IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/njopap/v13y2020i2p49-73n4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Functional Politicization in the Dutch Senior Civil Service: Evidence from Longitudinal Surveys and Qualitative Research (2007 – 2019)

Author

Listed:
  • Belloir Alexandre

    (Campus Fryslân – University of Groningen, The Netherlands.)

  • van den Berg Caspar

    (Campus Fryslân – University of Groningen, The Netherlands.)

Abstract

Although substantial advances have been made in our comprehension of functional politicization – political capacities and activities being taken on by bureaucrats in their administrative duties – questions surrounding its causal mechanisms remain. To shed light on these questions, we here explore increasing political polarization (and fragmentation) in Dutch politics and functional politicization over the period 2007 – 2019 to see how the two are related. To do so, we adopt a cross-time approach that observes which skills – political-strategic insight, substantive expertise (Fachwissen), or procedural knowledge (Dienstwissen) – senior civil servants perceive to be the most relevant to successfully and correctly exercise their profession in a period of increasing polarization in the Dutch political landscape. Drawing from surveys conducted with senior civil servants in 2007, 2013 and 2019, combined with semi-structured interviews conducted in 2019, the data depicts the prevalence of political astuteness in the profession and highlights the factors for its causes: institutional, organizational, and interpersonal dynamics. This indicates an (in)direct link between political polarization and functional politicization of the administrative apparatus that serves as a basis for further cross-time and cross-country investigation.

Suggested Citation

  • Belloir Alexandre & van den Berg Caspar, 2020. "Functional Politicization in the Dutch Senior Civil Service: Evidence from Longitudinal Surveys and Qualitative Research (2007 – 2019)," NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, Sciendo, vol. 13(2), pages 49-73, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:njopap:v:13:y:2020:i:2:p:49-73:n:4
    DOI: 10.2478/nispa-2020-0014
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/nispa-2020-0014
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/nispa-2020-0014?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Caspar F. Berg, 2017. "Dynamics in the Dutch policy advisory system: externalization, politicization and the legacy of pillarization," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(1), pages 63-84, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nathalie Schiffino & Kristian Krieger, 2019. "Advisory bodies and morality policies: does ethical expertise matter?," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 52(2), pages 191-210, June.
    2. Caner Bakir, 2023. "The vicious circle of policy advisory systems and knowledge regimes in consolidated authoritarian regimes," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 42(3), pages 419-439.
    3. Jean Philippe Décieux, 2021. "The Dialectic of Transnational Integration and National Disintegration as Challenge for Multilevel Governance," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-11, July.
    4. Johan Christensen, 2018. "Economic knowledge and the scientization of policy advice," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 51(3), pages 291-311, September.
    5. Sedlačko Michal & Staroňová Katarína, 2018. "Internal ministerial advisory bodies: An attempt to transform governing in the Slovak Republic," Central European Journal of Public Policy, Sciendo, vol. 12(1), pages 1-16, June.
    6. Bert Fraussen & Adrià Albareda & Caelesta Braun, 2020. "Conceptualizing consultation approaches: identifying combinations of consultation tools and analyzing their implications for stakeholder diversity," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(3), pages 473-493, September.

    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:vrs:njopap:v:13:y:2020:i:2:p:49-73:n:4. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    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.