Abstract
AbstractGovernment agencies responsible for policy implementation have expertise on policy practicability, efficiency and effectiveness, and knowledge which is provided to policymakers as feedback. However, we know very little about the feedback dynamics in which implementing agencies provide different types of feedback with the intention that it is used by policymakers, and the strategic decisions underlying these dynamics. This article connects the literature on policy feedback and knowledge use to develop a typology of implementation feedback which can account for these strategic actions. While existing distinctions between positive and negative feedback lead to confusion when applied to implementation feedback, our typology moves beyond this confusion, by classifying implementation feedback on the basis of two dimensions: preferences of implementing agencies and whether feedback is in response an agenda for change, or existing policy instruments. To illustrate the typology, we look at implementation feedback surrounding the post-2013 reform of the Common Agricultural Policy. We find that implementing agencies engage predominantly in problem-solving and mitigating types of implementation feedback, which are the types of feedback most likely to be used instrumentally by policymakers. Moreover, role perception of implementing agencies limits feedback focused on agenda removal, which is more politically sensitive and contested. These insights are important for our understanding of policy feedback on the level of policy instruments and settings. Moreover, future research can use this typology to structure feedback by other actors.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law,Public Administration,General Social Sciences,Sociology and Political Science,Development
Reference57 articles.
1. Baumgartner, F. R., & Jones, B. D. (2005). The politics of attention: How government prioritizes problems. University of Chicago Press.
2. Béland, D. (2009). Ideas, institutions, and policy change. Journal of European Public Policy, 16(5), 701–718.
3. Béland, D., Rocco, P., & Waddan, A. (2019). Policy feedback and the politics of the affordable care act. Policy Studies Journal, 47(2), 395–422.
4. Béland, D., & Schlager, E. (2019). Varieties of policy feedback research: Looking backward moving forward. Policy Studies Journal, 47(2), 184–205.
5. Beyers, J., Donas, T., & Fraussen, B. (2015). No place like home? Explaining venue selection of regional offices in Brussels. Journal of European Public Policy, 22(5), 589–608.
Cited by
9 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献