Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The (Re)turn to the Political: Deepening the Grasp of Contingency in the Theories of the Policy Process

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
A Relational Approach to Governing Wicked Problems

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in Relational Sociology ((PSRS))

  • 59 Accesses

Abstract

In Chap. 7, we go further away from self-actionalism, by deepening the grasp of contingency in the theories of the policy process. We look at attempts at bringing an understanding of the political constitution of policy problems back into the theories of the policy process, by looking at different understandings of policy implementation ranging from the concepts of “street-level bureaucrats” to those of “backward mapping.” Then we move to four basic patterns in theorizing policy as a contingent process: the theory of policy streams; the theory of advocacy coalitions; “thick” institutionalism in rational choice theory; and the theory of “attention shifts.” This provides the basis for making sense of the emergence of the theories of policy networks and the notion of governance as governing through networks. We discuss various additional roots of the notion of governance, such as new-institutionalism, new public management, organization studies and political science, and multi-level governance and/as network governance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    A term sometimes used to highlight the specificity of network form of governance that is neither anarchy of markets, nor hierarchy of state—see Chap. 3.

  2. 2.

    To the “wider interpretation” of governance, Foucault’s notion of “governmentality” as “conduct of conduct” (Foucault 1982) has had quite separate, but increasingly influential impact on the Anglo-American governance literature (see Bevir 2010b).

References

  • Aldrich, H., & Pfeffer, J. (1976). Environments of organizations. Annual Review of Sociology, 2, 79–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allison, G. (1969). Conceptual models and the Cuban Missile Crisis. The American Political Science Review, 63(3), 689–718.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allison, G., & Zelikow, P. (1999). Essence of decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis. Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amnå, E., & Montin, S. (Eds.) (2000). Towards a New Concept of Local Self-Government?: Recent LocalGovernment Legislation in Comparative Perspective. Oslo: Fagbokforlaget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bache, I., & Flinders, M. (Eds.). (2004). Multilevel governance. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner, F. R., & Jones, B. D. (Eds.). (2002). Policy dynamics. Chicago University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner, F. R., & Jones, B. D. (2009). Agendas and instability in American politics. University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benson, K. (1975). The interorganizational network as a political economy. Administrative Science Quarterly, 20(2), 229–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benson, K. (1977). Organizations: A dialectical view. Administrative Science Quarterly, 22(1), 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benson, K. (1982). A framework for policy analysis. In D. L. Rogers & D. A. Whetton (Eds.), Interorganisational coordination: Theory, research and implementation (pp. 137–170). Ames.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berry, F., Brower, R., Choi, S., Goa, W., Jang, H., Kwon, M., & Word, J. (2004). Three traditions of network research: What the public management research agenda can learn from other research communities. Public Administration Review, 64(5), 539–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bevir, M. (2010a). Democratic governance. Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bevir, M. (2010b). Rethinking governmentality: Towards genealogies of governance. European Journal of Social Theory, 13(4), 423–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bevir, M., & Rhodes, R. (2006). Governance stories. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Chia, R. (1999). A ‘rhizomic’ model of organizational change and transformation: Perspective from a metaphysics of change. British Journal of Management, 10(3), 209–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chia, R., & Holt, R. (2009). Strategy without design. The silent efficacy of indirect action. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, G. (1984). A theory of local autonomy. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 74(2), 195–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cobb, R. W., & Elder, C. D. (1971). The politics of agenda-building: An alternative perspective for modern democratic theory. The Journal of Politics, 33(4), 892–899.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conklin, J. (2006). Dialogue mapping: Building shared understanding of wicked problems. John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crozier, M., & Thoenig, L.-C. (1976). The regulation of complex organized systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(4), 547–570.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeFilippis, J. (1999). Alternatives to the “New Urban Politics”: Finding locality and autonomy in local economic development. Political Geography, 18(9), 973–990.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dowding, K. (1995). Model or metaphor? A critical review of the policy network approach. Political Studies, 43(1), 136–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dowding, K. (2001). There must be end of confusion: Policy networks, intellectual fatigue, and the need for political science methods courses in British universities. Political Studies, 49(1), 89–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunsire, A. (1993). Modes of governance. In J. Kooiman (Ed.), Modern governance. New government-society interactions (pp. 21–34). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Easton, D. (1953). The political system: An inquiry into the state of political science. Alfred A. Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elmore, R. (1979/1980). Backward mapping: Implementation research and policy decisions. Political Science Quarterly, 94(4), 601–616.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elmore, R. (1983). Forward and backward mapping: Reversible logic in the analysis of public policy. Paper presented at the International Workshop on Interorganizational Implementation Systems, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, June 27–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Enroth, H. (2011). Policy network theory. In M. Bevir (Ed.), The Sage handbook of governance (pp. 19–35). Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, F., & Forester, J. (Eds.). (1993). The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning. Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flynn, N. (1993). Public sector management. Harvester Wheatsheaf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1982). The subject and power. Critical Inquiry, 8(4), 777–795.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gage, R. W., & Mandell, M. P. (Eds.). (1990). Strategies for managing intergovernmental policies and networks. Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldsmith, M. (1995). Autonomy and city limits. In D. Judge, G. Stoker, & H. Wolman (Eds.), Theories of urban politics (pp. 228–252). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanf, K., & Scharpf, F. (1978). Interorganisational policy making. Limits of coordination and central control. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162(3859), 1243–1248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hay, C. (2016). Good in a crisis: The ontological institutionalism of social constructivism. New Political Economy, 21(6), 520–535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heclo, H. (1978). Issue networks and the executive establishment. In A. King (Ed.), The new American political system (pp. 87–101). American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hitch, C. (1957). Operations research and national planning: A dissent. Operations Research, 5(5), 718–723.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hjern, B., & Porter, D. (1983). Implementation structures: A new unit of administrative analysis. In B. Holzner, K. D. Knorr, & H. Strasser (Eds.), Realizing social science knowledge (pp. 265–277). Physica-Verlag.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons? Public Administration, 69(1), 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howlett, M., McConnell, A., & Perl, A. (2014). Streams and stages: Reconciling Kingdon and policy process theory. European Journal of Political Research, 44, 37–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12064

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, B. (2004). Analysing network partnerships. Benson re-visited. Public Management Review, 6(1), 75–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jessop, B. (1998). The rise of governance and the risk of failure. International Social Science Journal, 50(155), 29–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jessop, B. (2004). Multi-level governance and multi-level metagovernance. In I. Bache & M. Flinders (Eds.), Multi-level governance (pp. 49–74). Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jessop, B. (2011). Metagovernance. In M. Bevir (Ed.), The Sage handbook of governance (pp. 106–123). Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jessop, B. (2016a). The state: Past, present, future. Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jessop, B. (2016b). Territory, Governance and Multispatial Metagovernance. Territory, Politics, Governance, 4(1), 8–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, G. (2011). Policy community. In B. Badie, D. Berg-Schlosser, & L. Morlino (Eds.), International encyclopaedia of political science (pp. 1902–1904). Sage/IPSA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, G., Maloney, W. A., & McLaughlin, A. M. (1994). Characterizing agricultural policy-making. Public Administration, 72(4), 505–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Junginger, S. (2014). Towards Policymaking as Designing: Policymaking beyond Problem-Solving and Decision-making. In Bason C. (Ed.), Design for Policy (pp. 57–69). London, New York: Gover.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keast, R. (2013). Network theory tracks and trajectories. In R. Keast, M. Mandell, & R. Agranoff (Eds.), Network theory in the public sector. Building new theoretical frameworks (pp. 15–30). Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Keast, R., Mandell, M., & Agranoff, R. (Eds.). (2013). Network theory in the public sector. Building new theoretical frameworks. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kickert, W. J. M., Kijn, E.-H., & Koppenjan, J. F. M. (eds.) (1997). Managing Complex Networks. Strategies for the Public Sectors. London, Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kjellberg, F., Reschova, J., & Sootla, G. (1994). The role of local autonomy in democratic and democratising societies. The new local government acts in Czech Republic, Estonia and Norway. Paper presented at the XVI IPSA World Congress, Berlin, August 21–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klijn, E. H. (1997). Policy networks: An overview. In W. Kickert, E. H. Klijn, & J. F. M. Koppenjan (Eds.), Managing complex networks. Strategies for the public sector (pp. 15–34). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klijn, E. H., & Koppenjan, J. F. M. (2000). Public management and policy networks: Foundations of a network approach to governance. Public Management, 2(2), 135–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klijn, E. H., & Koppenjan, J. F. M. (2015). Governance networks in the public sector. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Knoepfel, P., Larrue, C., Varone, F., & Hill, M. (2007). Public policy analysis. Polity Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kooiman, J. (Ed.). (1993). Modern governance. New government-society interactions. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kooiman, J. (1999). Social-political governance. Overview, reflections and design. Public Management: An International Journal of Research and Theory, 1(1), 67–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koppenjan, J., & Klijn, E. H. (2004). Managing uncertainties in networks. A network approach to problem solving and decision making. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Law, J. (1994). Organizing modernity. Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, T., Suddaby, R., & Leca, B. (2009). Institutional work actors and agency in institutional studies of organizations. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Leemans, A. (1970). Changing patterns of local government. IUAL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindblom, C. (1959). The science of “muddling through.”. Public Administration Review, 19(2), 79–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindblom, C. (1979). Still muddling, not yet through. Public Administration Review, 39(6), 517–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipsky, M. (1969). Toward a theory of street-level bureaucracy. Paper prepared for presentation at the 1969 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, York, September 2–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowi, T. (1964). Review: American business, public policy, case-studies, and political theory. World Politics, 16(4), 677–715.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marks, G., & Hooghe, L. (2004). Contrasting visions of multi-level governance. In I. Bache & M. Flinders (Eds.), Multi-level governance (pp. 15–29). Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, D. (1998). Comparing policy networks. Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, D., & Smith M. (2000). Understanding Policy Networks: towards a Dialectical Approach. Policy Studies 48(1), 4-21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayntz, R. (1978). Intergovernmental implementation of environmental policy. In K. Hanf & F. W. Scharpf (Eds.), Interorganizational policy-making: Limits of coordination and central control (pp. 202–214). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayntz, R. (1993). Governing failures and the problem of governability: Some comments on a theoretical paradigm. In J. Kooiman (Ed.), Modern governance: New government—Society interactions (pp. 9–20). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayntz, R. (2003). New challenge to governance theory. In H. Bang (Ed.), Governance as social and political communication (pp. 27–40). Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLaughlin, K., Osborne, S., & Ferlie, E. (2002). New public management. Current trends and future prospects. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murdoch, J. (2006). Post-structuralist geography. A guide to relational space. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nayak, A., & Chia, R. (2011). Thinking becoming and emergence: Process philosophy and organisation studies. In H. Tsoukas & R. Chia (Eds.), Philosophy and organization theory. Research in the sociology of organizations (pp. 281–309). Emerald Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, S. (2010). The new public governance? Emerging perspectives in the theory and practice of public governance. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (1986). An agenda for the study of institutions. Public Choice, 48, 3–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (1998). Behavioural approach to the rational choice theory of collective action: Presidential address. Political Science Review, 92(1), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (2015/1990). Governing the commons. The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, W. (1995). Public policy: An introduction to the theory and practice of policy analysis. Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2011). Public management. Reform a comparative analysis—New public management, governance, and the Neo-Weberian state. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollitt, C., Hanney, S., Packwood, T., Rothwell, S., & Roberts, S. (1997). Trajectories and options: An international perspective on the implementation of public management reforms. Ministry of Finance.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressman, J., & Wildavsky, A. (1973). Implementation. University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, R. A. W. (1981). Control and power in central-local government relations. Gower.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, R. A. W. (1988). Beyond Westminster and Whitehall: The sub-central governments of Britain. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, R. A. W. (1996). The new governance: Governing without government. Political Studies, 44(4), 652–667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, R. A. W. (2000). The governance narrative: Key findings and lessons from the ECRC’s Whitehall Program. Public Administration, 78(2), 345–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, R. A. W. (2007). Understanding governance: Ten years on. Organization Studies, 28(8), 1243–1264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, J. J., & Jordan, A. G. (1979). Governing under pressure. Robertson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabatier, P. (1986). Top-down and bottom-up approach to implementation research: A critical analysis and suggested synthesis. Journal of Public Policy, 6, 21–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sabatier, P. (Ed.). (1999). Theories of the policy process. Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scharpf, F. (1978). Interorganisational policy studies: Issues, concepts and perspective. In K. Hanf & F. Scharpf (Eds.), Interorganisational policy making. Limits of coordination and central control (pp. 345–370). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scharpf, F. W. (1997). Games real actors play: Actor-centered institutionalism in policy research. Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schatzki, T. (2019). Processes, life, and the practice plenum. In T. Reay, T. Zilber, A. Langley, & H. Tsoukas (Eds.), Institutions and organizations. A process view (pp. 79–99). Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, V. (2008). Discursive institutionalism: The explanatory power of ideas and discourse. Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 303–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, V. (2011). Institutional theory. In B. Badie. D. Berg-Schlosser, & L. Morlino (Eds.), International encyclopaedia of political science (pp. 1188–1198). Sage/IPSA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, R. W., & Davis, G. (2006). Organizations and organizing. Rational, natural, and open system perspectives. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepsle, K. (2006). Rational choice institutionalism. In R. A. W. Rhodes, S. Binder, & B. Rockman (Eds.), Oxford handbook of political institutions (pp. 23–38). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. (1964/1957). Models of man: Social and rational: Mathematical essays in a social setting. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (Eds.). (2007). Theories of democratic network governance. Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spector, M., & Kitsuse J. I. (1977). Constructing Social Problems. Menlo Park, Cummings.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teisman, G. (2000). Models for research into decision-making processes: On phases, streams and decision-making rounds. Public Administration, 78(4), 937–956.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teisman, G., & van Buuren, A. (2012). Models for research into decision-making processes: On phases, streams, rounds and tracks of decision-making. In E. Araral, S. Fritzen, M. Howlett, M. Ramesh, & X. Wu (Eds.), Routledge handbook of public policy (pp. 299–319). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teisman, G., van Buuren A., & Gerrits, L. (Eds.) (2009). Managing complex governance systems: Dynamics, self-organization and coevolution in public investments. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torfing, J., Peters, G., Pierre, J., & Sørensen, E. (2012). Interactive governance. Advancing the paradigm. Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tsoukas, H., & Chia, R. (2002). On organizational becoming: Rethinking organizational change. Organization Science, 13(5), 567–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turnbull, N. (2008). Dewey’s philosophy of questioning: Science, practical reason and democracy. History of the Human Sciences, 21(1), 49–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124–1131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. (1969). The social psychology of organizing. Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. (1995). Sensemaking in organisations. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. (2009). Making sense of the organization, volume 2: The impermanent organization. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. (1996). Mechanisms of governance. Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. (1998/1985). The economic institutions of capitalism: Firms, markets, relational contracting. Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xiang, B. (2013). Multi-scalar ethnography: An approach for critical engagement with migration and social change. Ethnography, 14(3), 282–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Governance, Law & Society, Tallinn University, Tallinn, Estonia

    Peeter Selg & Georg Sootla

  2. School of Governance, Law and Society, Tallinn University, Tallinn, Estonia

    Benjamin Klasche

Authors
  1. Peeter Selg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Georg Sootla
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Benjamin Klasche
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peeter Selg .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Selg, P., Sootla, G., Klasche, B. (2023). The (Re)turn to the Political: Deepening the Grasp of Contingency in the Theories of the Policy Process. In: A Relational Approach to Governing Wicked Problems. Palgrave Studies in Relational Sociology. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24034-8_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24034-8_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-24033-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-24034-8

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation