María José Dorado-Rubín, María José Guerrero-Mayo, Clemente Jesús Navarro-Yáñez
{"title":"作为多层次政策混合的城市政策整合","authors":"María José Dorado-Rubín, María José Guerrero-Mayo, Clemente Jesús Navarro-Yáñez","doi":"10.1007/s11077-024-09562-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper analyses policy integration in the field of urban policies. Specifically, the policy framework on sustainable urban development promoted by various international organisations is analysed as an exemplar combining multi-sectoriality in its substantive dimension (policy goals in different policy subsystems) and integration in its procedural dimension (integration between policy actions across policy subsystems involved). It is assumed that urban policies often take the form of multi-level policy mixes, and that integration involves a process of collective action between different policy subsystems. Based on the literature on policy integration and actor-centred institutionalism frameworks, it is postulated that in the absence of clear indications about the integrated strategy and policy integration capacities in the policy frame, the collective action dilemmas that this strategy entails in local projects will prevail, reducing the possibility of policy integration. The implementation of the urban dimension of the European Union's cohesion policy in Spain between 1994 and 2013 is analysed a total of 82 urban projects, where the integrated strategy is a central element but understood as multi-sectorial objectives rather than a complementarity between policy subsystems. Empirical results show a high level of diversity of objectives across policy sectors and a very low level of integration; specifically, a curvilinear pattern in the relationship between these two aspects. The results highlight the need to include policy instruments and capacities in the policy frame to address the collective action dilemmas that policy integration implies, especially if the policy frame calls for a broad multi-sectorial agenda across different policy subsystems.</p>","PeriodicalId":51433,"journal":{"name":"Policy Sciences","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Policy integration in urban policies as multi-level policy mixes\",\"authors\":\"María José Dorado-Rubín, María José Guerrero-Mayo, Clemente Jesús Navarro-Yáñez\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11077-024-09562-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This paper analyses policy integration in the field of urban policies. Specifically, the policy framework on sustainable urban development promoted by various international organisations is analysed as an exemplar combining multi-sectoriality in its substantive dimension (policy goals in different policy subsystems) and integration in its procedural dimension (integration between policy actions across policy subsystems involved). It is assumed that urban policies often take the form of multi-level policy mixes, and that integration involves a process of collective action between different policy subsystems. Based on the literature on policy integration and actor-centred institutionalism frameworks, it is postulated that in the absence of clear indications about the integrated strategy and policy integration capacities in the policy frame, the collective action dilemmas that this strategy entails in local projects will prevail, reducing the possibility of policy integration. The implementation of the urban dimension of the European Union's cohesion policy in Spain between 1994 and 2013 is analysed a total of 82 urban projects, where the integrated strategy is a central element but understood as multi-sectorial objectives rather than a complementarity between policy subsystems. Empirical results show a high level of diversity of objectives across policy sectors and a very low level of integration; specifically, a curvilinear pattern in the relationship between these two aspects. The results highlight the need to include policy instruments and capacities in the policy frame to address the collective action dilemmas that policy integration implies, especially if the policy frame calls for a broad multi-sectorial agenda across different policy subsystems.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51433,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Policy Sciences\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-06\",\"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/s11077-024-09562-5\",\"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/s11077-024-09562-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
Policy integration in urban policies as multi-level policy mixes
This paper analyses policy integration in the field of urban policies. Specifically, the policy framework on sustainable urban development promoted by various international organisations is analysed as an exemplar combining multi-sectoriality in its substantive dimension (policy goals in different policy subsystems) and integration in its procedural dimension (integration between policy actions across policy subsystems involved). It is assumed that urban policies often take the form of multi-level policy mixes, and that integration involves a process of collective action between different policy subsystems. Based on the literature on policy integration and actor-centred institutionalism frameworks, it is postulated that in the absence of clear indications about the integrated strategy and policy integration capacities in the policy frame, the collective action dilemmas that this strategy entails in local projects will prevail, reducing the possibility of policy integration. The implementation of the urban dimension of the European Union's cohesion policy in Spain between 1994 and 2013 is analysed a total of 82 urban projects, where the integrated strategy is a central element but understood as multi-sectorial objectives rather than a complementarity between policy subsystems. Empirical results show a high level of diversity of objectives across policy sectors and a very low level of integration; specifically, a curvilinear pattern in the relationship between these two aspects. The results highlight the need to include policy instruments and capacities in the policy frame to address the collective action dilemmas that policy integration implies, especially if the policy frame calls for a broad multi-sectorial agenda across different policy subsystems.
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