Policy and power: A conceptual framework between the â€˜oldâ€™ and â€˜newâ€™ policy idioms
AbstractDuring the last few decades, both policy practices and policy idioms have drastically changed. Concepts such as interactive planning, network management, stakeholder dialogue, deliberative democracy, policy discourses, governance, etc. have replaced older ones such as public administration, policy programmes, interest groups, institutions, power, and the like. Although we recognise the relevance and importance of this shift in vocabulary, we also regret related â€˜lossesâ€™. We particularly regret that the concept of power has â€“ in our view â€“ become an â€˜endangered speciesâ€™ in the field of public policy analysis. We therefore will develop a framework to analyse power â€“ being a multi-layered concept â€“ in policy practices in this article. We will do so on the basis of the so-called policy arrangement approach, which combines elements of the old and new policy vocabularies. In addition, we draw upon different power theories in developing our argument and model. As a result, we hope to combine the best of two worlds, of the â€˜oldâ€™ and the â€˜newâ€™ idioms in policy studies, and to achieve our two aims: to bring back in the concept of power in current policy analysis and to expand the policy arrangement approach from a power perspective. Copyright Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2004
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Springer in its journal Policy Sciences.
Volume (Year): 37 (2004)
Issue (Month): 3 (December)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=102982
policy analysis; policy arrangements; political modernisation; policy innovation; power analysis;
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Guzzini, Stefano, 1993. "Structural power: the limits of neorealist power analysis," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 47(03), pages 443-478, June.
- Veenman, Sietske & Liefferink, Duncan & Arts, Bas, 2009. "A short history of Dutch forest policy: The 'de-institutionalisation' of a policy arrangement," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 202-208, May.
- Arnouts, Rikke & van der Zouwen, Mariëlle & Arts, Bas, 2012. "Analysing governance modes and shifts — Governance arrangements in Dutch nature policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 43-50.
- Takeda, Louise & Røpke, Inge, 2010. "Power and contestation in collaborative ecosystem-based management: The case of Haida Gwaii," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 178-188, December.
- Späth, Philipp & Rohracher, Harald, 2010. "'Energy regions': The transformative power of regional discourses on socio-technical futures," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 449-458, May.
- Ruostetsaari, Ilkka, 2009. "Governance and political consumerism in Finnish energy policy-making," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 102-110, January.
- Charles McClintock & Staci Lowe, 2007. "And the question is? Knowledge growth in welfare policy research," Policy Sciences, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 35-54, March.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn) or (Christopher F. Baum).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.