IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v35y2008i4p265-276.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Coordination within fragmentation: Governance in knowledge policy in the German federal system

Author

Listed:
  • Jakob Edler
  • Stefan Kuhlmann

Abstract

The governance of Germany's public ‘knowledge system’ is characterised by a variety of coordination needs and modes in a layered and fragmented federal system. Competences are divided between horizontal sectoral ministries and agencies at the federal level and between federal level and the states (Länder), the latter being endowed with major competences in education and science policy. This fragmentation may have advantages regarding interfaces with stakeholders, but coordination between and within ministries is indeed insufficient when it comes to providing policy consistency and overall orientation. The German case shows the coordination challenges of fragmented systems and attempts to improve coherence and provide orientation through means such as (limited) disentanglement of responsibilities, strategic, cross-cutting initiatives, and the usage of standards, evaluation and advisory bodies. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Jakob Edler & Stefan Kuhlmann, 2008. "Coordination within fragmentation: Governance in knowledge policy in the German federal system," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 35(4), pages 265-276, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:35:y:2008:i:4:p:265-276
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/030234208X310329
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Grashof, Nils, 2020. "Putting the watering can away Towards a targeted (problem-oriented) cluster policy framework," Papers in Innovation Studies 2020/4, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    2. Grashof, Nils, 2021. "Putting the watering can away –Towards a targeted (problem-oriented) cluster policy framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    3. Nicola Francesco Dotti & André Spithoven, 2017. "Spatial perspectives on knowledge brokers: Evidence from Brussels," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 49(10), pages 2203-2222, October.
    4. Jan Nill & Amrie Landwehr & Vicente Carabias Barcelo & Gerard Carat, 2009. "ERAWATCH Country Reports 2009: Germany. Analysis of policy mixes to foster R&D investment and to contribute to the ERA," JRC Research Reports JRC53667, Joint Research Centre.
    5. Dan Chen & Bo Ning & Wilfried Bos, 2022. "Relationship between Principal Leadership Style and Student Achievement: A Comparative Study between Germany and China," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(2), pages 21582440221, May.
    6. Hilde Nykamp, 2020. "Policy Mix for a Transition to Sustainability: Green Buildings in Norway," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-17, January.
    7. Leonie Drooge & Jack Spaapen, 2022. "Evaluation and monitoring of transdisciplinary collaborations," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 747-761, June.
    8. Jan Christoph Nill & Alexander Grablowitz, 2009. "ERAWATCH Country Report 2008 - An Assessment of Research System and Policies: Germany," JRC Research Reports JRC50464, Joint Research Centre.
    9. Tilmann Rave & Ursula Triebswetter & Johann Wackerbauer, 2013. "Koordination von Innovations-, Energie- und Umweltpolitik," ifo Forschungsberichte, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 61, October.
    10. Becker, Lasse & Bizer, Kilian, 2015. "Federalism and innovation support for small and medium-sized enterprises: Empirical evidence in Europe," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 245, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:35:y:2008:i:4:p:265-276. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.