40 research outputs found
Participacija i profesionalizam u radu na javnim politikama: pitanja za zemlje u tranziciji
The emergence of āpolicy analysisā as a skilled occupation in the governmental process raised questions about the significance of this work for democratic control in government, and the relationship between the discourses of elected leadership, expert policy analysis, and public norms and understandings, in the construction of policy. The questions are even more acute in the ātransitional politiesā of Eastern Europe, where the norms of democratic accountability are less well established, but the rules of the game are āunder reconstructionā. This paper reviews the way the themes of professionalism and participation relate to policy work in transitional polities, the tensions that policy workers face, and the way that the diverse discourses available are mobilized in the discursive construction of policy and policy work.Pojava analize javnih politika kao kvalificiranog zanimanja u procesu vladanja otvorila je pitanja o važnosti te vrste posla za demokratsku kontrolu vlasti, te o odnosu izmeÄu diskursa izabranih voÄa, profesionalnih analitiÄara politika i javnih normi i razumijevanja u konstrukciji javnih politika. Ta su pitanja joÅ” istaknutija u ātranzicijskim politiÄkim sustavimaā IstoÄne Europe, gdje su norme demokratske odgovornosti manje uspostavljene, a pravila igre su u izgradnji. Ovaj rad razmatra u kojem su odnosu teme profesionalizma i participacije s radom na javnim politikama u zemljama u tranziciji, zatim napetosti s kojima se suoÄavaju oni koji rade na javnih politikama, te na koji se naÄin razliÄiti dostupni diskursi mobiliziraju u diskurzivnoj konstrukciji javnih politika i rada na javnim politikama
Challenge and Development: The Emerging Understanding of Policy Work
Two themes have traversed the academic and practitioner literatures on policy and policy analysis: the search for a sophisticated technology of choice in the paradigm of instrumental rationality, and a āpuzzlingā about the relationship of this technology to practice. A great deal of conceptual development has emerged from the tension between these two themes. There has been a re-thinking of the nature of the actors in the policy process, of the significance of the organizational forms within which they are located, and of the way in which they engage with policy problems. There has been an increasing realization that while concepts of hierarchical authority and instrumental rationality are very significant in the policy process, they are inadequate as descriptions of that process, and that attention has to be given to the place of interpretation in the construction of policy. In this context, there has been a focus on the agency of the participants, and the way that policy activity has become a form of specialized and interactive practice, going well beyond classical formulations of āpolicy analysisā. This paper reviews the way in which this conceptual development has enabled a more complex and more informative analysis of the policy process, and the place of āpolicy analysisā as part of this process
Policy and Governing: Basic Approaches
Pojam policy srediÅ”nji je pojam u praksi, jednako kao i u analizi javnog upravljanja, no rijetko kad je predmet velike teorijske pozornosti. On Äini dio pretpostavljenoga svijeta stvari u kojem se neupitno pretpostavlja da je javno upravljanje koherentan, hijerarhijski i instrumentaliziran proces, a da je policy oblik izbora na temelju vlasti. Takvo predstavljanje upravljanja predmet je empirijskih i teorijskih kritika u kojima se vladavina u mnogo veÄoj
mjeri prikazuje kao oblik strukturirane interakcije. No te kritike ne uspijevaju potkopati snagu dominantnoga prikaza policyja kao izbora na temelju vlasti. Stoga je srediÅ”nje pitanje analize i prakse javnih politika pitanje odnosa tih dvaju suprotstavljenih prikaza. Za policy se tvrdi da kao polje prouÄavanja pripada politiÄkoj znanosti, no u njegovu prouÄavanju ona se nadmeÄe s ekonomijom. RazliÄiti dijelovi ekonomije i politiÄke znanosti mobiliziraju se u analizi politika, pri Äemu svaka od tih znanosti daje specifi Äan doprinos oblikovanju analize procesa policyja. Instrumentalizirano oblikovanje policyja i njegove evaluacije dominantan su oblik glavnoga tijeka ameriÄkoga pristupa literaturi o policyju, no taj se pristup dovodi u pitanje sve veÄim usmjeravanjem pozornosti na specifiÄnosti organizacije i na tumaÄenje znaÄenja pojma policy. Objedinjavanje takvih razliÄitih pristupa u jedan zajedniÄki pristup osnažuje analizu politika, no istodobno zahtijeva preispitivanje pretpostavki o mjestu javnih politika u procesu upravljanja.The concept of policy is a central element in both the practice and the analysis of governing, but it is rarely subject to much theoretical scrutiny. It forms part of an assumptive world in which it is taken for granted that governing is a coherent, hierarchical and instrumental process, and that policy is a pattern of authorised choice. This presentation of governing is subject to both empirical and theoretical critiques, which present government rather in terms of structured interaction. But these critiques do not appear to undermine the force of the dominant presentation of policy as authorised choice, and the central question for both the analysis and the practice of policy is the relationship between these confl icting presentations.
Policy has been claimed as a fi eld of study for political science, but this has been contested by economics, and various elements of both economics and political science are mobilised in the analysis of policy, each contributing to a particular framing of the policy process. Instrumental framings of policy and its evaluation have dominated the American mainstream in the policy literature, but have been challenged by an increasing focus on organization and interpretation. Drawing these strands together in an institutional framework strengthens the analysis, but calls for a reconsideration of assumptions about the place of policy in the process of governing
POLICY AS AN INTERROGATION OF THE PROCESS OF GOVERNMENT
Autor objaÅ”njava policy pristup vladavini i istiÄe kako āpolicyā oznaÄava samo jedan od mnogobrojnih naÄina razumijevanja vladavine. KarakteristiÄno za policy je razumijevanje vladavine kao svjesnog upravljanja zajedniÄkim problemima. MeÄutim, i unutar policy perspektive autor razlikuje tri tumaÄenja policyja: tumaÄenja kroz autoritativne odluke, strukturiranu interakciju i druÅ”tvenu konstrukciju. Na kraju zakljuÄuje kako se sva tri tumaÄenja kreativno nadopunjuju pri razumijevanju vladavinskog procesa.The author explains the policy account of government and points out that policy is only one of the many possible accounts of the process of government. The policy perspective is characterised by an understanding of government as a more or less conscious attempt to manage collective problems. Still, even inside the policy camp, there are three different accounts of policy: authoritative choice, structured interaction and social construction. The author concludes that the three accounts are complementary and useful for understanding the process of government
Javne politike i policy analiza:modeli, kultura i praksa
Usmjerenost na policy kao kljuÄni pojam u analizi uÄinaka vlade ima svoje izvoriÅ”te u anglosaksonskim sustavima predstavniÄke vlasti. Neke od kljuÄnih kulturoloÅ”kih normi tog oblika vlasti, koje ukljuÄuju suprotstavljenost pozicija, hijerarhiju i izbor, temelj su znatnogbroja radova o javnim politikama, koje se obiÄno odreÄuju kao proces izbora legitimnih i odgovornih dužnosnika vlasti. Postoji, meÄutim, i diskurs koji je tome suprotstavljen, kojim se naglaÅ”avaju ograniÄenja vlasti zasnovane na hijerarhiji, a na policy se prije svega
gleda kao na strukturiranu interakciju. Ta dva suprotstavljena stava u meÄusobnu su odnosu i ne može ih se razmatrati posve odvojeno. Može se, meÄutim, reÄi da s obzirom na odnos dvaju pristupa postoje znaÄajne razlike izmeÄu anglosaksonskih sustava i sustava
koji postoje u ostalim zemljama zapadne Europe. Time se ujedno postavlja i pitanje o znaÄenju policyja i javnih politika u ostalim politiÄkim sustavima, primjerice u jugoistoÄnoj Aziji ili u bivÅ”im socijalistiÄkim zemljama istoÄne Europe
Bridging rhetoric and practice: new perspectives on barriers to gendered change
Contains fulltext :
167537.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)This article presents a new methodology, Gender Knowledge Contestation Analysis, and uses it to examine the processes under way when transformative gender equality policies, such as gender mainstreaming are implemented. Drawing on data gathered in the European Commission, the findings show the processes linking high-level rhetorical policy statements, strategic policies, and daily working practices. This analysis enables exploration of the mechanisms through which indifference to and nonawareness of gendered policy problems are collectively constituted and methods through which they can be challenged. Findings thus deepen our understanding of barriers to the implementation of gender mainstreaming and the steps required for its effective implementation.20 juli 201
Policy work as a reform project
One aspect of the modernization of liberal government in the late 20th century was an increased attention to policy, both as a concept for interrogating government, and as the basis for organizing work within government, leading to the development of āpolicy analysisā as a decision tool. This paper reviews the development of specialised
forms of āpolicy workā in liberal western political systems in order to establish what can be learned by other sorts of polity, and in particular, the transitional states of Eastern Europe. It discusses the multiple and overlapping accounts of policy that are in use, and
the implications that these have for the nature of policy work. It points out that policy work takes place in multiple locations where a diversity of rationales may apply, and discusses the implications of this analysis for the place of policy work in the modernization
of government