Expert legitimacy and competing legitimation in Italian school reforms

IF 5.7 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Policy and Society Pub Date : 2023-08-31 DOI:10.1093/polsoc/puad024
Maria Tullia Galanti
{"title":"Expert legitimacy and competing legitimation in Italian school reforms","authors":"Maria Tullia Galanti","doi":"10.1093/polsoc/puad024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the face of the complexities of problem-solving , experts are gaining centrality in policymaking (Weiss, 1979). At the same time, they are increasingly challenged in their legitimacy, which is not only technical but also political. Challenges to the legitimacy of experts suggest that other types of legitimacy are important for policymaking. Issues of legitimacy are particularly important for sound policymaking when the authority of experts and the value of evidence are contested and when the debate over policy solutions is particularly conflictual and ideological. In this paper, I use three exploratory cases of the use of expertise in education policy in Italy to show how policymakers design different advisory committees to enhance different types of legitimacy (epistemic, bureaucratic, and political). The findings suggest that while policymakers design advisory committees primarily to meet their legitimacy needs, the legitimacy of a decision requires different types of sources to generate consent and to allow for the impact of expertise.","PeriodicalId":47383,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Society","volume":"112 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Policy and Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/polsoc/puad024","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the face of the complexities of problem-solving , experts are gaining centrality in policymaking (Weiss, 1979). At the same time, they are increasingly challenged in their legitimacy, which is not only technical but also political. Challenges to the legitimacy of experts suggest that other types of legitimacy are important for policymaking. Issues of legitimacy are particularly important for sound policymaking when the authority of experts and the value of evidence are contested and when the debate over policy solutions is particularly conflictual and ideological. In this paper, I use three exploratory cases of the use of expertise in education policy in Italy to show how policymakers design different advisory committees to enhance different types of legitimacy (epistemic, bureaucratic, and political). The findings suggest that while policymakers design advisory committees primarily to meet their legitimacy needs, the legitimacy of a decision requires different types of sources to generate consent and to allow for the impact of expertise.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
意大利学校改革中的专家合法性与竞争合法性
面对问题解决的复杂性,专家在政策制定中获得了中心地位(Weiss, 1979)。与此同时,它们的合法性也日益受到挑战,这不仅是技术上的挑战,也是政治上的挑战。对专家合法性的挑战表明,其他类型的合法性对政策制定也很重要。当专家的权威和证据的价值受到质疑,以及关于政策解决方案的辩论特别具有冲突性和意识形态性时,合法性问题对于健全的政策制定尤其重要。在本文中,我使用了意大利在教育政策中使用专业知识的三个探索性案例来展示决策者如何设计不同的咨询委员会来增强不同类型的合法性(认识论、官僚主义和政治)。研究结果表明,虽然决策者设计咨询委员会主要是为了满足他们的合法性需求,但一项决定的合法性需要不同类型的来源来获得同意,并允许专业知识的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Policy and Society
Policy and Society Multiple-
CiteScore
18.00
自引率
6.50%
发文量
43
审稿时长
30 weeks
期刊介绍: Policy and Society is a prominent international open-access journal publishing peer-reviewed research on critical issues in policy theory and practice across local, national, and international levels. The journal seeks to comprehend the origin, functioning, and implications of policies within broader political, social, and economic contexts. It publishes themed issues regularly and, starting in 2023, will also feature non-themed individual submissions.
期刊最新文献
Exploring cultures of evidence in energy policymaking in the UK, Germany, and the Netherlands Variation in evidence use across policy sectors: the case of Brazil Policy sequencing can increase public support for ambitious climate policy Blame avoidance and credit-claiming dynamics in government policy communications: evidence from leadership tweets in four OECD countries during the 2020–2022 COVID-19 pandemic Is there a behavioral revolution in policy design? A new agenda and inventory of the behavioral toolbox
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1