摘要 :
Governments and international organizations increasingly pursue the development of integrated policy strategies to govern persistent societal problems that crosscut the boundaries of traditional jurisdictions. In spite of the risi...
展开
Governments and international organizations increasingly pursue the development of integrated policy strategies to govern persistent societal problems that crosscut the boundaries of traditional jurisdictions. In spite of the rising popularity of such integrated strategies, little is known about their effects. Although it is generally assumed that integrated strategies result in better outcomes, the evidence base to support this claim is sparse. This is not to say that no attempts to study the relationship between integrated strategies and policy outcomes have been undertaken at all; this paper presents a research synthesis of the fragmented evidence base. Eligible studies are interpreted and discussed by using a heuristic that distinguishes between programmatic and political success and failure. Apart from synthesizing the impacts that integrated strategies have had, the paper reflects on associated explanatory conditions and methodological approaches that have been used. The review almost exclusively finds reports of failure and constraining conditions. At the same time, methodological approaches are found to be largely unconvincing and considerable research gaps remain. The paper, therefore, ends with a nuanced answer to the question of whether integrated strategies are worth pursuing and sets out various avenues for further research.
收起
摘要 :
Policy integration has come to be known as the Holy Grail of public policy. Given the increased complexity of societal problems, academics and policymakers alike have called for better integrated governance approaches to deal with...
展开
Policy integration has come to be known as the Holy Grail of public policy. Given the increased complexity of societal problems, academics and policymakers alike have called for better integrated governance approaches to deal with these problems more effectively. Despite the intuitive appeal of these calls, pursuing policy integration may not always be expedient, as it comes with significant costs and pitfalls. So far, the question of when pursuing policy integration may be considered opportune has remained largely unaddressed in the public policy literature. This article takes up this question and addresses it by discussing two interrelated elements: the desirability and the feasibility of policy integration. The former is reflected upon by synthesizing the main pros and cons that emerge from previous studies. The latter is addressed by proposing a heuristic that evaluates policy integration possibilities based on two key determinants: integrative capacity and leadership. Together, the synthesis and heuristic can serve as a point of departure for more critical reflections on pushes for more policy integration and on how to allocate scarce resources. The other way around, the heuristic allows policy entrepreneurs pushing for integrated "solutions" to focus their attention on the variables that matter most.
收起
摘要 :
In both national and international circles, environmental policy makers are repeatedly faced with the challenges posed by scientific, institutional and administrative fragmentation and complexity. Within this context, appraisal - ...
展开
In both national and international circles, environmental policy makers are repeatedly faced with the challenges posed by scientific, institutional and administrative fragmentation and complexity. Within this context, appraisal - of policies, programmes and projects - has been repeatedly advocated as a key integration tool that can help policy makers navigate such fragmentation and complexity by better integrating environmental concerns into decision making. In this paper, we examine the challenges that are posed for integrative governance, defined as the theories and practices that focus on the relationships between policy instruments and/or governance systems, from the perspective of efforts to integrate environmental considerations into all sectors of decision making via appraisal. Drawing on institutional theory, we explore the cross-sectoral and multi-level institutional challenges surrounding the integration of environmental considerations across different levels of appraisal. We do so by examining appraisal in the European Commission, and at the national, regional and local level in the UK. We argue that conflicts between different 'logics of integration' - or disintegration - routinely hamper the integration of environmental concerns between governance levels and across governance sectors. These logics include differences between appraisal systems; between appraising in theory and in practice; between different sectors and between the fragmented professional logics of different policy actors.
收起
摘要 :
The role of policy integration in the governance of cross-cutting policy problems has attracted increasing scholarly attention in recent years. Nevertheless, the concept of policy (dis)integration is still under theorized, particu...
展开
The role of policy integration in the governance of cross-cutting policy problems has attracted increasing scholarly attention in recent years. Nevertheless, the concept of policy (dis)integration is still under theorized, particularly regarding its inherent processual nature. The main argument of this paper is that policy integration should be understood as a process that entails various elements that do not necessarily move in a concerted manner but may develop at different paces or even in opposite directions. To study such dynamic integration pathways, the paper proposes a multi-dimensional framework. Drawing on existing literature, the framework distinguishes four dimensions of integration: (1) policy frame, (2), subsystem involvement, (3) policy goals, and (4) policy instruments. For each of these dimensions, we describe different manifestations that are associated with lesser or more advanced degrees of policy integration within a governance system. Apart from offering an innovative theoretical approach that does justice to the dynamic and oftentimes asynchronous nature of integration processes, the framework allows for holding decision-makers accountable for promises they make about enhancing policy integration. Simultaneously, it is argued that the merit of lower degrees of integration should not be underestimated, as these may sometimes be the most feasible or appropriate for the governance of a cross-cutting problem.
收起
摘要 :
The ambitious goal of the Paris Agreement demands action across all policy domains and even scrutinizes traditionally privileged ones, including agriculture. Is agriculture playing an increasingly important role in climate policie...
展开
The ambitious goal of the Paris Agreement demands action across all policy domains and even scrutinizes traditionally privileged ones, including agriculture. Is agriculture playing an increasingly important role in climate policies? Existing research argues that the insulated agricultural domain is opening up and becoming more multidimensional. Whether such developments are visible in the comparatively new climate domain, however, has not been systematically assessed yet. This article seeks to advance the academic debate on policy integration by examining the opposite direction of integration, i.e. the integration of agricultural components into climate policies. To assess coordination efforts, I investigate which ministries are represented in climate policies. I provide a global perspective by analyzing over 1000 climate policies from 1990 to 2017 and find that climate policies with mentions of agriculture are increasing. This is particularly true of EU and African countries, and since 2005. However, half of the data made no reference to agriculture and hardly ever mentioned agricultural ministries. I argue that agricultural ministries' involvement in climate policymaking is crucial to the meaningful achievement of agri-climate objectives. The fragmented picture suggests that, while climate policies are becoming more multidimensional, both domains continue to co-exist rather than to merge into an entity.
收起
摘要 :
Has the Swedish Climate Policy Framework - including the new Swedish Climate Act - adopted in June 2017, been conducive to advancing climate mitigation, and if so, to what extent and in which aspects? Although Sweden is often desc...
展开
Has the Swedish Climate Policy Framework - including the new Swedish Climate Act - adopted in June 2017, been conducive to advancing climate mitigation, and if so, to what extent and in which aspects? Although Sweden is often described as a frontrunner in climate work, several evaluations prior to the adoption of the Climate Policy Framework and the Climate Act concluded that Swedish climate policy has suffered from both implementation and monitoring deficits, as well as from the fact that climate goals and strategies were non-legally binding. Taken together, such deficits make the stable, long-term prioritizing of climate mitigation over other sector policies increasingly difficult, thus limiting the possibilities to reach future targets. This article focuses on three dimensions of climate policy integration - assessing policy processes, outputs and outcomes - with the aim to analyse political developments and policy outcomes in Sweden after the implementation of the Climate Policy Framework and the Climate Act. The results of a comprehensive set of interviews with policy experts and high-level decision-makers show that the framework is believed to have had important effects, mainly in terms of changing both policy language, cross-sector coordination, and increasing the prioritization of the climate issue. Thus the study (1) contributes to a better theoretical and empirical understanding of Climate Change Acts as instruments for climate policy integration; (2) paves the way for future comparative studies; and (3) presents important practical lessons for policy makers on the effects of legal mechanisms to achieve climate mitigation. Key policy insights Climate Acts provide a legal framework for governmental climate activities. A comprehensive framework including three dimensions of climate policy integration - assessing process, output and outcome, should be used to evaluate Climate Act effects. The Swedish Climate Policy Framework and Climate Act has induced a weak type of climate policy integration, showing effects on climate policy debate, coordination, policy measure implementation and policy support. The framework sends strong signals of political will to address climate change, but the non-inclusion of targets and instruments in the Swedish Climate Act is causing debate and insecurity regarding what policy instruments will be implemented
收起
摘要 :
Environmental policy integration (EPI) refers to the incorporation of environmental concerns in non-environmental policy sectors. EPI aims to avoid conflicts between environmental and other policy objectives and to enhance environ...
展开
Environmental policy integration (EPI) refers to the incorporation of environmental concerns in non-environmental policy sectors. EPI aims to avoid conflicts between environmental and other policy objectives and to enhance environmental policy by directly targeting the driving forces of environmental degradation. In practice, however, the potential of EPI has not been fully utilized. Scientific knowledge of EPI is found in several, largely isolated, bodies of literature (on EPI, climate policy integration and environmental impact assessment/strategic environmental assessment) and does not provide an adequate answer to the question of what EPI strategies work, where and why. A systematic framework based on comparative empirical research is required to contribute to more effective EPI strategies. In this paper we formulate a research agenda for the development of such a framework on the governance of EPI that is robust, i.e. builds on other theories of environmental governance and policy change and that envisages large-scale, international comparative empirical analysis.
收起
摘要 :
Abstract This article explores the role of participation by indigenous peoples in Latin America in the political process of Environmental Policy Integration (EPI). Although the benefits of participation have been largely taken for...
展开
Abstract This article explores the role of participation by indigenous peoples in Latin America in the political process of Environmental Policy Integration (EPI). Although the benefits of participation have been largely taken for granted, this article shows that participation makes the policy integration process even more complex. By selecting two cases of clean energy infrastructure projects (a wind power plant and a natural gas pipeline) in Mexico, whose policy processes included an indigenous consultation, this article traces the competing problem definitions in public policy debates and the resulting policy frame in relation to sustainable development. The goal is to assess the ways that indigenous consultation functions as a procedural EPI instrument aimed at boosting participation from a public that is largely composed by indigenous communities in the decision-making stage. This article contributes to the existing literature on policy integration in two ways: (1) it explores the role of participation by non-state actors in the policy integration process, especially in highly politicized policy areas such as energy and the environment, and (2) it identifies the limitations of applicability of policy integration literature, particularly in contexts where state–society interactions are radically different compared to Western countries, including Latin American countries inhabited by indigenous groups.
收起
摘要 :
Governments have struggled to successfully implement large-scale integrated policy approaches, often resulting in policy failure. However, there has been little investigation into why this is the case. This paper links the discour...
展开
Governments have struggled to successfully implement large-scale integrated policy approaches, often resulting in policy failure. However, there has been little investigation into why this is the case. This paper links the discourse on policy failure and integrated policy approaches and identifies what aspects of 'integration' cause failure. It argues that programme failure occurs in integrated policy approaches when there are unachievable goals or timelines, poor policy design and/or when the incorrect types of processes are selected. Policy process failure is particularly evident in an integrated policy's implementation where multi-sector and multi-level issues arise, whereas failure in the politics of integrated approaches is found in political gain and blame avoidance of key decision-makers. This framework is then applied to Australia's Oceans Policy demonstrating that it was unable to achieve its original objectives; the layering process of new policy and institutions on established silos was ineffective; and the new institutions did not have the integrative capacity required for successful implementation. The Australian experience reveals that an institutional model that can deal with multiple issues, jurisdictions and sectors holistically is essential if integrative capacity is to be achieved.
收起
摘要 :
Abstract The paradigmatic shift from traditional flood defense toward integrated flood risk management has widened the sectors and policies affected and has spurred a growing interest of scholars to understand cross-sectoral flood...
展开
Abstract The paradigmatic shift from traditional flood defense toward integrated flood risk management has widened the sectors and policies affected and has spurred a growing interest of scholars to understand cross-sectoral flood policy integration. In this paper we argue that the cross-sectoral goal relationship—ranging from complementary to conflictual policy goals—is a useful conceptual framework to understand (1) the policy integration challenge at hands and (2) in particular the unfolding policy integration from a processual perspective. For our empirical analysis we identify three policy subsystems that are highly important for sectoral interplay in flood risk management: agriculture, hydropower generation, and spatial planning. Using Austria as a case study we illustrate the goal relationships and sectoral policy integration challenges in each of these fields of interaction. Based on 45 expert interviews in the selected policy sectors we provide useful insights into the current processes of flood policy integration. The empirical findings from our case studies show that sectoral goal relationships and the nature of the policy integration challenge drive flood policy integration. More pronounced land use conflicts are more strongly reflected in different actor interests, policy frames, policy goals, and the choice of policy instruments. Sectoral goal relationships are an important factor to explain the unfolding policy integration process. Complementary policy goals result in rather informal, harmonious integrative negotiations on strengthening synergies by using soft policy instruments. On the contrary, conflictual policy goals lead to more formal negotiations among the affected sectors relying on hard, regulative instruments.
收起
原文获取