Eckersley, P

Lakoma, K

Nottingham Trent Institutional Repository (IRep)

Multiple streams and the construction of policy problems Explaining reforms to the governance of fire and rescue services in EnglandDr Pete EckersleyKatarzyna LakomaNottingham Trent UniversityECPR General ConferenceUniversity of Wroclaw, Wroclaw, Poland 6 September 2019@peckersley@KatarzynaLakomaMultiple Streams Approach (MSA)Taken from Jones et al 2016Kingdon (1984) Agendas, Alternatives and Public PoliciesLimitations and evolution of MSA• Criticism that it is random and unpredictable with no clear power dimension (Sabatier 2007; Robinson and Eller 2010)• Focus largely on reactive problem-solving rather than proactive policymaking• Although the streams may be analytically distinct, actors can be involved in more than one simultaneously – and policy entrepreneurs can also be endogenous to the process (Ackrill and Kay 2011)• Some have combined it with narrative approaches to help explain how policymakers try to effect change (e.g. Jones and McBeth; Cairney 2018)Research Questions• How might proactive policymakers try to couple the streams and implement their preferred solutions?• If policy entrepreneurs are endogenous to the policymaking processes, does this help to explain power dynamics within the MSA?• Could proactive policymakers try to straddle the different streams to increase their chances of coupling them?• What strategies do proactive policymakers adopt to try and open policy windows?The case of P(F)CCs• Since 2017, Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) have been able to make a case to assume responsibility for the governance of fire and rescue services within their force areas and become Police, Fire and Crime Commissioners (PFCCs)• The 2017 Act requires an assessment (i.e. a business case submitted and approved by the Home Secretary) of why this reform• (i) is in the interests of economy, efficiency and effectiveness, or • (ii) is in the interests of public safety Methods• 7 business cases (Essex, Northamptonshire, West Mercia, North Yorkshire, Cambridgeshire & Peterborough, Staffordshire and Hertfordshire)• Ex post inductive coding exercise of publicly-available documentation results of public consultations, • the business cases, • independent analyses by the CIPFA, • local media reports, • the minutes of local council and Fire and Rescue Authority meetingsConsultation responses IForce areaAgree DisagreeResidentsElected repsFRS staffPolice staffCouncils ResidentsElected repsFRS staffPolice staffCouncilsNorthants 57% 63% 92% 62% 35% 30% 4% 5%West Mercia64% 33% 37% 0 36% 67% 67% 8Cambs 53% 3 n/a n/a 0 39% 1 n/a n/a 2Herts 52% 11 n/a n/a 1 34% 0 n/a n/a 3Consultations to seek approval for PCC decision to opt for Governance model: i.e. no other options presentedConsultation responses II1 – no benefit 2 3 45 – significant benefitRepresentation 42 % 18 % 15 % 11 % 14%Governance 34% 8% 10% 18% 30%Single employer 45% 13% 15% 12% 15%EssexStaffordshire North YorkshireElected repsFRS staffPolice staffResidentsPublic Sector/CVSOverall Online ResidentsFRS staffPolice staffOverallNo change 42% 60% 41% 49% 34% 49% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/aRepresentation 12% 19% 5% 10% 13% 11% 40% 22% 27% 48% 29%Governance 32% 12% 26% 23% 30% 22% 48% 61% 59% 27% 55%Single employer 14% 9% 28% 18% 23% 17% 12% 17% 14% 25% 15%In favour OpposedCambridgeshire & Peterborough1 Conservative-controlled district council3 Conservative MPs1 Conservative combined authority mayor Cambridgeshire CC (Conservative-controlled)Peterborough Council (Conservative-controlled)1 then-Conservative MP (who now sits with Change UK)Cambridgeshire & Peterborough FRSEssexEssex CC (Conservative-controlled)Southend Council (Conservative-controlled)Thurrock Council (No overall control)2 Conservative-controlled district councils17 Conservative MPsHertfordshire1 Conservative-controlled district council 11 Conservative MPsHertfordshire CC (Conservative-controlled)2 Conservative-controlled district councils1 Liberal Democrat-controlled district councilNorth Yorkshire1 Conservative-controlled district councilNorth Yorkshire CC (Conservative-controlled)City of York Council (no overall control)5 Conservative-controlled district councils2 district councils with no overall controlNorth Yorkshire FRSNorthamptonshire3 Conservative-controlled district councils4 Conservative MPsNorthamptonshire FRS1 Labour-controlled district councilStaffordshire2 Conservative-controlled district councils6 Conservative MPsStaffordshire CC (Conservative-controlled)Stoke-on-Trent Council (no overall control)2 Labour-controlled district councils1 district council with no overall control2 Labour MPsStaffordshire and Stoke on Trent FRSWest MerciaWorcestershire CC (Conservative-controlled)Herefordshire Council (Conservative-controlled)Shropshire Council (Conservative-controlled)2 Conservative-controlled district councils2 Labour-controlled district councils1 district council with no overall controlHereford and Worcester FRSShropshire FRSCurrent state of play• Two PFCCs approved without much controversy (Essex and Northamptonshire). In both cases there were clear local problems that needed to be addressed• Two PFCCs approved in the teeth of local opposition (Staffordshire and North Yorkshire) • Two PCCs got the Home Office’s approval after the judicial review (Cambridgeshire & Peterborough and West Mercia) • Hertfordshire PCC abandoned his proposal (along with seven other PCCs who considered change)So, given that there was limited public support for change, how did some PFCCs manage to introduce their reform proposals?Problem narratives – supportive (finance, public accountability and performance)• “There would be direct benefits from adopting this [governance] option realised through accelerating estate consolidation opportunities” (PCC for Cambridgeshire and Peterborough)• “I would suggest that democracy and accountability is improved by having a directly elected Fire Commissioner rather than appointed local councillors acting as an FRA.” (PCC for West Mercia)• “The change to single governance will enable new ways of working that will benefit our communities and our emergency services alike.” (PCC for West Mercia) • “More opportunities for early intervention and prevention work. Greater value coming from quicker and easier sharing of information.” (Northants)Counter-narratives - opposed(finance, public accountability and performance) “I am deeply concerned about the proposals for ‘estate rationalisation’. This clearly indicates the closure of local police stations and locating the services in Fire Stations.” (Councillor, Staffs) “Both need more money. No need to work together” (West Mercia) “Services provided by the Fire Brigade have been operating effectively. Therefore why risk this?” (Cambs) “The Commissioner’s Local Business Case does not make a compelling argument as to why it is necessary to adopt the Governance Model to address the stated shortcomings in the pace and scope of collaboration between the Police and the Fire and Rescue Service.” (Member of the public, North Yorks) “The two work together at the moment and if something is not broken why change.” (Northants)How can the MSA help to explain this?• PCCs were involved in all three streams in each case: they helped to frame and broker problems that needed addressing; as endogenous policy entrepreneurs they championed a policy solution; and they were key political actors• There was a window open in the political stream in each case• However, only in Essex and Northamptonshire were windows open in the problem stream • Attempts to construct a problem in the other force areas met with opposition from other local actors. This might mean the window in the political stream closes more quicklyConclusions• Policy entrepreneurs previously seen as exogenous to the process: if they are endogenous, and able to straddle all three streams, they are well-positioned to couple them• The ability of policymakers to straddle the streams in this way introduces a power dynamic into MSA perspectives• Relevant in small policy subsystems• Coupling may be much easier if windows are open in both the problem and political streams• Endogenous policy entrepreneurs can use narratives to construct and broker problems and thereby open a window in this stream – but this is not a foolproof strategyThank youPeter.Eckersley@ntu.ac.ukKatarzyna.Lakoma@ntu.ac.uk 

Multiple streams and the construction of policy problems. Explaining reforms to the governance of fire and rescue services in England

http://irep.ntu.ac.uk/id/eprint/37756/1/14904_Lakoma.pdf

Multiple streams and the construction of policy problems. Explaining reforms to the governance of fire and rescue services in England

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Nottingham Trent Institutional Repository (IRep)