Central to the outlined approach is a shifted perspective on the role of scientific knowledge in society. Understanding scientific knowledge as entering societal arenas and as fundamentally negotiated, the role of the scientist becomes a more modest one, a contributor to ongoing negotiation processes among stakeholders. Scientists can, therefore, not merely describe and explain resource-use dynamics and competing claims, but in doing so, they should actively contribute to negotiation processes between stakeholders operating at different scales (local, national, regional, and global). Together with stakeholders, they explore alternatives that can contribute to more sustainable and equitable use of natural resources and, where possible, design new technical options and institutional arrangements

Theoretical multiplicity for the governance of transitions. The energy producing greenhouse case

Transition management, as a theory of directing structural societal changes towards sustainable system innovations, has become a major topic in scientific research over the last years. In the Netherlands, the concept of transition management was adopted by several governmental agencies as one of the leading principles for steering sustainable development. In this paper we focus on the governance of transitions. The question is if and how transitions towards sustainability can be steered, governed or managed, in particular by governmental actors. We suggest an approach of theoretical multiplicity, arguing that multiple theories will be needed simultaneously for dealing with the complex societal sustainability issues. Therefore, we address the governance question by theoretically comparing transition management theory to a number of related theories on societal change and intervention, such as multi-actor collaboration, network governance, policy agenda setting and adaptive governance. We argue that these related theories put the managerial assumptions of transition management into perspective, by adding other steering roles and leadership mechanisms to the picture. We will illustrate the advantages of theoretical multiplicity by analysing the case of the greenhouse as a source of energy. The energy producing greenhouse can be considered a revolutionary technology, with the potential of turning the greenhouse horticultural sector from a mass energy consumer into a sustainable energy user and producer

The value of theoretical multiplicity for steering transitions towards sustainability

Transition management, as a theory of directing structural societal changes towards sustainable system innovations, has become a major topic in scientific research over the last years. In this paper we focus on the question how transitions towards sustainability can be steered, governed or managed, in particular by governmental actors. We suggest an approach of theoretical multiplicity, arguing that multiple theories will be needed simultaneously for dealing with the complex societal sustainability issues. Therefore, we address the steering question by theoretically comparing transition management theory to a number of related theories on societal change and intervention, such as multi-actor collaboration, network governance, configuration management, policy agenda setting, and adaptive management. We conclude that these related theories put the managerial assumptions of transition management into perspective, by adding other steering roles and leadership mechanisms to the picture. Finally we argue that new modes of steering inevitable have consequences for the actual governance institutions. New ways of governing change ask for change within governance systems itself and vice versa. Our argument for theoretical multiplicity implicates the development of multiple, potentially conflicting, governance capacitie

A double network approach to international production.

This paper discusses some key implications of the view, emerged in the literature, that multinational firms organise their activities by connecting internal networks of subsidiaries with external networks of contractual relationships. It is argued that this view provides some useful elements for a more comprehensive theory of multinational change and for the analysis of the impact of internationalisation on economic systems of origin and destination. A “double network approach” to international production implies a fundamental change of focus from the “center” of multinationals – the headquarters – to the “periphery” of transnational organisations, and from individual decision making units to collective choices involving a variety of inter-linked actors. Moreover, it highlights the complexities of decision making processes associated to the increasing number and interdependencies of internal and external actors involved in international production.Foreign Investment, Multinational Firm.