Muhammad Alif K. Sahide, Micah R. Fisher, Nurhady Sirimorok, Fatwa Faturachmat, Ahmad Dhiaulhaq, Ahmad Maryudi, Karno B. Batiran, Supratman Supratman
{"title":"官僚政治中的盲点与亮点:印尼环境治理动态中的政策协同生产分析","authors":"Muhammad Alif K. Sahide, Micah R. Fisher, Nurhady Sirimorok, Fatwa Faturachmat, Ahmad Dhiaulhaq, Ahmad Maryudi, Karno B. Batiran, Supratman Supratman","doi":"10.1111/dpr.12693","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Motivation</h3>\n \n <p>There has been growing interest in recent years in a better understanding of knowledge/science and policy co-production in environmental governance.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>We aim to shed more light on the politics among the numerous actors shaping ideas that drive environmental policy in Indonesia. We focus our theoretical engagement on a framing of bureaucratic politics, which is a research tradition that has made various strides in explaining the formal and non-formal processes that influence environmental governance outcomes.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods and approach</h3>\n \n <p>Building from a wide range of case studies drawn from deep engagement of participatory research in policy-making in Indonesia, we established a simple typology that helps explain eight categories that emerge when bureaucracies, knowledge institutions, and publics come together to shape environmental governance outcomes.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Findings</h3>\n \n <p>The bureaucratic politics specifically clarified the features of cases that have clear fragmentation of bureaucracy but clear explanation variables from the formal and informal interest of bureaucracy. Potential uncovered by bureaucratic politics framing means that, if the metapolitical works alter, the bureaucracy works smoothly or makes it impossible for bureaucracy to operationalize their formal and informal interest in capturing the dynamics of macro and micro politics. In terms of form of knowledge, knowledge produced “from below” can also be used in policy co-production. It can be produced by non-expert actors, or from dialogue among them and sympathetic experts that occur below the bureaucracy's radar (people-driven).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Policy implications</h3>\n \n <p>Our ideal policy co-production implication is where the three actors have a strong foundation of “common consciousness” and interact equally to address a particular environmental policy agenda, with enough working space to jointly commit to creating the knowledge base to shape policy.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51478,"journal":{"name":"Development Policy Review","volume":"41 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Blind spots and spotlights in bureaucratic politics: An analysis of policy co-production in environmental governance dynamics in Indonesia\",\"authors\":\"Muhammad Alif K. Sahide, Micah R. Fisher, Nurhady Sirimorok, Fatwa Faturachmat, Ahmad Dhiaulhaq, Ahmad Maryudi, Karno B. Batiran, Supratman Supratman\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/dpr.12693\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Motivation</h3>\\n \\n <p>There has been growing interest in recent years in a better understanding of knowledge/science and policy co-production in environmental governance.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Purpose</h3>\\n \\n <p>We aim to shed more light on the politics among the numerous actors shaping ideas that drive environmental policy in Indonesia. We focus our theoretical engagement on a framing of bureaucratic politics, which is a research tradition that has made various strides in explaining the formal and non-formal processes that influence environmental governance outcomes.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods and approach</h3>\\n \\n <p>Building from a wide range of case studies drawn from deep engagement of participatory research in policy-making in Indonesia, we established a simple typology that helps explain eight categories that emerge when bureaucracies, knowledge institutions, and publics come together to shape environmental governance outcomes.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Findings</h3>\\n \\n <p>The bureaucratic politics specifically clarified the features of cases that have clear fragmentation of bureaucracy but clear explanation variables from the formal and informal interest of bureaucracy. Potential uncovered by bureaucratic politics framing means that, if the metapolitical works alter, the bureaucracy works smoothly or makes it impossible for bureaucracy to operationalize their formal and informal interest in capturing the dynamics of macro and micro politics. In terms of form of knowledge, knowledge produced “from below” can also be used in policy co-production. It can be produced by non-expert actors, or from dialogue among them and sympathetic experts that occur below the bureaucracy's radar (people-driven).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Policy implications</h3>\\n \\n <p>Our ideal policy co-production implication is where the three actors have a strong foundation of “common consciousness” and interact equally to address a particular environmental policy agenda, with enough working space to jointly commit to creating the knowledge base to shape policy.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51478,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Development Policy Review\",\"volume\":\"41 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Development Policy Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dpr.12693\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Development Policy Review","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dpr.12693","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Blind spots and spotlights in bureaucratic politics: An analysis of policy co-production in environmental governance dynamics in Indonesia
Motivation
There has been growing interest in recent years in a better understanding of knowledge/science and policy co-production in environmental governance.
Purpose
We aim to shed more light on the politics among the numerous actors shaping ideas that drive environmental policy in Indonesia. We focus our theoretical engagement on a framing of bureaucratic politics, which is a research tradition that has made various strides in explaining the formal and non-formal processes that influence environmental governance outcomes.
Methods and approach
Building from a wide range of case studies drawn from deep engagement of participatory research in policy-making in Indonesia, we established a simple typology that helps explain eight categories that emerge when bureaucracies, knowledge institutions, and publics come together to shape environmental governance outcomes.
Findings
The bureaucratic politics specifically clarified the features of cases that have clear fragmentation of bureaucracy but clear explanation variables from the formal and informal interest of bureaucracy. Potential uncovered by bureaucratic politics framing means that, if the metapolitical works alter, the bureaucracy works smoothly or makes it impossible for bureaucracy to operationalize their formal and informal interest in capturing the dynamics of macro and micro politics. In terms of form of knowledge, knowledge produced “from below” can also be used in policy co-production. It can be produced by non-expert actors, or from dialogue among them and sympathetic experts that occur below the bureaucracy's radar (people-driven).
Policy implications
Our ideal policy co-production implication is where the three actors have a strong foundation of “common consciousness” and interact equally to address a particular environmental policy agenda, with enough working space to jointly commit to creating the knowledge base to shape policy.
期刊介绍:
Development Policy Review is the refereed journal that makes the crucial links between research and policy in international development. Edited by staff of the Overseas Development Institute, the London-based think-tank on international development and humanitarian issues, it publishes single articles and theme issues on topics at the forefront of current development policy debate. Coverage includes the latest thinking and research on poverty-reduction strategies, inequality and social exclusion, property rights and sustainable livelihoods, globalisation in trade and finance, and the reform of global governance. Informed, rigorous, multi-disciplinary and up-to-the-minute, DPR is an indispensable tool for development researchers and practitioners alike.