European Policy Analysis最新文献

This article examines the fire and rescue services sector in Sweden in the period 1986–2021, and explains the timing of bureaucratic reforms using the Multiple Streams Framework (MSF). In this study, we insert institutions in MSF by employing a two-level analysis; we highlight the interactions among experts acting as policy entrepreneurs over time and during a large window of opportunity, and we show that in a programmatically complex policy during a large window of opportunity open for a long period of time, policymakers may become proactive and engage in commissioning.

This symposium examines the theoretical and empirical advancement of policy entrepreneurship scholarship, addressing a field that has grown significantly over the past four decades. This symposium contributes to the theoretical advancement of policy entrepreneurship through five papers that integrate modern entrepreneurship literature, synthesize frameworks into new models, and explore policy entrepreneurship across diverse contexts. Contributions include Hand and Birkhead's integration of opportunity creation theories and identification of distinct “species” of policy entrepreneurs, and Arslangulov and Ackrill's Multi-Level Governance and Strategy model for sustainability transitions. Arnold et al. demonstrate that policy entrepreneurship may enhance transformative governance capacity more than fiscal or political resources, while Taylor et al. extend research beyond elite influence to examine public behavior during policy implementation. Finally, Eriksson et al., explore expert-entrepreneurs' persistence in reorganizing Sweden's fire and rescue services. The symposium addresses policy entrepreneurship's relevance in increasingly complex policy environments spanning multiple domains and jurisdictions facing transformation pressures. Future research directions include challenging the normativity of policy entrepreneurship, establishing rigorous identification methods, and developing sophisticated measures beyond binary classifications. The work emphasizes the importance of micro-level policymaking dynamics, particularly when institutions fail to preserve democratic values in crisis contexts.

Policy integration is seen as an appropriate strategy to address urban problems and promote sustainable urban development objectives. The European Union (EU) has been including this strategy as an essential aspect of its urban initiatives since the 1990s. In that way, local authorities have designed their projects including the integration strategy. However, are municipalities finally adopting the strategy, and what factors explain this? To answer these questions, aspects related to the complexity of the projects, the political organizational capacities and the existence of political learning processes have been studied. Some 171 sustainable urban development projects implemented in Spain in the framework of the EU during the 2014–2020 period are analyzed. Regression models show the influence of goal diversity and political capabilities, but not of previous experience, showing the drawbacks of urban policies as multi-level policy mixes and the need for capacity building process among municipalities.

“Opération Papyrus” was implemented in the Swiss Canton of Geneva between 2017 and 2018 with the aim of granting residence permits to undocumented migrants who met pre-established criteria. This program serves as an exemplary case of involving nongovernmental actors to facilitate what were originally state-controlled procedures. Civil society organizations (CSOs) exercised discretionary power and played a pivotal role in negotiating the program's design and acting as gatekeepers, ensuring that only eligible individuals applied, thereby reducing the administrative workload. Our paper primarily focuses on the unique role played by civil society organizations, extending the reach of the state, as they acted independently as regulators and maintained proximity to the individuals involved, enhancing the program's effectiveness. The analysis is based on 10 retrospective interviews with cantonal and federal civil servants and representatives from CSOs, supplemented with additional official documents.

Over the past decade, the concept of “instrument constituency” has been proposed as a way in which to bridge studies on policy networks and policy instruments. This concept focuses on policy networks composed of diverse actors who are brought together by the shared goal of promoting a specific instrument. In this study, we examine who is involved in policy instruments development, and the extent to which they drive change within the policy process. To do so, we focus on the case of two care coordination instruments, namely, the IPEP and PEPS, used in the French healthcare system. Drawing on qualitative methods, we identify the actors involved in the development of the two instruments. Our analysis reveals the formation of two instrument constituencies around the IPEP and PEPS. This finding suggests that the continuity of primary care policies is supported through these instruments, fostering shared approaches among the actors involved.

What is the role of policy entrepreneurs in promoting the design of public administrative reform? We present a conceptual framework for assessing the influence of policy entrepreneurs on public administrative reform. We start by proposing a typology of the various policy entrepreneurs active in the administrative reform arena. We then analyze the unique political and institutional obstacles to reform and the motivations and strategies of local players for overcoming them. Finally, we test the framework using textual analysis and in-depth interviews with Israeli politicians, senior bureaucrats and nongovernmental officials about the 2013–2018 attempt to reform Israel's civil service. We also discuss the need to test the theoretical aspects of this framework in other contexts.

Initially developed for the US context, the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) is increasingly used to analyze policy processes in the EU. But policymaking in EU differs from the US context, why the applicability of ACF in the EU context should be scrutinized. This paper discusses limitations of ACF for analyzing supranational EU policy processes. Policymaking in EU is mainly about collaboration and competition of organizations. Thus, the central concept of ACF—individual beliefs—is difficult to apply. Organizations have cultures, not beliefs. The formal path to policy change in EU is negotiations to reach consensus. These take place in different modes, affecting policy learning. If systems boundaries are adapted to EU governance, organizations are given more attention, and ACF theories are developed to better explain negotiations and policy learning, ACF can complement macro-level studies of European integration with meso-level perspectives to better explain policy change in EU.