Abstract

In the Multiple Streams Framework (MSF), policy entrepreneurs are primarily defined by their ability to promote and seek support for policy solutions. Recent research, however, points to the importance of policy entrepreneurs as “arena shapers” who attempt to create favorable conditions for their solutions in conflictual policy settings. In this paper, we seek to incorporate such strategies into the MSF by drawing on the organizational foundations of the original garbage can model. The main question is what role do policy entrepreneurs play in “organizing out” opposition from pre-decision processes, as a way of advancing contested policy solutions. We answer this question in a case study of a controversial hospital “mega-project” in Stockholm healthcare that shows how a small but influential team of entrepreneurs used the project as an opportunity for policy change. The study helps to identify three different organizational strategies: 1) regulating participation in order to neutralize opponents: 2) specializing attention to limit the “searchlight” and 3) sequential attention in order to reduce complexity and build commitment. While effective for advancing solutions in the face of conflict and entrenched positions, organizational strategies also have important democratic implications for the legitimacy of pre-decision processes and the prospects for broad deliberation.

Highlights

  • How, and under what conditions, contested solutions become viable political alternatives have been key questions in the literature on agenda-setting in public policymaking (Kingdon 1984; Keeler 1993; Baumgartner & Jones 1993; Zahariadis 2003; Zohlnhöfer & Rüb 2016)

  • This paper has developed the concept of organizational strategies to account for policy entrepreneurs’ attempts to shape the organizational structure of pre-decision processes in order to “maneuver out” opposition and rival solutions

  • This is an example of how consensus can be actively created, even in the face of conflict and entrenched positions in the wider policy community

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Under what conditions, contested solutions become viable political alternatives have been key questions in the literature on agenda-setting in public policymaking (Kingdon 1984; Keeler 1993; Baumgartner & Jones 1993; Zahariadis 2003; Zohlnhöfer & Rüb 2016). It follows that organizing can be used to influence the pace with which alternatives are generated by creating better-integrated subsets of policy communities (cf Zahariadis 2003) Based on this examination of the garbage-can model and its possible application to policy entrepreneurial strategies, the empirical part of this paper seeks: 1) to determine the type of organizational structures (hierarchical/specialized/open) in which solutions are developed, and 2) to explore how and to what extent this structure is influenced by the actions of policy entrepreneurs. The extraordinary nature of mega-projects often involves ways of organizing the preparatory processes and procedures that are not standardized (Flyvbjerg 2014)

Methods and material
Concluding discussion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call