首页 > 最新文献

Australian Journal of Public Administration最新文献

英文 中文
The role of discretion and street-level deliberative practices in the COVID-19 crisis response: Lessons from the Philippines 自由裁量权和街头审议做法在2019冠状病毒病危机应对中的作用:菲律宾的经验教训
IF 2.1 4区 管理学 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Pub Date : 2024-10-15 DOI: 10.1111/1467-8500.12671
Antonio D. Salazar Jr.
<div> <section> <p>This study investigates the role of frontline workers, such as the <i>Barangay</i> Health Emergency Response Teams (BHERTs) in the Philippines, as street-level bureaucrats (SLBs) in implementing COVID-19 community quarantine policies. Drawing from SLB theory and deliberative policy analysis (DPA), I explore how SLBs adapted to rapidly changing conditions by exercising discretion in interpreting and adapting the implementation of nationally formulated pandemic management policies to meet local realities. I argue that SLBs functioned as deliberative practitioners, mediating between national policies and local realities while engaging in deliberative practices with their clients. Using the experience of BHERTs in Palompon, Leyte in the Philippines as an illustrative case, I identified the policy mandates (policy-as-written) of the BHERTs; the challenges and constraints they faced in implementing community quarantine policies; and the discretion they exercised in implementing community quarantine policies (policy-as-practiced). The findings reveal that, to meet their policy mandates and address the challenges they faced, they engaged in deliberative practices and collaborated with citizens in implementing context-specific and creative strategies. Insights from this study highlight the adaptive and deliberative potential of SLBs in crisis situations and the value of a DPA in understanding SLB theory and research. By examining SLBs’ experiences during the pandemic, this study contributes to the SLB literature and offers practical lessons to policy practitioners in facilitating deliberation and developing context-specific solutions in times of crisis.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Points for practitioners</h3> <div> <ul> <li>The COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent government response in the Philippines have increased the challenges faced by street-level bureaucrats (SLBs), including resource scarcity, organisational and political pressure, public resistance, and the risk of exposure to the virus.</li> <li>SLBs have shown their capacity to apply discretion and collaborate with their clients to resolve their own and the client's challenges and limitations through negotiation, mediation, conflict management, and active listening. This cooperative approach empowers them to resolve common issues and together formulate effective strategies that are beneficial to all parties involved.</li> <li>Relationships outside of SLBs’ duties as state agents (i.e. socio-cultural relationships) can be a viable pathway for SLBs to implement alternative policy strategies to meet their policy mandates and address the challenges they face as they implement their mandates.</li>
本研究调查了一线工作人员,如菲律宾的Barangay卫生应急小组(BHERTs),作为街头官僚(slb)在实施COVID-19社区隔离政策中的作用。从SLB理论和审议性政策分析(DPA)中,我探讨了SLB如何通过行使自由裁量权来解释和调整国家制定的流行病管理政策的实施,以适应当地的实际情况,从而适应快速变化的条件。我认为,slb发挥了协商实践者的作用,在与客户进行协商实践的同时,在国家政策和地方现实之间进行调解。我以菲律宾莱特市帕洛蓬市城市交通中心的经验为例,确定了城市交通中心的政策任务(书面政策);在实施社区检疫政策方面面临的挑战和制约;以及他们在实施社区隔离政策(政策实践)时行使的自由裁量权。调查结果表明,为了履行其政策任务并应对所面临的挑战,它们参与了审议实践,并与公民合作实施了具体情况和创造性战略。本研究的见解强调了SLB在危机情况下的适应和审议潜力,以及DPA对理解SLB理论和研究的价值。通过审查SLB在大流行期间的经验,本研究为SLB文献做出了贡献,并为政策从业者在危机时期促进审议和制定针对具体情况的解决方案提供了实践经验。2019冠状病毒病大流行以及随后菲律宾政府的应对措施增加了街头官僚面临的挑战,包括资源短缺、组织和政治压力、公众抵制以及接触病毒的风险。slb已经展示了他们运用自由裁量权和与客户合作的能力,通过谈判、调解、冲突管理和积极倾听来解决他们自己和客户的挑战和限制。这种合作方式使他们能够解决共同的问题,并共同制定有利于所有有关各方的有效战略。slb作为国家代理人的职责之外的关系(即社会文化关系)可以成为slb实施替代政策战略的可行途径,以满足其政策任务并解决其在执行任务时面临的挑战。相互竞争的价值体系、知识主张和情感叙述,再加上治理危机,决定了疫情等危机背景下政策过程的复杂性和非正式性。虽然slb通过审议实践证明他们有能力创造性地解决他们遇到的挑战,但这不应成为政府在优先考虑、保障和维护他们的福利方面缺乏行动的理由。
{"title":"The role of discretion and street-level deliberative practices in the COVID-19 crisis response: Lessons from the Philippines","authors":"Antonio D. Salazar Jr.","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12671","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12671","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;div&gt;\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;This study investigates the role of frontline workers, such as the &lt;i&gt;Barangay&lt;/i&gt; Health Emergency Response Teams (BHERTs) in the Philippines, as street-level bureaucrats (SLBs) in implementing COVID-19 community quarantine policies. Drawing from SLB theory and deliberative policy analysis (DPA), I explore how SLBs adapted to rapidly changing conditions by exercising discretion in interpreting and adapting the implementation of nationally formulated pandemic management policies to meet local realities. I argue that SLBs functioned as deliberative practitioners, mediating between national policies and local realities while engaging in deliberative practices with their clients. Using the experience of BHERTs in Palompon, Leyte in the Philippines as an illustrative case, I identified the policy mandates (policy-as-written) of the BHERTs; the challenges and constraints they faced in implementing community quarantine policies; and the discretion they exercised in implementing community quarantine policies (policy-as-practiced). The findings reveal that, to meet their policy mandates and address the challenges they faced, they engaged in deliberative practices and collaborated with citizens in implementing context-specific and creative strategies. Insights from this study highlight the adaptive and deliberative potential of SLBs in crisis situations and the value of a DPA in understanding SLB theory and research. By examining SLBs’ experiences during the pandemic, this study contributes to the SLB literature and offers practical lessons to policy practitioners in facilitating deliberation and developing context-specific solutions in times of crisis.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Points for practitioners&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;div&gt;\u0000 &lt;ul&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;li&gt;The COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent government response in the Philippines have increased the challenges faced by street-level bureaucrats (SLBs), including resource scarcity, organisational and political pressure, public resistance, and the risk of exposure to the virus.&lt;/li&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;li&gt;SLBs have shown their capacity to apply discretion and collaborate with their clients to resolve their own and the client's challenges and limitations through negotiation, mediation, conflict management, and active listening. This cooperative approach empowers them to resolve common issues and together formulate effective strategies that are beneficial to all parties involved.&lt;/li&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;li&gt;Relationships outside of SLBs’ duties as state agents (i.e. socio-cultural relationships) can be a viable pathway for SLBs to implement alternative policy strategies to meet their policy mandates and address the challenges they face as they implement their mandates.&lt;/li&gt;\u0000 \u0000 ","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":"84 4","pages":"646-669"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145646426","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Political involvement in street-level policy implementation as a two-way relationship—The effect of policy capacity 政治参与在街道层面政策执行中的双向关系——政策能力的影响
IF 2.1 4区 管理学 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Pub Date : 2024-10-15 DOI: 10.1111/1467-8500.12669
Bettina Stauffer, Susanne Hadorn
<div> <section> <p>To date, research on politicians’ influence on the work of street-level bureaucrats (SLB) and the consequences for policy implementation has mainly focused on disruptive effects of political involvement—for instance, poorer social equity in public service provision or political patronage. Our study opens up this perspective and argues that the relationship between politicians and SLB is a two-way relationship shaped by capacities of the stakeholders themselves and their organisational environment. We link SLB research with policy capacity literature. We focus on the effect of <i>political capacity</i> because this type of capacity meaningfully influences whether SLB can actively control the relationship with politicians. We ask: What is the relevance of political capacity for policy implementation? We use data from Swiss social assistance where the phenomenon of interest, that is the political involvement, is institutionalised by law within the implementing agencies. We show that political capacity at the organisational and individual level has a confidence-building effect. SLB and politicians learn how to engage with each other and how to make the most of the exchange. Politicians gain a deeper understanding and are able to politically legitimise the policy.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Points for practitioners</h3> <div> <ul> <li>Existing research on politicians’ influence on the work of street-level bureaucrats (SLB) has mainly focused on disruptive effects of political involvement—for instance, poorer social equity in public service provision or political patronage. We show that the relationship between SLB and political actors can actually lead to ‘non-disruptive’ or even positive effects on public service provision due to certain capacities of the stakeholders themselves and their institutional environment. We identify two types of capacity that foster a constructive relationship between SLB and politicians: organisational and individual political capacity.</li> <li><i>Organisational political capacity</i>: The institutional or organisational setting within which SLB and politicians implement public policy and provide public services can promote regular exchange and cooperation between these two types of stakeholders to a greater or lesser extent—or even require it (e.g. by law). If the setting is conducive, constructive contact between SLB and politicians takes place during policy implementation. Thus, SLB and politicians know each other and know how to interact, which enhances trust among them and mutual understanding of their respective duties, challenges, and interests. <i>Individual political capacity</i> arises from this as SLB learn how to use
迄今为止,关于政治家对街头官僚(SLB)工作的影响及其对政策实施的影响的研究主要集中在政治参与的破坏性影响上,例如,在公共服务提供或政治赞助方面的社会公平性较差。我们的研究开辟了这一视角,并认为政治家与SLB之间的关系是一种双向关系,受利益相关者自身能力及其组织环境的影响。我们将SLB研究与政策能力文献联系起来。我们之所以关注政治能力的影响,是因为这种类型的能力会对SLB能否主动控制与政治家的关系产生有意义的影响。我们的问题是:政治能力与政策执行的相关性是什么?我们使用瑞士社会援助的数据,在那里,利益现象,即政治参与,在执行机构内被法律制度化。我们表明,组织和个人层面的政治能力具有建立信任的效果。SLB和政治家们学习如何相互接触,以及如何充分利用交流。政客们对此有了更深入的了解,并能够在政治上使该政策合法化。现有的关于政治家对基层官僚工作影响的研究主要集中在政治参与的破坏性影响上,例如,在公共服务提供或政治庇护方面的社会公平性较差。我们表明,由于利益相关者自身及其制度环境的一定能力,SLB与政治行为者之间的关系实际上可以对公共服务提供产生“非破坏性”甚至是积极的影响。我们确定了两种促进SLB和政治家之间建设性关系的能力:组织和个人政治能力。组织政治能力:SLB和政治家执行公共政策和提供公共服务的制度或组织环境可以或多或少地促进这两类利益相关者之间的定期交流与合作,甚至要求(例如通过法律)。如果环境有利,SLB和政治家之间会在政策实施过程中进行建设性的接触。因此,SLB和政治家相互了解,知道如何互动,这增强了他们之间的信任,以及对各自职责、挑战和利益的相互理解。个人的政治能力由此产生,因为SLB学会了如何利用这种联系来满足他们的需要,即为他们的政策行动获得和维持政治支持。政治家们也从交流中受益,因为他们对各自的政策有了更深入的了解,在向公众和政界代表政策时更有信心。简而言之,研究结果表明,不同水平的能力是如何相互加强的。组织环境可以通过SLB与政治家之间的定期接触来促进政治能力。行动者必须学会相互合作,从而提高他们个人的政治能力。
{"title":"Political involvement in street-level policy implementation as a two-way relationship—The effect of policy capacity","authors":"Bettina Stauffer,&nbsp;Susanne Hadorn","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12669","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12669","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;div&gt;\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;To date, research on politicians’ influence on the work of street-level bureaucrats (SLB) and the consequences for policy implementation has mainly focused on disruptive effects of political involvement—for instance, poorer social equity in public service provision or political patronage. Our study opens up this perspective and argues that the relationship between politicians and SLB is a two-way relationship shaped by capacities of the stakeholders themselves and their organisational environment. We link SLB research with policy capacity literature. We focus on the effect of &lt;i&gt;political capacity&lt;/i&gt; because this type of capacity meaningfully influences whether SLB can actively control the relationship with politicians. We ask: What is the relevance of political capacity for policy implementation? We use data from Swiss social assistance where the phenomenon of interest, that is the political involvement, is institutionalised by law within the implementing agencies. We show that political capacity at the organisational and individual level has a confidence-building effect. SLB and politicians learn how to engage with each other and how to make the most of the exchange. Politicians gain a deeper understanding and are able to politically legitimise the policy.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Points for practitioners&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;div&gt;\u0000 &lt;ul&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;li&gt;Existing research on politicians’ influence on the work of street-level bureaucrats (SLB) has mainly focused on disruptive effects of political involvement—for instance, poorer social equity in public service provision or political patronage. We show that the relationship between SLB and political actors can actually lead to ‘non-disruptive’ or even positive effects on public service provision due to certain capacities of the stakeholders themselves and their institutional environment. We identify two types of capacity that foster a constructive relationship between SLB and politicians: organisational and individual political capacity.&lt;/li&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;li&gt;&lt;i&gt;Organisational political capacity&lt;/i&gt;: The institutional or organisational setting within which SLB and politicians implement public policy and provide public services can promote regular exchange and cooperation between these two types of stakeholders to a greater or lesser extent—or even require it (e.g. by law). If the setting is conducive, constructive contact between SLB and politicians takes place during policy implementation. Thus, SLB and politicians know each other and know how to interact, which enhances trust among them and mutual understanding of their respective duties, challenges, and interests. &lt;i&gt;Individual political capacity&lt;/i&gt; arises from this as SLB learn how to use ","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":"84 4","pages":"628-645"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-8500.12669","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145646427","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
How the political elite make decisions 政治精英是如何做决定的
IF 2.1 4区 管理学 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Pub Date : 2024-10-15 DOI: 10.1111/1467-8500.12664
Conor Wynn, Liam Smith, Catherine Killen

The political elite make policy decisions in noisy environments and under time pressure, and so are prone to using heuristics. There are conflicting schools of thought as to whether it is appropriate for them to do so. Experienced decision-makers are thought to be more effective at using heuristics, so it is possible that for the political elite with experience in a particular context, heuristic decision-making is appropriate. Yet, many politicians are asked to make decisions on matters about which they are not experts. To add to the debate, we facilitated a discussion with a highly experienced cohort of 21 current and former senior politicians, former advisers, and current and former senior bureaucrats. When presented with a carefully considered and innovative new transport network pricing policy, we sought to identify whether and, if so, how they used heuristics to make a decision. We found that they used heuristics (1) to decide whether to engage with the issue at all and (2) how to act, having made the decision to engage. We describe how these heuristics were used and discuss the implications for theory and public administration practice.

Points for practitioners

  • There is a growing body of evidence that the political elite use heuristics for decision-making and that the use of heuristics is influenced by seven factors.
  • We gained rare access to the political elite deciding on a politically risky issue and observed not only which heuristics they used, but how they used them.
  • We observed a three-step decision tree, incorporating the ‘wait-and-see’ heuristic being used to decide whether to act, and political empathy, or intuiting voter heuristics to help decide how to act.
  • We outline five options for public administrators who think that the political elite are using heuristics inappropriately for decision-making.
政治精英在嘈杂的环境和时间压力下做出政策决定,因此倾向于使用启发式。对于他们这样做是否合适,存在着相互冲突的思想流派。经验丰富的决策者被认为在使用启发式方面更有效,因此对于具有特定背景经验的政治精英来说,启发式决策可能是合适的。然而,许多政治家被要求在他们不是专家的问题上做出决定。为了增加辩论,我们促成了一场由21位现任和前任高级政治家、前任顾问、现任和前任高级官僚组成的经验丰富的讨论。当提出一个经过仔细考虑和创新的新运输网络定价政策时,我们试图确定他们是否以及如果是,他们如何使用启发式来做出决定。我们发现他们使用启发式(1)来决定是否参与这个问题,(2)在做出参与的决定后如何行动。我们描述了这些启发式是如何使用的,并讨论了理论和公共行政实践的含义。越来越多的证据表明,政治精英使用启发式进行决策,启发式的使用受到七个因素的影响。我们难得地接触到了政治精英们对一个政治风险问题的决策,不仅观察到他们使用了哪些启发式方法,还观察到他们是如何使用这些方法的。我们观察了一个三步决策树,其中包括用于决定是否采取行动的“观望”启发式,以及用于决定如何采取行动的政治同理心或直觉选民启发式。我们为那些认为政治精英不恰当地使用启发式进行决策的公共行政人员概述了五种选择。
{"title":"How the political elite make decisions","authors":"Conor Wynn,&nbsp;Liam Smith,&nbsp;Catherine Killen","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12664","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12664","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The political elite make policy decisions in noisy environments and under time pressure, and so are prone to using heuristics. There are conflicting schools of thought as to whether it is appropriate for them to do so. Experienced decision-makers are thought to be more effective at using heuristics, so it is possible that for the political elite with experience in a particular context, heuristic decision-making is appropriate. Yet, many politicians are asked to make decisions on matters about which they are not experts. To add to the debate, we facilitated a discussion with a highly experienced cohort of 21 current and former senior politicians, former advisers, and current and former senior bureaucrats. When presented with a carefully considered and innovative new transport network pricing policy, we sought to identify whether and, if so, how they used heuristics to make a decision. We found that they used heuristics (1) to decide whether to engage with the issue at all and (2) how to act, having made the decision to engage. We describe how these heuristics were used and discuss the implications for theory and public administration practice.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Points for practitioners</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <div>\u0000 <ul>\u0000 \u0000 <li>There is a growing body of evidence that the political elite use heuristics for decision-making and that the use of heuristics is influenced by seven factors.</li>\u0000 \u0000 <li>We gained rare access to the political elite deciding on a politically risky issue and observed not only which heuristics they used, but how they used them.</li>\u0000 \u0000 <li>We observed a three-step decision tree, incorporating the ‘wait-and-see’ heuristic being used to decide whether to act, and political empathy, or intuiting voter heuristics to help decide how to act.</li>\u0000 \u0000 <li>We outline five options for public administrators who think that the political elite are using heuristics inappropriately for decision-making.</li>\u0000 </ul>\u0000 </div>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":"84 3","pages":"520-538"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-8500.12664","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145038398","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Knowledge brokering for public sector reform 促进公共部门改革的知识中介
IF 2.1 4区 管理学 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Pub Date : 2024-09-11 DOI: 10.1111/1467-8500.12665
Honae Cuffe

Better use of evidence is at the centre of the ambitious Australian Public Sector Reform agenda, providing an authorising environment in which to test new ideas, tools, and approaches to bridge the research–practice gap. As the interlocutors between research and practice, knowledge brokers have a critical role to play in promoting the structural and behavioural changes necessary to build the knowledge networks and new capabilities that enable an evidence ecosystem. In particular, this article makes a case for harnessing the relational nature of knowledge brokering and trialling new mechanisms for research–practitioner collaboration and evidence innovation. It is hoped that this article can serve as the foundation for a future research and practice agenda examining how knowledge brokering operates and where university-produced research can best support evidence-based reform.

Points for practitioners

  • As the interlocutors between research and practice, knowledge brokers can encourage the cross-boundary thinking, genuine partnerships, and new capabilities to support evidence-based reform.
  • The Australian Public Sector Reform agenda provides a unique opportunity to trial new mechanisms and approaches to expand understanding of how knowledge brokering operates in practice and the conditions that support successful research–practice collaboration.
  • Mechanisms should be formal and accompanied by bureaucratic-level support and incentives, providing them with the legitimacy needed to embed new mindsets, capabilities, and ways of working.
  • A key consideration for public sector practitioners is how to establish arrangements and incentives that are mutually beneficial for researchers and practitioners alike and monitor the effectiveness of these initiatives over time.
更好地利用证据是雄心勃勃的澳大利亚公共部门改革议程的核心,它为测试新理念、新工具和新方法以弥合研究与实践之间的差距提供了授权环境。作为研究与实践之间的对话者,知识经纪人在促进建立知识网络和新能力所需的结构和行为变化方面发挥着至关重要的作用,而知识网络和新能力则是建立证据生态系统的基础。特别是,本文提出了利用知识中介的关系性质以及试验研究与实践者合作和证据创新新机制的理由。希望这篇文章可以作为未来研究与实践议程的基础,研究知识中介如何运作,以及大学生产的研究成果在哪些方面可以为循证改革提供最佳支持。澳大利亚公共部门改革议程为我们提供了一个独特的机会,可借以尝试新的机制和方法,从而进一步了解知识中介在实践中是如何运作的,以及支持研究与实践成功合作的条件。这些机制应该是正式的,并伴有官僚层面的支持和激励措施,为其提供嵌入新思维、新能力和新工作方式所需的合法性。公共部门从业人员需要考虑的一个关键问题是,如何建立对研究人员和从业人员都有利的安排和激励机制,并随着时间的推移监督这些举措的有效性。
{"title":"Knowledge brokering for public sector reform","authors":"Honae Cuffe","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12665","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1467-8500.12665","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Better use of evidence is at the centre of the ambitious Australian Public Sector Reform agenda, providing an authorising environment in which to test new ideas, tools, and approaches to bridge the research–practice gap. As the interlocutors between research and practice, knowledge brokers have a critical role to play in promoting the structural and behavioural changes necessary to build the knowledge networks and new capabilities that enable an evidence ecosystem. In particular, this article makes a case for harnessing the relational nature of knowledge brokering and trialling new mechanisms for research–practitioner collaboration and evidence innovation. It is hoped that this article can serve as the foundation for a future research and practice agenda examining how knowledge brokering operates and where university-produced research can best support evidence-based reform.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Points for practitioners</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <div>\u0000 <ul>\u0000 \u0000 <li>As the interlocutors between research and practice, knowledge brokers can encourage the cross-boundary thinking, genuine partnerships, and new capabilities to support evidence-based reform.</li>\u0000 \u0000 <li>The Australian Public Sector Reform agenda provides a unique opportunity to trial new mechanisms and approaches to expand understanding of how knowledge brokering operates in practice and the conditions that support successful research–practice collaboration.</li>\u0000 \u0000 <li>Mechanisms should be formal and accompanied by bureaucratic-level support and incentives, providing them with the legitimacy needed to embed new mindsets, capabilities, and ways of working.</li>\u0000 \u0000 <li>A key consideration for public sector practitioners is how to establish arrangements and incentives that are mutually beneficial for researchers and practitioners alike and monitor the effectiveness of these initiatives over time.</li>\u0000 </ul>\u0000 </div>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":"84 1","pages":"184-189"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2024-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142209312","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
‘We're trying to get out of here, that's what we're doing’: A Bourdieusian examination of ‘choice’ in the National Disability Insurance Scheme 我们试图离开这里,这就是我们正在做的":布尔迪厄斯对国家残疾保险计划中 "选择 "的研究
IF 2.1 4区 管理学 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Pub Date : 2024-08-24 DOI: 10.1111/1467-8500.12660
Elroy Dearn, Paul Ramcharan

The notion of choice underpinning Australia's National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) has its origin in neoliberal assumptions about the inherent value of market choice in human services reform and in the disability movement's advocacy for the right to self-determination. Little is known about how people in institutional settings experience choice in the NDIS context. Based on a critical ethnographic study, this article explores the choices made by 12 people with psychosocial disability living in two Victorian supported residential services (SRS). The study found that despite the goal of most participants being to move into independent accommodation, 2 years after the start of the roll-out of the NDIS, most participants were still living in SRS. Adopting a Bourdieusian conceptual framework, we show that the choices participants made were constrained by the institutional field in which they were living, their low capitals, and their relative powerlessness. This novel application of the concepts of field, habitus, and capitals in the NDIS context has implications for debates about the impact of marketisation and personalisation on individuals with limited agency. The findings have implications for policy and practice in other institutional settings and jurisdictions where public service delivery is framed around the notion of choice.

Points for practitioners

  • This research shows that a key choice for residents with psychosocial disability living in SRS was to move into independent housing. However, choice over their housing goals was constrained by living in an institutional setting and their relative powerlessness.
  • Residents in these settings and NDIS participants living in other segregated institutional settings will need independent housing and living navigators if they are to find pathways into independent housing.
澳大利亚国家伤残保险计划(NDIS)中的选择概念源于新自由主义关于人类服务改革中市场选择固有价值的假设,以及残疾人运动对自决权的倡导。在 NDIS 的背景下,人们对机构环境中的人们如何体验选择知之甚少。本文以一项批判性人种学研究为基础,探讨了生活在维多利亚州两家辅助居住服务机构(SRS)中的 12 名社会心理残疾人士的选择。研究发现,尽管大多数参与者的目标是搬到独立的住所,但在 NDIS 开始推出两年后,大多数参与者仍然住在 SRS 中。我们采用布尔迪厄斯(Bourdieusian)的概念框架,表明参与者的选择受到他们所处的制度领域、他们的低资本以及他们的相对无力感的制约。在 NDIS 背景下对领域、习惯和资本等概念的这一新颖应用,对有关市场化和个性化对代理权有限的个人的影响的讨论具有重要意义。研究结果对其他以选择概念为框架提供公共服务的机构环境和司法管辖区的政策和实践也有影响。然而,他们对住房目标的选择受到了居住在机构环境中和相对无权的限制。这些环境中的居民以及生活在其他隔离机构环境中的 NDIS 参与者需要独立住房和生活导航员,这样他们才能找到进入独立住房的途径。
{"title":"‘We're trying to get out of here, that's what we're doing’: A Bourdieusian examination of ‘choice’ in the National Disability Insurance Scheme","authors":"Elroy Dearn,&nbsp;Paul Ramcharan","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12660","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1467-8500.12660","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The notion of choice underpinning Australia's National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) has its origin in neoliberal assumptions about the inherent value of market choice in human services reform and in the disability movement's advocacy for the right to self-determination. Little is known about how people in institutional settings experience choice in the NDIS context. Based on a critical ethnographic study, this article explores the choices made by 12 people with psychosocial disability living in two Victorian supported residential services (SRS). The study found that despite the goal of most participants being to move into independent accommodation, 2 years after the start of the roll-out of the NDIS, most participants were still living in SRS. Adopting a Bourdieusian conceptual framework, we show that the choices participants made were constrained by the institutional field in which they were living, their low capitals, and their relative powerlessness. This novel application of the concepts of field, habitus, and capitals in the NDIS context has implications for debates about the impact of marketisation and personalisation on individuals with limited agency. The findings have implications for policy and practice in other institutional settings and jurisdictions where public service delivery is framed around the notion of choice.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Points for practitioners</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <div>\u0000 <ul>\u0000 \u0000 <li>This research shows that a key choice for residents with psychosocial disability living in SRS was to move into independent housing. However, choice over their housing goals was constrained by living in an institutional setting and their relative powerlessness.</li>\u0000 \u0000 <li>Residents in these settings and NDIS participants living in other segregated institutional settings will need independent housing and living navigators if they are to find pathways into independent housing.</li>\u0000 </ul>\u0000 </div>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":"84 1","pages":"125-141"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2024-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-8500.12660","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142209314","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Knowing what not to know: Unravelling the dynamics of selective knowledge in government policymaking 知道什么不知道:解读政府决策中的选择性知识动态
IF 2.1 4区 管理学 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Pub Date : 2024-08-24 DOI: 10.1111/1467-8500.12659
Christiane Gerblinger

The Robodebt controversy in Australia has led to an investigation regarding bureaucratic practices, particularly concerning the dissemination of false or misleading information. While overt falsehoods may be relatively easy to spot, this paper delves into subtler forms of misleading discourse that often evade detection, perpetuating a culture of deliberate ambiguity within governmental institutions. By analysing bureaucratic manoeuvres like feigned ignorance, selective knowledge and silent silencing, this study elucidates how policymakers strategically incorporate uncertainty to shield themselves from blame. Drawing on empirical evidence from the handling of a 2016 state-wide blackout and the subsequent bureaucratic discourse, the paper highlights how routine bureaucratic interactions contribute to maintaining politically convenient narratives at the expense of transparency and democratic accountability. It proposes three key areas for policy organisations to address: engaging with what is being ignored, redefining objectivity to include diverse perspectives, and leaning into the tension between political desires and necessities.

Points for practitioners

  • Practitioners should start identifying and addressing subtle forms of misinformation in their own bureaucratic practices. This includes strategies like feigned ignorance, selective knowledge, and silent silencing, which are used to avoid blame and perpetuate a culture of deliberate ambiguity.
  • By understanding how they employ such strategies, practitioners may be better able to foster diverse perspectives and redefine objectivity in ways that expand upon their institutional expertise.
  • In politically charged situations, policy advisers may prioritise short-term expedience, but they do so at the cost of longer term integrity of the public service. Lean into the tension and acknowledge that policy advice is not about turning a blind eye.
澳大利亚的 "机器人债务"(Robodebt)争议引发了对官僚作风的调查,尤其是有关传播虚假或误导性信息的调查。虽然公开的虚假信息可能相对容易被发现,但本文深入探讨了误导性言论的更微妙形式,这些误导性言论往往逃避检测,使政府机构内部蓄意模糊的文化得以延续。通过分析装作不知情、选择性知情和沉默不语等官僚伎俩,本研究阐明了决策者如何策略性地将不确定性纳入其中,从而使自己免受指责。本文利用 2016 年全州大停电事件的处理过程以及随后的官僚话语中的经验证据,强调了例行的官僚互动如何以牺牲透明度和民主问责为代价,帮助维持政治上方便的叙事。论文提出了政策组织需要解决的三个关键领域:与被忽视的事物打交道、重新定义客观性以纳入不同观点,以及倾听政治愿望与必要性之间的紧张关系。 从业者要点 从业者应开始识别并解决自身官僚实践中微妙形式的错误信息。这包括佯装不知、选择性知情和沉默缄默等策略,这些策略被用来逃避责任,并使刻意模糊的文化得以延续。通过了解他们是如何运用这些策略的,实践者或许能够更好地促进多元化观点,并以拓展其机构专业知识的方式重新定义客观性。在政治氛围浓厚的情况下,政策顾问可能会优先考虑短期的权宜之计,但他们这样做的代价是公共服务的长期完整性。面对紧张局势,政策顾问应认识到,政策建议并非视而不见。
{"title":"Knowing what not to know: Unravelling the dynamics of selective knowledge in government policymaking","authors":"Christiane Gerblinger","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12659","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1467-8500.12659","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The Robodebt controversy in Australia has led to an investigation regarding bureaucratic practices, particularly concerning the dissemination of false or misleading information. While overt falsehoods may be relatively easy to spot, this paper delves into subtler forms of misleading discourse that often evade detection, perpetuating a culture of deliberate ambiguity within governmental institutions. By analysing bureaucratic manoeuvres like feigned ignorance, selective knowledge and silent silencing, this study elucidates how policymakers strategically incorporate uncertainty to shield themselves from blame. Drawing on empirical evidence from the handling of a 2016 state-wide blackout and the subsequent bureaucratic discourse, the paper highlights how routine bureaucratic interactions contribute to maintaining politically convenient narratives at the expense of transparency and democratic accountability. It proposes three key areas for policy organisations to address: engaging with what is being ignored, redefining objectivity to include diverse perspectives, and leaning into the tension between political desires and necessities.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Points for practitioners</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <div>\u0000 <ul>\u0000 \u0000 <li>Practitioners should start identifying and addressing subtle forms of misinformation in their own bureaucratic practices. This includes strategies like feigned ignorance, selective knowledge, and silent silencing, which are used to avoid blame and perpetuate a culture of deliberate ambiguity.</li>\u0000 \u0000 <li>By understanding how they employ such strategies, practitioners may be better able to foster diverse perspectives and redefine objectivity in ways that expand upon their institutional expertise.</li>\u0000 \u0000 <li>In politically charged situations, policy advisers may prioritise short-term expedience, but they do so at the cost of longer term integrity of the public service. Lean into the tension and acknowledge that policy advice is not about turning a blind eye.</li>\u0000 </ul>\u0000 </div>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":"84 3","pages":"463-468"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2024-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-8500.12659","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142209316","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Cabinetisation or a Westminster solution? Understanding the employment of public servants in Australian ministers’ offices 内阁化还是威斯敏斯特解决方案?了解澳大利亚部长办公室雇用公务员的情况
IF 2.1 4区 管理学 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Pub Date : 2024-08-22 DOI: 10.1111/1467-8500.12655
Maria Maley

This article tracks the proportion of Australian ministerial advisory staff over time who are drawn from the public service. Using a mix of parliamentary and employment data, biographical data and interviews (1984-2018), the paper tests if there has been a dramatic decline in the number of public servants in ministers' offices, and if the Australian ministerial office is evolving towards the cabinet ministeriel model found in Napoleonic countries, a concept known as cabinetisation. The paper shows that the proportion of Australian advisers who are public servants on leave is lower than in the past but has been consistently around 30% since 2010. The central argument advanced in the paper is that Australia's model of ministerial office has critical differences from Napoleonic ministerial cabinets and there is no evidence of cabinetisation. It argues that rather than bending towards European models, Australia's ministerial office is a response to peculiarly Westminster challenges and tensions, provoked by Washington aspirations. The paper shows that the institutional architecture of Australia's Westminster variant produces distinct and in some ways paradoxical dynamics: the separation designed to protect departments' impartiality threatens their marginalisation, leading to a push for greater presence in ministerial offices, despite the inherent frictions and risks of politicisation.

Points for practitioners

  • There is a significant level of exchange between departments and ministers’ offices under the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act in Australia which can create frictions when staff return to departments.
  • The exchange is encouraged and desired by departments and seen as helping to address disconnection and lack of understanding between ministers’ offices and departments.
  • However, the practice is limited by the recruitment preferences of ministers, who are wary of depoliticisation, seek a mix of backgrounds and skills in their offices, and have a ready supply of political cadres to draw on.
  • The Thodey Review's recommendations to increase the number of public servants in ministers’ offices, and that Senior Executive Service officers work as advisers as part of their training, are unlikely to be accepted by ministers.
本文追踪了澳大利亚部长顾问人员中来自公共服务部门的人员比例。通过混合使用议会和就业数据、传记数据和访谈(1984-2018 年),本文检验了部长办公室的公务员人数是否急剧下降,以及澳大利亚部长办公室是否正在向拿破仑时代国家的内阁部长模式演变,这一概念被称为内阁化。论文显示,澳大利亚顾问中休假的公务员比例低于以往,但自 2010 年以来一直保持在 30% 左右。本文提出的核心论点是,澳大利亚的部长办公模式与拿破仑时期的部长内阁有着本质区别,没有内阁化的迹象。论文认为,澳大利亚的部长办公室并没有向欧洲模式靠拢,而是为了应对威斯敏斯特特有的挑战和紧张局势,这些挑战和紧张局势是由华盛顿的愿望引发的。论文表明,澳大利亚威斯敏斯特模式的制度架构产生了独特的、在某些方面自相矛盾的动力:旨在保护部门公正性的分立制度威胁到了部门的边缘化,从而导致尽管存在固有的摩擦和政治化风险,但仍有更多的人员在部长办公室任职。各部门鼓励并希望进行这种交流,并认为这有助于解决部长办公室与各部门之间脱节和缺乏了解的问题。然而,这种做法受到部长们招聘偏好的限制,他们对非政治化持谨慎态度,希望其办公室能有不同背景和技能的人员,并有现成的政治干部可以利用。索迪审查报告》建议增加部长办公室的公务员人数,并建议高级行政官员在培训期间担任顾问,但这些建议不太可能被部长们接受。
{"title":"Cabinetisation or a Westminster solution? Understanding the employment of public servants in Australian ministers’ offices","authors":"Maria Maley","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12655","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1467-8500.12655","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This article tracks the proportion of Australian ministerial advisory staff over time who are drawn from the public service. Using a mix of parliamentary and employment data, biographical data and interviews (1984-2018), the paper tests if there has been a dramatic decline in the number of public servants in ministers' offices, and if the Australian ministerial office is evolving towards the <i>cabinet ministeriel</i> model found in Napoleonic countries, a concept known as cabinetisation. The paper shows that the proportion of Australian advisers who are public servants on leave is lower than in the past but has been consistently around 30% since 2010. The central argument advanced in the paper is that Australia's model of ministerial office has critical differences from Napoleonic <i>ministerial cabinets</i> and there is no evidence of cabinetisation. It argues that rather than bending towards European models, Australia's ministerial office is a response to peculiarly Westminster challenges and tensions, provoked by Washington aspirations. The paper shows that the institutional architecture of Australia's Westminster variant produces distinct and in some ways paradoxical dynamics: the separation designed to protect departments' impartiality threatens their marginalisation, leading to a push for greater presence in ministerial offices, despite the inherent frictions and risks of politicisation.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Points for practitioners</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <div>\u0000 <ul>\u0000 \u0000 <li>There is a significant level of exchange between departments and ministers’ offices under the <i>Members of Parliament (Staff) Act</i> in Australia which can create frictions when staff return to departments.</li>\u0000 \u0000 <li>The exchange is encouraged and desired by departments and seen as helping to address disconnection and lack of understanding between ministers’ offices and departments.</li>\u0000 \u0000 <li>However, the practice is limited by the recruitment preferences of ministers, who are wary of depoliticisation, seek a mix of backgrounds and skills in their offices, and have a ready supply of political cadres to draw on.</li>\u0000 \u0000 <li>The Thodey Review's recommendations to increase the number of public servants in ministers’ offices, and that Senior Executive Service officers work as advisers as part of their training, are unlikely to be accepted by ministers.</li>\u0000 </ul>\u0000 </div>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":"84 1","pages":"6-25"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2024-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-8500.12655","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142209337","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Hybrid governance and intersectional discrimination: An examination of women's experiences in South Africa 混合治理与交叉歧视:对南非妇女经历的考察
IF 2.1 4区 管理学 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Pub Date : 2024-08-22 DOI: 10.1111/1467-8500.12662
Gerda van Dijk, Mary S. Mangai
<div> <section> <p>This research investigates the lived experiences of women in South Africa, focusing on the concept of hybrid governance and intersectional discrimination. Hybrid governance denotes a blend of modern and traditional governance structures that coexist in many post-colonial societies, including South Africa. Intersectional discrimination recognises that individuals face layers of discrimination simultaneously influenced by intersecting identities like race, gender, class, and ethnicity. This study utilised quantitative analysis and desktop research methods. The researchers employed theoretical and operational parameters to conduct a logistic regression analysis using data from the 2018/2019 Governance, Public Safety and Justice Survey (GPSJS) conducted by Statistics South Africa. The analysis aims to investigate how hybrid governance structures impact women's lives and the interconnectedness among forms of discrimination they encounter. The results shed light on the power dynamics, representation challenges, and discriminatory practices within the realm of hybrid governance. Women's experiences showcase how patriarchal norms, racial disparities, and socio-economic factors intersect to heighten discrimination levels and constrain women's autonomy. Additionally, the study emphasises the significance of recognising and addressing intersectionality as a framework for comprehending and responding to the multi-faceted challenges faced by women in South Africa.</p> </section> <section> <h3> Points for practitioners</h3> <div> <ul> <li>Practitioners should appreciate the cultural diversity in South Africa and respect the varying customs and practices that come with hybrid governance. They should understand that traditional governance structures can coexist with modern ones, but also ensure that these structures do not perpetuate discriminatory practices.</li> <li>Practitioners should understand that individuals may face multiple, intersecting forms of discrimination. They should therefore approach work with an intersectional lens, taking into account the ways in which factors like race, gender, and tribal affiliation can compound discrimination.</li> <li>Practitioners should encourage dialogue about discrimination within the communities in which they work. They should raise awareness about what constitutes discrimination and how individuals can report it.</li> <li>Practitioners should utilise available data to inform their work. They should regularly review and analyse data on discrimination to identify trends and patterns, and to inform strategies and interventions.</li>
本研究调查了南非妇女的生活经历,重点关注混合治理和交叉歧视的概念。混合型治理是指在包括南非在内的许多后殖民社会中共存的现代和传统治理结构的混合。交叉歧视承认个人同时面临多重歧视,这些歧视受到种族、性别、阶级和民族等交叉身份的影响。本研究采用定量分析和桌面研究方法。研究人员利用南非统计局开展的2018/2019年治理、公共安全和司法调查(GPSJS)的数据,采用理论和操作参数进行了逻辑回归分析。该分析旨在调查混合治理结构如何影响妇女的生活,以及她们所遭遇的各种歧视之间的相互联系。研究结果揭示了混合治理领域内的权力动态、代表性挑战和歧视性做法。妇女的经历表明,父权规范、种族差异和社会经济因素如何相互交织,加剧了歧视程度,限制了妇女的自主权。此外,该研究强调了认识和处理交叉性作为理解和应对南非妇女面临的多方面挑战的框架的重要性。实践者要点实践者应该欣赏南非的文化多样性,尊重混合治理带来的不同习俗和实践。他们应该明白,传统治理结构可以与现代治理结构共存,但也要确保这些结构不会使歧视性做法永久化。从业人员应该明白,个人可能面临多种交叉形式的歧视。因此,他们应该以交叉视角来看待工作,考虑到种族、性别和部落关系等因素可能加剧歧视的方式。从业人员应鼓励在他们工作的社区内就歧视问题进行对话。他们应该提高对什么构成歧视以及个人如何举报歧视的认识。从业者应该利用现有的数据来告知他们的工作。它们应定期审查和分析有关歧视的数据,以确定趋势和模式,并为战略和干预措施提供信息。
{"title":"Hybrid governance and intersectional discrimination: An examination of women's experiences in South Africa","authors":"Gerda van Dijk,&nbsp;Mary S. Mangai","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12662","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12662","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;div&gt;\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;This research investigates the lived experiences of women in South Africa, focusing on the concept of hybrid governance and intersectional discrimination. Hybrid governance denotes a blend of modern and traditional governance structures that coexist in many post-colonial societies, including South Africa. Intersectional discrimination recognises that individuals face layers of discrimination simultaneously influenced by intersecting identities like race, gender, class, and ethnicity. This study utilised quantitative analysis and desktop research methods. The researchers employed theoretical and operational parameters to conduct a logistic regression analysis using data from the 2018/2019 Governance, Public Safety and Justice Survey (GPSJS) conducted by Statistics South Africa. The analysis aims to investigate how hybrid governance structures impact women's lives and the interconnectedness among forms of discrimination they encounter. The results shed light on the power dynamics, representation challenges, and discriminatory practices within the realm of hybrid governance. Women's experiences showcase how patriarchal norms, racial disparities, and socio-economic factors intersect to heighten discrimination levels and constrain women's autonomy. Additionally, the study emphasises the significance of recognising and addressing intersectionality as a framework for comprehending and responding to the multi-faceted challenges faced by women in South Africa.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Points for practitioners&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;div&gt;\u0000 &lt;ul&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;li&gt;Practitioners should appreciate the cultural diversity in South Africa and respect the varying customs and practices that come with hybrid governance. They should understand that traditional governance structures can coexist with modern ones, but also ensure that these structures do not perpetuate discriminatory practices.&lt;/li&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;li&gt;Practitioners should understand that individuals may face multiple, intersecting forms of discrimination. They should therefore approach work with an intersectional lens, taking into account the ways in which factors like race, gender, and tribal affiliation can compound discrimination.&lt;/li&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;li&gt;Practitioners should encourage dialogue about discrimination within the communities in which they work. They should raise awareness about what constitutes discrimination and how individuals can report it.&lt;/li&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;li&gt;Practitioners should utilise available data to inform their work. They should regularly review and analyse data on discrimination to identify trends and patterns, and to inform strategies and interventions.&lt;/li&gt;\u0000 ","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":"84 2","pages":"339-361"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2024-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-8500.12662","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144519851","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Collaborating in future states—Contextual instability, paradigmatic remaking, and public policy 未来状态中的合作--语境不稳定性、范式重塑和公共政策
IF 2.2 4区 管理学 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Pub Date : 2024-08-12 DOI: 10.1111/1467-8500.12661
Helen Sullivan
Collaboration is ubiquitous in public policy life, with its presence and profile determined by prevailing governance conditions. Commitments to globalisation and marketisation in the latter part of the 20th century marked the onset of an era defined by collaboration, between and across tiers and spheres of government, with non‐state actors, and through market and network instruments. Current contextual instability poses questions for dominant public policy paradigms and the existing collaborative settlement. This article explores the challenges presented in the current moment and how policymakers and scholars might navigate them. It focuses on how ideas about economics and security shape public policy, illustrating the paradigm‐shifting impact of economism and securitisation. It argues for the replacement of economism and securitisation by sustainability, sovereignty, and justice and demonstrates the latter's engagement with economics and security and their accounting for what have hitherto been ‘subaltern voices’ in public policy. It discusses the implications for collaboration in relation to future collective action problems, more diverse and disconnected ‘publics’, and a more congested and lower trust policy environment. It highlights the need for collaborative plasticity and pluralistic agency.Points for practitioners Public policymaking is shaped by dominant ideas about economics and security; ideas that become ‘taken for granted’ in policy practice. The prevailing ideas of economism and securitisation are being challenged by contextual changes, globally, regionally, and nationally. This creates space for new ideas to shape future public policy. Ideas of sustainability, sovereignty, and justice offer an alternative framework for public policymaking. These ideas can engage productively with economics and security, and they are also inclusive of a wider variety of ‘voices’ particularly those previously marginalised. Collaboration will remain integral to the success of public policy. However, it will need to adapt to new circumstances. This will include defining new purposes, reassessing its appropriateness, reshaping collaborative scope, scale, and form, and refining collaborative activities. A paradigmatic shift in public policy that highlights sustainability, sovereignty, and justice will require the active involvement of a plurality of actors enabled to contribute new knowledge and contest the status quo.
合作在公共政策生活中无处不在,它的存在与否取决于当时的治理条件。20 世纪后半叶对全球化和市场化的承诺,标志着一个由政府各层级和各领域之间、与非国家行为者之间以及通过市场和网络工具开展合作所定义的时代的到来。当前环境的不稳定性对主流公共政策范式和现有的合作解决方案提出了质疑。本文探讨了当前所面临的挑战以及政策制定者和学者如何应对这些挑战。文章重点探讨了经济学和安全思想如何影响公共政策,说明了经济主义和安全化对范式转变的影响。它主张以可持续性、主权和正义取代经济主义和安全化,并展示了后者与经济学和安全的关系,以及它们对公共政策中迄今为止的 "次等声音 "的解释。报告讨论了未来集体行动问题、更加多样化和相互脱节的 "公众 "以及更加拥挤和信任度更低的政策环境对合作的影响。对实践者的启示 公共政策的制定受经济和安全主导思想的影响;这些思想在政策实践中被 "视为理所当然"。在全球、地区和国家范围内,经济主义和安全化的主流思想正受到环境变化的挑战。这为新思想塑造未来的公共政策创造了空间。可持续性、主权和正义的理念为公共政策的制定提供了另一种框架。这些理念可以有效地与经济和安全相联系,也可以包容更多的 "声音",特别是那些以前被边缘化的声音。合作仍将是公共政策取得成功不可或缺的因素。然而,它需要适应新的形势。这将包括确定新的目的,重新评估其适当性,重塑合作范围、规模和形式,以及完善合作活动。强调可持续性、主权和公正的公共政策范式的转变将需要多元化参与者的积极参与,使其能够贡献新的知识并对现状提出质疑。
{"title":"Collaborating in future states—Contextual instability, paradigmatic remaking, and public policy","authors":"Helen Sullivan","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12661","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12661","url":null,"abstract":"<jats:label/>Collaboration is ubiquitous in public policy life, with its presence and profile determined by prevailing governance conditions. Commitments to globalisation and marketisation in the latter part of the 20th century marked the onset of an era defined by collaboration, between and across tiers and spheres of government, with non‐state actors, and through market and network instruments. Current contextual instability poses questions for dominant public policy paradigms and the existing collaborative settlement. This article explores the challenges presented in the current moment and how policymakers and scholars might navigate them. It focuses on how ideas about economics and security shape public policy, illustrating the paradigm‐shifting impact of economism and securitisation. It argues for the replacement of economism and securitisation by sustainability, sovereignty, and justice and demonstrates the latter's engagement with economics and security and their accounting for what have hitherto been ‘subaltern voices’ in public policy. It discusses the implications for collaboration in relation to future collective action problems, more diverse and disconnected ‘publics’, and a more congested and lower trust policy environment. It highlights the need for collaborative plasticity and pluralistic agency.Points for practitioners<jats:list list-type=\"bullet\"> <jats:list-item>Public policymaking is shaped by dominant ideas about economics and security; ideas that become ‘taken for granted’ in policy practice. The prevailing ideas of economism and securitisation are being challenged by contextual changes, globally, regionally, and nationally. This creates space for new ideas to shape future public policy.</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>Ideas of sustainability, sovereignty, and justice offer an alternative framework for public policymaking. These ideas can engage productively with economics and security, and they are also inclusive of a wider variety of ‘voices’ particularly those previously marginalised.</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>Collaboration will remain integral to the success of public policy. However, it will need to adapt to new circumstances. This will include defining new purposes, reassessing its appropriateness, reshaping collaborative scope, scale, and form, and refining collaborative activities.</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>A paradigmatic shift in public policy that highlights sustainability, sovereignty, and justice will require the active involvement of a plurality of actors enabled to contribute new knowledge and contest the status quo.</jats:list-item> </jats:list>","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":"62 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142209338","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Analysing policy success and failure in Australia: Pink batts and set‐top boxes 分析澳大利亚政策的成败:粉红电池和机顶盒
IF 2.2 4区 管理学 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Pub Date : 2024-08-11 DOI: 10.1111/1467-8500.12663
Daniel Casey
This article examines two Australian government programs from the Rudd/Gillard Labor government, the Home Insulation Program (HIP) and the Digital Switchover Household Assistance Scheme (HAS). Both became shibboleths of the Labor government's perceived waste and incompetence. Using key informant interviews and documents obtained under freedom of information (FOI), I analyse these programs against the multiple ‘dimensions’ of success proposed by Newman and common narrative frames around programme failure. I argue that the HAS was broadly successful across most dimensions of success, notwithstanding the adverse media attention. The study identifies four key factors driving HIP's failure: scheme design, installer training, demand control, and departmental expertise. All of these came back to the timeline pressures, driven by conflicting priorities, which in turn gave the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (PM&C) more influence than would usually be the case. In comparison, HAS's success is attributed to crucial design choices, like the phased rollout and head contractor model. The article identifies the danger of ignoring subject matter expertise and poor policy/Cabinet processes, which have been reinforced by the recent Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme.Points for practitioners Demand‐driven programmes need to have demand‐side control techniques built into them. The role of central agencies needs to be carefully considered, particularly in relation to areas that are not their expertise, such as detailed programme development and implementation. Lessons about poor policy and Cabinet processes, as well as cultural change from the Pink Batts Royal Commission, do not appear to have been sufficiently embedded in the culture of the APS, as there are ongoing echoes of the same problems evident in the Robodebt Royal Commission.
本文探讨了陆克文/吉拉德工党政府的两项澳大利亚政府计划,即 "家庭隔热计划"(HIP)和 "数字转换家庭援助计划"(HAS)。这两个项目都成为工党政府浪费和无能的象征。通过对关键信息提供者的访谈以及根据信息自由(FOI)获得的文件,我根据纽曼提出的成功的多个 "维度 "以及围绕计划失败的常见叙事框架对这些计划进行了分析。我认为,尽管受到了媒体的负面关注,但在大多数成功维度上,人道主义援助计划大体上是成功的。研究指出了导致 HIP 计划失败的四个关键因素:计划设计、安装人员培训、需求控制和部门专业知识。所有这些都归因于优先事项冲突导致的时间压力,这反过来又给了首相和内阁部(PM&C)比通常情况下更大的影响力。相比之下,HAS 的成功要归功于关键的设计选择,如分阶段推广和总承包商模式。这篇文章指出了忽视主题专业知识和政策/内阁程序不当的危险,而最近皇家委员会对机器人债务计划的调查则进一步证实了这一点。需要认真考虑中央机构的作用,特别是在其不擅长的领域,如详细的计划制定和实施。从 Pink Batts 皇家委员会中吸取的关于政策和内阁程序不完善以及文化变革的教训似乎并没有充分融入 APS 的文化中,因为 Robodebt 皇家委员会中明显存在的同样问题仍在不断出现。
{"title":"Analysing policy success and failure in Australia: Pink batts and set‐top boxes","authors":"Daniel Casey","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12663","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12663","url":null,"abstract":"<jats:label/>This article examines two Australian government programs from the Rudd/Gillard Labor government, the Home Insulation Program (HIP) and the Digital Switchover Household Assistance Scheme (HAS). Both became shibboleths of the Labor government's perceived waste and incompetence. Using key informant interviews and documents obtained under freedom of information (FOI), I analyse these programs against the multiple ‘dimensions’ of success proposed by Newman and common narrative frames around programme failure. I argue that the HAS was broadly successful across most dimensions of success, notwithstanding the adverse media attention. The study identifies four key factors driving HIP's failure: scheme design, installer training, demand control, and departmental expertise. All of these came back to the timeline pressures, driven by conflicting priorities, which in turn gave the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (PM&amp;C) more influence than would usually be the case. In comparison, HAS's success is attributed to crucial design choices, like the phased rollout and head contractor model. The article identifies the danger of ignoring subject matter expertise and poor policy/Cabinet processes, which have been reinforced by the recent Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme.Points for practitioners<jats:list list-type=\"bullet\"> <jats:list-item>Demand‐driven programmes need to have demand‐side control techniques built into them.</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>The role of central agencies needs to be carefully considered, particularly in relation to areas that are not their expertise, such as detailed programme development and implementation.</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>Lessons about poor policy and Cabinet processes, as well as cultural change from the Pink Batts Royal Commission, do not appear to have been sufficiently embedded in the culture of the APS, as there are ongoing echoes of the same problems evident in the Robodebt Royal Commission.</jats:list-item> </jats:list>","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2024-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141939695","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
Australian Journal of Public Administration
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
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
×
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
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
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