作为多层次政策混合的城市政策整合

IF 3.8 3区 管理学 Q1 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Policy Sciences Pub Date : 2025-01-06 DOI:10.1007/s11077-024-09562-5
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}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文对城市政策领域的政策整合进行了分析。具体而言,各国际组织推动的可持续城市发展政策框架作为一个范例进行了分析,该框架结合了实质性方面的多部门性(不同政策子系统的政策目标)和程序方面的一体化(涉及政策子系统的政策行动之间的一体化)。假设城市政策往往采取多层次政策混合的形式,一体化涉及不同政策子系统之间的集体行动过程。根据有关政策整合和以行为者为中心的制度主义框架的文献,假设在政策框架中缺乏关于综合战略和政策整合能力的明确指示的情况下,该战略在地方项目中所带来的集体行动困境将占优,从而降低了政策整合的可能性。本文分析了1994年至2013年间欧盟凝聚力政策在西班牙城市层面的实施情况,共分析了82个城市项目,其中综合战略是核心要素,但被理解为多部门目标,而不是政策子系统之间的互补。实证结果表明,各政策部门的目标高度多样化,一体化程度很低;具体来说,这两个方面的关系呈曲线模式。研究结果突出表明,需要将政策工具和能力纳入政策框架,以解决政策一体化所带来的集体行动困境,特别是如果政策框架要求跨不同政策子系统制定广泛的多部门议程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
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.

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
The politics of experimental policymaking: the influence of blame avoidance and credit claiming Assessing evidence based on scale can be a useful predictor of policy outcomes Theorizing the functions and patterns of agency in the policymaking process Policy integration in urban policies as multi-level policy mixes Analyzing industrial policy portfolios
×
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