Pub Date : 2022-11-16DOI: 10.1080/25741292.2022.2146916
Jamelia Harris, A. Lawson
Abstract Tackling climate change and environmental sustainability requires collaboration of multiple stakeholders, across several sectors. Traditionally, government responses to environmental issues have tended to come from regulation, taxation, and subsidies. This article is concerned with taking a holistic approach to integrating sustainability into government policy and practice through public financial management (PFM) and proposes incorporating features of a landscape approach, a concept from conservation and ecology studies, into PFM. The article sets out the many benefits of integrating landscape approaches with PFM and provides an operational framework for policy practitioners. In so doing, the public sector is positioned as one of many sectors in the landscape, and government public finances as a tool to directly address climate change, and to support initiatives driven by non-governmental actors.
{"title":"Mainstreaming sustainability in public finances: where PFM meets landscape approaches","authors":"Jamelia Harris, A. Lawson","doi":"10.1080/25741292.2022.2146916","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/25741292.2022.2146916","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Tackling climate change and environmental sustainability requires collaboration of multiple stakeholders, across several sectors. Traditionally, government responses to environmental issues have tended to come from regulation, taxation, and subsidies. This article is concerned with taking a holistic approach to integrating sustainability into government policy and practice through public financial management (PFM) and proposes incorporating features of a landscape approach, a concept from conservation and ecology studies, into PFM. The article sets out the many benefits of integrating landscape approaches with PFM and provides an operational framework for policy practitioners. In so doing, the public sector is positioned as one of many sectors in the landscape, and government public finances as a tool to directly address climate change, and to support initiatives driven by non-governmental actors.","PeriodicalId":20397,"journal":{"name":"Policy Design and Practice","volume":"6 1","pages":"313 - 327"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45784443","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-07DOI: 10.1080/25741292.2022.2139952
Sally Washington
Abstract The Covid-19 pandemic highlighted the importance of good systems for policy and decision-making. An effective policy system depends on robust policy capability. This article articulates key dimensions of policy capability based on the practical experience of policy practitioners from a range of jurisdictions. It briefly draws on the literature on policy making and organizational capability before situating the key components of policy capability as mutually reinforcing parts of a policy capability infrastructure. These include “supply side” components of leadership, policy quality systems, people capability, and effective internal and external engagement, as well as the “demand side” component of the political administrative interface that shapes and is shaped by policy capability in the public service. This framing of policy capability as an infrastructure broadens the definition of policy capability from a narrow focus on people and skills to a systemic approach that includes the range of systems and processes that enable and support good government decision-making. The article argues that the policy capability infrastructure could serve as a useful and generic analytical framework for describing, assessing, and improving policy capability in teams, organizations, or across an entire public service. Policy leaders are invited to test the framework and share their insights and results, including with colleagues in academia. If it works in practice, it might also work in theory.
{"title":"An infrastructure for building policy capability – lessons from practice","authors":"Sally Washington","doi":"10.1080/25741292.2022.2139952","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/25741292.2022.2139952","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The Covid-19 pandemic highlighted the importance of good systems for policy and decision-making. An effective policy system depends on robust policy capability. This article articulates key dimensions of policy capability based on the practical experience of policy practitioners from a range of jurisdictions. It briefly draws on the literature on policy making and organizational capability before situating the key components of policy capability as mutually reinforcing parts of a policy capability infrastructure. These include “supply side” components of leadership, policy quality systems, people capability, and effective internal and external engagement, as well as the “demand side” component of the political administrative interface that shapes and is shaped by policy capability in the public service. This framing of policy capability as an infrastructure broadens the definition of policy capability from a narrow focus on people and skills to a systemic approach that includes the range of systems and processes that enable and support good government decision-making. The article argues that the policy capability infrastructure could serve as a useful and generic analytical framework for describing, assessing, and improving policy capability in teams, organizations, or across an entire public service. Policy leaders are invited to test the framework and share their insights and results, including with colleagues in academia. If it works in practice, it might also work in theory.","PeriodicalId":20397,"journal":{"name":"Policy Design and Practice","volume":"6 1","pages":"283 - 298"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41464914","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-28DOI: 10.1080/25741292.2022.2139951
Ambika P. Adhikari
Abstract United Nations data shows that the number of global diaspora had reached 281 million in 2020, and it continues to grow. Diasporas have contributed significantly to the development of their native lands through remittance, technology and knowledge transfer, philanthropy, and diplomacy. Many countries have designed policies to engage the diaspora more deeply by providing concessional citizenship and visa regimes, and attractive investment opportunities. Yet, there is room for improvement in policies and programs to enhance these prospects. Since the 2010s, the size and expanse of Nepali diaspora has grown dramatically, the number of permanent expatriates in the more developed parts of the world reaching about 800,000 in 2022. In addition, at any time, there are 2–3 million temporary migrants from Nepal working in foreign countries outside of India. With the enhanced level of education and experience, and their growing economic prowess, the Nepali diaspora is in a strong position to become a significant partner in Nepal’s development efforts. The diaspora’s potential contribution to Nepal’s development remains vastly underutilized for mainly two policy-related reasons. The Nepali government’s supporting policies, regulations, and programs to effectively engage the diaspora are inadequate. The diaspora groups too have not been able to fully assess and chart out their capacities, and create proper institutional, and policy mechanisms to mobilize their resources. This paper reviews some examples of diaspora in development, and the current situation of the Nepali diaspora, and provide recommendations for improving the strategies, policies, and programs both for the diaspora, and the Nepali government, and for similar developing countries.
{"title":"The Nepali diaspora’s role in national development","authors":"Ambika P. Adhikari","doi":"10.1080/25741292.2022.2139951","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/25741292.2022.2139951","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract United Nations data shows that the number of global diaspora had reached 281 million in 2020, and it continues to grow. Diasporas have contributed significantly to the development of their native lands through remittance, technology and knowledge transfer, philanthropy, and diplomacy. Many countries have designed policies to engage the diaspora more deeply by providing concessional citizenship and visa regimes, and attractive investment opportunities. Yet, there is room for improvement in policies and programs to enhance these prospects. Since the 2010s, the size and expanse of Nepali diaspora has grown dramatically, the number of permanent expatriates in the more developed parts of the world reaching about 800,000 in 2022. In addition, at any time, there are 2–3 million temporary migrants from Nepal working in foreign countries outside of India. With the enhanced level of education and experience, and their growing economic prowess, the Nepali diaspora is in a strong position to become a significant partner in Nepal’s development efforts. The diaspora’s potential contribution to Nepal’s development remains vastly underutilized for mainly two policy-related reasons. The Nepali government’s supporting policies, regulations, and programs to effectively engage the diaspora are inadequate. The diaspora groups too have not been able to fully assess and chart out their capacities, and create proper institutional, and policy mechanisms to mobilize their resources. This paper reviews some examples of diaspora in development, and the current situation of the Nepali diaspora, and provide recommendations for improving the strategies, policies, and programs both for the diaspora, and the Nepali government, and for similar developing countries.","PeriodicalId":20397,"journal":{"name":"Policy Design and Practice","volume":"6 1","pages":"357 - 380"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42346491","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/25741292.2022.2144808
Lara Salinas
Abstract The appetite for design in local government saw a rise in the late 2000s with the global financial crisis and the resulting economic austerity that required local government services to innovate. This appetite has been exacerbated by the awakening to the global climate emergency and inclusion of action plans to reduce carbon emissions at a local scale; and of course, the global health crisis caused by Covid-19. Local governments are responsible for responding to these unprecedented challenges ensuring continued and equitable access to public services for residents. Yet, design for local public policy is a nascent field of practice. This paper presents an approach to design for local policy characterized by “world-building preferable futures through Critical Service Design” which proposes a novel approach to participatory place-based local policymaking. This design-led methodology has been developed through theory and practice, informed by critical reflection on the successes and shortcomings of collaborative design practice research with public servants in England and developed iteratively at Service Futures Lab, as part of the postgraduate service design curriculum at London College of Communication. The paper aims to contribute to a growing a body of academic literature on design for local governance, supporting collaboration between design education and local government and the development of dedicated training programmes on design for policy.
{"title":"Designing for local policy: exploring preferable futures in the UK","authors":"Lara Salinas","doi":"10.1080/25741292.2022.2144808","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/25741292.2022.2144808","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The appetite for design in local government saw a rise in the late 2000s with the global financial crisis and the resulting economic austerity that required local government services to innovate. This appetite has been exacerbated by the awakening to the global climate emergency and inclusion of action plans to reduce carbon emissions at a local scale; and of course, the global health crisis caused by Covid-19. Local governments are responsible for responding to these unprecedented challenges ensuring continued and equitable access to public services for residents. Yet, design for local public policy is a nascent field of practice. This paper presents an approach to design for local policy characterized by “world-building preferable futures through Critical Service Design” which proposes a novel approach to participatory place-based local policymaking. This design-led methodology has been developed through theory and practice, informed by critical reflection on the successes and shortcomings of collaborative design practice research with public servants in England and developed iteratively at Service Futures Lab, as part of the postgraduate service design curriculum at London College of Communication. The paper aims to contribute to a growing a body of academic literature on design for local governance, supporting collaboration between design education and local government and the development of dedicated training programmes on design for policy.","PeriodicalId":20397,"journal":{"name":"Policy Design and Practice","volume":"5 1","pages":"516 - 528"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49420848","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/25741292.2022.2157126
Nidhi Singh Rathore
Abstract Can community-centered design practice create a space to channel creativity into building community, dismantle power structures, and facilitate conversations to create equitable opportunities? This paper investigates how methodologies and tools like community-centered design, qualitative interrogations, and emotional intelligence can give practitioners the tools to reimagine constituents’ relationships with their municipalities. Using community-centered design practice and principles, the author imagines how practitioners can break down privileged perspectives and invite marginalized communities into policy-centered decision-making. While design practice can be an exclusive bubble, just like policy, the intersection of the two has led many cities worldwide to embrace human-centered design. And although Human-centered design can challenge sterile processes, it is often unable to tackle the complexities of power hoarding, marginalization, and other challenges faced by local governments. As a result, it limits design practitioners from approaching obstinate problems and centers power on practitioners’ positionality and decision-making, instead of the communities and individuals impacted by the systemic inadequacies. This paper questions the same by investigating the role of design practitioners in the public sector and community-centered design. Policymaking cannot be innovative or thoughtful without design. Design interrogation in government should embrace vulnerability, transparency, and intentionality. This paper highlights how community-centered designers have the ability and sensitivity to challenge complacent institutions and their lack of human-centered systems. Using case studies from three U.S. cities (Philadelphia, New York, and Baltimore), this paper explores how design gives us mechanisms that can activate a government by the people, of the people, and for the people.
{"title":"Dismantling traditional approaches: community-centered design in local government","authors":"Nidhi Singh Rathore","doi":"10.1080/25741292.2022.2157126","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/25741292.2022.2157126","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Can community-centered design practice create a space to channel creativity into building community, dismantle power structures, and facilitate conversations to create equitable opportunities? This paper investigates how methodologies and tools like community-centered design, qualitative interrogations, and emotional intelligence can give practitioners the tools to reimagine constituents’ relationships with their municipalities. Using community-centered design practice and principles, the author imagines how practitioners can break down privileged perspectives and invite marginalized communities into policy-centered decision-making. While design practice can be an exclusive bubble, just like policy, the intersection of the two has led many cities worldwide to embrace human-centered design. And although Human-centered design can challenge sterile processes, it is often unable to tackle the complexities of power hoarding, marginalization, and other challenges faced by local governments. As a result, it limits design practitioners from approaching obstinate problems and centers power on practitioners’ positionality and decision-making, instead of the communities and individuals impacted by the systemic inadequacies. This paper questions the same by investigating the role of design practitioners in the public sector and community-centered design. Policymaking cannot be innovative or thoughtful without design. Design interrogation in government should embrace vulnerability, transparency, and intentionality. This paper highlights how community-centered designers have the ability and sensitivity to challenge complacent institutions and their lack of human-centered systems. Using case studies from three U.S. cities (Philadelphia, New York, and Baltimore), this paper explores how design gives us mechanisms that can activate a government by the people, of the people, and for the people.","PeriodicalId":20397,"journal":{"name":"Policy Design and Practice","volume":"5 1","pages":"550 - 564"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46269852","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/25741292.2022.2141490
B. Şahin, Gulname Turan
Abstract Turkey’s central government’s administrative structure includes a one-of-a-kind autonomous unit called muhtarlık that spans rural and urban neighborhoods with over 50,000 posts all over the country. Despite being a part of the central administration, muhtarlık is administered by local elections and is considered a hybrid institution that mediates citizens, the local government and the central administration. Muhtarlık originates in the late Ottoman Empire in 1829 as an attempt in modernizing state hierarchies and manages to continue its existence till now as the smallest unit of the administrative structure. However, the long history also causes blurred boundaries for the space the institution occupies. This paper focuses on this blurred space of muhtarlık as a possible policy making incubator and an accessible space for all the relevant stakeholders. In particular, the paper follows through the case study of two very different muhtarlıks in Istanbul to understand the nature of this unique administrative unit. The research concludes that the geographical, social and relational proximity of the muhtarlık with the public as a stop gap unit creates an immense networking example. The paper contributes to the interdisciplinary approaches to policy making by analyzing the juxtaposition of the two processes relevant to policy making and design, the policy analysis and the design thinking process, to model a dynamic policy making process that provides a participative approach. The analysis and observation help explore the possibilities of a space by combining valuable experiences of citizen engagement, governmental tradition and designerly thinking.
{"title":"Blurred boundaries: Muhtarlık as the right space for policy making in Turkey","authors":"B. Şahin, Gulname Turan","doi":"10.1080/25741292.2022.2141490","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/25741292.2022.2141490","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Turkey’s central government’s administrative structure includes a one-of-a-kind autonomous unit called muhtarlık that spans rural and urban neighborhoods with over 50,000 posts all over the country. Despite being a part of the central administration, muhtarlık is administered by local elections and is considered a hybrid institution that mediates citizens, the local government and the central administration. Muhtarlık originates in the late Ottoman Empire in 1829 as an attempt in modernizing state hierarchies and manages to continue its existence till now as the smallest unit of the administrative structure. However, the long history also causes blurred boundaries for the space the institution occupies. This paper focuses on this blurred space of muhtarlık as a possible policy making incubator and an accessible space for all the relevant stakeholders. In particular, the paper follows through the case study of two very different muhtarlıks in Istanbul to understand the nature of this unique administrative unit. The research concludes that the geographical, social and relational proximity of the muhtarlık with the public as a stop gap unit creates an immense networking example. The paper contributes to the interdisciplinary approaches to policy making by analyzing the juxtaposition of the two processes relevant to policy making and design, the policy analysis and the design thinking process, to model a dynamic policy making process that provides a participative approach. The analysis and observation help explore the possibilities of a space by combining valuable experiences of citizen engagement, governmental tradition and designerly thinking.","PeriodicalId":20397,"journal":{"name":"Policy Design and Practice","volume":"5 1","pages":"427 - 443"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44545681","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/25741292.2022.2141487
Federico Vaz, M. Koria, S. Prendeville
Abstract Whilst design politics is an increasingly topical focus in the design field, in practice, design for policy has been normatively presented as a people-centric approach to public policymaking devoid of political or ideological agendas. Up to now, design for policy has exclusively been conceived as embedded within governmental structures, thus adopting a technocratic, internal, and top-down approach to, and understanding of, public policymaking. We argue that most often, this understanding and practice of design for policy establishes and mediates public problems from the standpoint of the government body addressing those problems. In this paper, we take a new and distinct point of departure to design for policy in which design is implicated in the practice of policymaking from below through processes of collective action. Design for Policy from Below moves from an intra-governmental lens to a negotiated exchange between social actors and government. In turn, this informs strategic collective action required to gain political support and leverage efforts to pressure power structures to acknowledge and adopt policy frames and options. To this end, we examine the conflictual power dynamics and negotiation-based approaches to influencing government policymaking processes and model the messy interplay between government-led policymaking and the activities of social innovators aiming at changing policy outcomes. Finally, we synthesize these insights into a conceptual model offering a novel viewpoint on how we can more critically understand the politics at play in design theory and practice engaged with policymaking.
{"title":"‘Design for policy’ from below: grassroots framing and political negotiation","authors":"Federico Vaz, M. Koria, S. Prendeville","doi":"10.1080/25741292.2022.2141487","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/25741292.2022.2141487","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Whilst design politics is an increasingly topical focus in the design field, in practice, design for policy has been normatively presented as a people-centric approach to public policymaking devoid of political or ideological agendas. Up to now, design for policy has exclusively been conceived as embedded within governmental structures, thus adopting a technocratic, internal, and top-down approach to, and understanding of, public policymaking. We argue that most often, this understanding and practice of design for policy establishes and mediates public problems from the standpoint of the government body addressing those problems. In this paper, we take a new and distinct point of departure to design for policy in which design is implicated in the practice of policymaking from below through processes of collective action. Design for Policy from Below moves from an intra-governmental lens to a negotiated exchange between social actors and government. In turn, this informs strategic collective action required to gain political support and leverage efforts to pressure power structures to acknowledge and adopt policy frames and options. To this end, we examine the conflictual power dynamics and negotiation-based approaches to influencing government policymaking processes and model the messy interplay between government-led policymaking and the activities of social innovators aiming at changing policy outcomes. Finally, we synthesize these insights into a conceptual model offering a novel viewpoint on how we can more critically understand the politics at play in design theory and practice engaged with policymaking.","PeriodicalId":20397,"journal":{"name":"Policy Design and Practice","volume":"5 1","pages":"410 - 426"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48157384","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/25741292.2022.2141489
Dr. Willhemina Wahlin, Dr. Emma Blomkamp
Abstract In 2021, faced with rolling changes to the rules of community engagement due to COVID restrictions, Port Macquarie-Hastings Council, a local government on the Mid North Coast of New South Wales (NSW), Australia, embarked on the creation of their new Cultural Plan. With State Government legislation requiring local governments to create strategic planning with documented community engagement, an opportunity presented itself for the researchers to work with council and community. In this research, we combined a modified Design Thinking model, Co-Design Principles and Harvard Kennedy School’s Public Policy Design Arc. Our aim was to explore, firstly, whether this approach might build the capacity of both council staff and community representatives in the use of design methods for strategic planning, and secondly, whether it could provide a framework of genuine community engagement for council staff. This paper discusses how and why these approaches were adapted for a local government to create the ‘SITT Model’ and how council staff and community representatives responded to the process.
{"title":"Making global local: Global methods, local planning, and the importance of genuine community engagement in Australia","authors":"Dr. Willhemina Wahlin, Dr. Emma Blomkamp","doi":"10.1080/25741292.2022.2141489","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/25741292.2022.2141489","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In 2021, faced with rolling changes to the rules of community engagement due to COVID restrictions, Port Macquarie-Hastings Council, a local government on the Mid North Coast of New South Wales (NSW), Australia, embarked on the creation of their new Cultural Plan. With State Government legislation requiring local governments to create strategic planning with documented community engagement, an opportunity presented itself for the researchers to work with council and community. In this research, we combined a modified Design Thinking model, Co-Design Principles and Harvard Kennedy School’s Public Policy Design Arc. Our aim was to explore, firstly, whether this approach might build the capacity of both council staff and community representatives in the use of design methods for strategic planning, and secondly, whether it could provide a framework of genuine community engagement for council staff. This paper discusses how and why these approaches were adapted for a local government to create the ‘SITT Model’ and how council staff and community representatives responded to the process.","PeriodicalId":20397,"journal":{"name":"Policy Design and Practice","volume":"5 1","pages":"483 - 503"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45589654","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/25741292.2022.2141488
A. Whicher, P. Swiatek
Abstract “Perhaps Policy Designer really should be a new job title” mused Bason, the former Director of the Danish Government’s policy lab back in 2014. In 2017, Policy Lab in the UK Cabinet Office advertised the first UK job for a “Policy Designer” requesting skills, such as visualizing complex data, creating and testing prototypes in policy delivery environments, and facilitating workshops with people of all backgrounds. Since then, many UK central government departments have followed suit and by 2022, around 50 Policy Designers work in various government departments. According to Nesta, there are more than 200 government labs around the world and ∼60 in Europe. Around ten of these are concentrated in UK central government and the first UK policy labs opened their doors in 2014 in the Cabinet Office and the Northern Ireland Department of Finance. However, the design for policy agenda is also on the rise in Eastern Europe; and Latvia has been identified as an example of good practice by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). In 2018, the Latvian Innovation Laboratory was opened in the State Chancellery and now in 2022, it embarks on its third distinct phase of operation. This article charts the rise of government labs in the UK and Latvia to explore different experiences and identify good practices in building capability for policy design across Europe. The purpose of this research is not to make a comparison between the two countries, as they are on very different stages of their journeys, but to identify strengths and weaknesses in the supply and demand for policy design to drawn out lesson learned for other European countries. What has been the role of policy labs in the rise of the policy designer in the UK and Latvia? To what extent is there a professional community of policy designers in either country? Bobrow outlines seven preconditions for a professional community: self-identification as a policy designer, a professional association, journals, standards for certification, broader attribution of special expertise, a core foundation of knowledge, and capacity building programmes. This article explores the emergence of policy labs and policy designers in the UK and Latvia, the attributes, skillset, challenges, opportunities, and whether according to Bobrow’s criteria policy design is a professional community.
{"title":"Rise of the policy designer—lessons from the UK and Latvia","authors":"A. Whicher, P. Swiatek","doi":"10.1080/25741292.2022.2141488","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/25741292.2022.2141488","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract “Perhaps Policy Designer really should be a new job title” mused Bason, the former Director of the Danish Government’s policy lab back in 2014. In 2017, Policy Lab in the UK Cabinet Office advertised the first UK job for a “Policy Designer” requesting skills, such as visualizing complex data, creating and testing prototypes in policy delivery environments, and facilitating workshops with people of all backgrounds. Since then, many UK central government departments have followed suit and by 2022, around 50 Policy Designers work in various government departments. According to Nesta, there are more than 200 government labs around the world and ∼60 in Europe. Around ten of these are concentrated in UK central government and the first UK policy labs opened their doors in 2014 in the Cabinet Office and the Northern Ireland Department of Finance. However, the design for policy agenda is also on the rise in Eastern Europe; and Latvia has been identified as an example of good practice by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). In 2018, the Latvian Innovation Laboratory was opened in the State Chancellery and now in 2022, it embarks on its third distinct phase of operation. This article charts the rise of government labs in the UK and Latvia to explore different experiences and identify good practices in building capability for policy design across Europe. The purpose of this research is not to make a comparison between the two countries, as they are on very different stages of their journeys, but to identify strengths and weaknesses in the supply and demand for policy design to drawn out lesson learned for other European countries. What has been the role of policy labs in the rise of the policy designer in the UK and Latvia? To what extent is there a professional community of policy designers in either country? Bobrow outlines seven preconditions for a professional community: self-identification as a policy designer, a professional association, journals, standards for certification, broader attribution of special expertise, a core foundation of knowledge, and capacity building programmes. This article explores the emergence of policy labs and policy designers in the UK and Latvia, the attributes, skillset, challenges, opportunities, and whether according to Bobrow’s criteria policy design is a professional community.","PeriodicalId":20397,"journal":{"name":"Policy Design and Practice","volume":"5 1","pages":"466 - 482"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43206704","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/25741292.2022.2144817
Justyna Starostka, Amalia de Götzen, Nicola Morelli
Abstract In recent years, design in the public sector has gained popularity amongst policymakers as well as among scholars. Design is perceived as a promising way to create more successful policies and public services. Despite growing popularity, a critical reflection on benefits and challenges, as well as about different understandings of design practices in the public sector, are still lacking. Therefore, this paper aims to investigate different ways public organizations engage and introduce design approach. In this paper we present 3 municipalities in Denmark and the way design is understood and implemented in organizational work practices. Our contribution to theory is twofold. First, our research responds to the recent call of different researchers to investigate how design is operationalized and drawn upon in practice by different organizations in the public sector. Second, our research contributes to the design field, by showing barriers of implementations, different benefits and challenges connected with design in organizations with no prior experience in design.
{"title":"Design thinking in the public sector – a case study of three Danish municipalities","authors":"Justyna Starostka, Amalia de Götzen, Nicola Morelli","doi":"10.1080/25741292.2022.2144817","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/25741292.2022.2144817","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In recent years, design in the public sector has gained popularity amongst policymakers as well as among scholars. Design is perceived as a promising way to create more successful policies and public services. Despite growing popularity, a critical reflection on benefits and challenges, as well as about different understandings of design practices in the public sector, are still lacking. Therefore, this paper aims to investigate different ways public organizations engage and introduce design approach. In this paper we present 3 municipalities in Denmark and the way design is understood and implemented in organizational work practices. Our contribution to theory is twofold. First, our research responds to the recent call of different researchers to investigate how design is operationalized and drawn upon in practice by different organizations in the public sector. Second, our research contributes to the design field, by showing barriers of implementations, different benefits and challenges connected with design in organizations with no prior experience in design.","PeriodicalId":20397,"journal":{"name":"Policy Design and Practice","volume":"5 1","pages":"504 - 515"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45357200","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：