咨询公司在政策传播中的作用:环境治理领域的系统审查

IF 3.8 3区 管理学 Q1 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Policy Sciences Pub Date : 2024-07-23 DOI:10.1007/s11077-024-09540-x
Alejandra Burchard-Levine, Dave Huitema, Nicolas W. Jager, Iris Bijlsma
{"title":"咨询公司在政策传播中的作用:环境治理领域的系统审查","authors":"Alejandra Burchard-Levine, Dave Huitema, Nicolas W. Jager, Iris Bijlsma","doi":"10.1007/s11077-024-09540-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Since the 1980’s, the growing involvement of private consultancy firms in the public sector worldwide has instigated concerns about the outsourcing of public policy advising to market-driven actors. Although these firms participate in spreading policy ideas, their roles have not received sustained attention, despite being observed by a few scholars. Against this background, the aim of this paper is threefold. First, from established policy concepts relating to policy diffusion, we identify the potential roles that consultancy firms may take on in spreading policy ideas. Second, we use a systematic literature review to collect and distil what is currently known about what different roles consultancy firms fulfil, and what kinds of tensions arise in their interactions with both clients and other actors. Third, we draft an agenda for future research on consultancy firms’ impact in governance processes. To focus our study, our review hones in on environmental governance, more specifically water governance, a significant area of activity for such firms where they play an important in-between role in providing policy ideas. We found indications that consultancy firms possess six types of capabilities (trusted facilitators, reactors to environmental policies, shapers of environmental policies, market drivers, interest navigators, and managers of public participation), and face various dilemmas around biases, decontextualized global practices, market interests, and manipulative practices. We conclude that more attention should be given to empirically refining capabilities involved in shaping policies and markets and to further highlighting how consultancy firms impact the diffusion of governance ideas in and beyond the water and environmental sectors.</p>","PeriodicalId":51433,"journal":{"name":"Policy Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Consultancy firms’ roles in policy diffusion: a systematic review from the environmental governance field\",\"authors\":\"Alejandra Burchard-Levine, Dave Huitema, Nicolas W. Jager, Iris Bijlsma\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11077-024-09540-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Since the 1980’s, the growing involvement of private consultancy firms in the public sector worldwide has instigated concerns about the outsourcing of public policy advising to market-driven actors. Although these firms participate in spreading policy ideas, their roles have not received sustained attention, despite being observed by a few scholars. Against this background, the aim of this paper is threefold. First, from established policy concepts relating to policy diffusion, we identify the potential roles that consultancy firms may take on in spreading policy ideas. Second, we use a systematic literature review to collect and distil what is currently known about what different roles consultancy firms fulfil, and what kinds of tensions arise in their interactions with both clients and other actors. Third, we draft an agenda for future research on consultancy firms’ impact in governance processes. To focus our study, our review hones in on environmental governance, more specifically water governance, a significant area of activity for such firms where they play an important in-between role in providing policy ideas. We found indications that consultancy firms possess six types of capabilities (trusted facilitators, reactors to environmental policies, shapers of environmental policies, market drivers, interest navigators, and managers of public participation), and face various dilemmas around biases, decontextualized global practices, market interests, and manipulative practices. We conclude that more attention should be given to empirically refining capabilities involved in shaping policies and markets and to further highlighting how consultancy firms impact the diffusion of governance ideas in and beyond the water and environmental sectors.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51433,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Policy Sciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Policy Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-024-09540-x\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Policy Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-024-09540-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自 20 世纪 80 年代以来,世界各地越来越多的私营咨询公司参与到公共部门中来,这引发了人们对公共政策咨询外包给市场驱动行为者的担忧。尽管这些公司参与了政策理念的传播,但它们的作用并未得到持续关注,尽管有少数学者对其进行了观察。在此背景下,本文的目的有三。首先,从与政策传播相关的既定政策概念出发,我们确定了咨询公司在传播政策理念方面可能扮演的角色。其次,我们通过系统的文献综述来收集和提炼目前已知的有关咨询公司所扮演的不同角色,以及它们在与客户和其他参与者的互动中出现的紧张关系。第三,我们为今后研究咨询公司在治理过程中的影响起草了一份议程。为了突出研究重点,我们的综述聚焦于环境治理,更具体地说是水治理,这是此类公司的一个重要活动领域,它们在提供政策理念方面扮演着重要的中间角色。我们发现有迹象表明,咨询公司拥有六种类型的能力(值得信赖的促进者、环境政策的反应者、环境政策的塑造者、市场的推动者、利益的导航者和公众参与的管理者),并面临着围绕偏见、非语境化的全球实践、市场利益和操纵行为的各种困境。我们的结论是,应更多地关注以经验为基础完善制定政策和市场的能力,并进一步强调咨询公司如何在水和环境领域内外影响治理理念的传播。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Consultancy firms’ roles in policy diffusion: a systematic review from the environmental governance field

Since the 1980’s, the growing involvement of private consultancy firms in the public sector worldwide has instigated concerns about the outsourcing of public policy advising to market-driven actors. Although these firms participate in spreading policy ideas, their roles have not received sustained attention, despite being observed by a few scholars. Against this background, the aim of this paper is threefold. First, from established policy concepts relating to policy diffusion, we identify the potential roles that consultancy firms may take on in spreading policy ideas. Second, we use a systematic literature review to collect and distil what is currently known about what different roles consultancy firms fulfil, and what kinds of tensions arise in their interactions with both clients and other actors. Third, we draft an agenda for future research on consultancy firms’ impact in governance processes. To focus our study, our review hones in on environmental governance, more specifically water governance, a significant area of activity for such firms where they play an important in-between role in providing policy ideas. We found indications that consultancy firms possess six types of capabilities (trusted facilitators, reactors to environmental policies, shapers of environmental policies, market drivers, interest navigators, and managers of public participation), and face various dilemmas around biases, decontextualized global practices, market interests, and manipulative practices. We conclude that more attention should be given to empirically refining capabilities involved in shaping policies and markets and to further highlighting how consultancy firms impact the diffusion of governance ideas in and beyond the water and environmental sectors.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Policy Sciences
Policy Sciences Multiple-
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
9.40%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: The policy sciences are distinctive within the policy movement in that they embrace the scholarly traditions innovated and elaborated by Harold D. Lasswell and Myres S. McDougal. Within these pages we provide space for approaches that are problem-oriented, contextual, and multi-method in orientation. There are many other journals in which authors can take top-down, deductive, and large-sample approach or adopt a primarily theoretical focus. Policy Sciences encourages systematic and empirical investigations in which problems are clearly identified from a practical and theoretical perspective, are well situated in the extant literature, and are investigated utilizing methodologies compatible with contextual, as opposed to reductionist, understandings. We tend not to publish pieces that are solely theoretical, but favor works in which the applied policy lessons are clearly articulated. Policy Sciences favors, but does not publish exclusively, works that either explicitly or implicitly utilize the policy sciences framework. The policy sciences can be applied to articles with greater or lesser intensity to accommodate the focus of an author’s work. At the minimum, this means taking a problem oriented, multi-method or contextual approach. At the fullest expression, it may mean leveraging central theory or explicitly applying aspects of the framework, which is comprised of three principal dimensions: (1) social process, which is mapped in terms of participants, perspectives, situations, base values, strategies, outcomes and effects, with values (power, wealth, enlightenment, skill, rectitude, respect, well-being, and affection) being the key elements in understanding participants’ behaviors and interactions; (2) decision process, which is mapped in terms of seven functions—intelligence, promotion, prescription, invocation, application, termination, and appraisal; and (3) problem orientation, which comprises the intellectual tasks of clarifying goals, describing trends, analyzing conditions, projecting developments, and inventing, evaluating, and selecting alternatives. There is a more extensive core literature that also applies and can be visited at the policy sciences website: http://www.policysciences.org/classicworks.cfm. In addition to articles that explicitly utilize the policy sciences framework, Policy Sciences has a long tradition of publishing papers that draw on various aspects of that framework and its central theory as well as high quality conceptual pieces that address key challenges, opportunities, or approaches in ways congruent with the perspective that this journal strives to maintain and extend.Officially cited as: Policy Sci
期刊最新文献
A semi-automated approach to policy-relevant evidence synthesis: combining natural language processing, causal mapping, and graph analytics for public policy Environmental identity and perceived salience of policy issues in coastal communities: a moderated-mediation analysis Nudging citizens co-production: Assessing multiple behavioral strategies The political polarization over abortion: An analysis of advocacy coalition belief systems (Un)usual advocacy coalitions in a multi-system setting: the case of hydrogen in Germany
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1