Search

Copyright of Public Money & Management is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In the network society, the capacity to deal with societal issues is spread among interacting actors in governance networks. Knowledge about this capacity, often called "governance capacity," is still fragmented and quite incoherent. The aim of this study is therefore to gain an integrated understanding of governance capacity. To do this, we conducted a literature review and organized focus groups. This resulted in the selection of five elements of governance capacity: (1) collective action, (2) coordination, (3) resilience, (4) learning, and (5) resources. We used these elements to form the first contours of a governance capacity framework. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2012 the Dutch High-Water Protection Programme (HWPP) was initiated. This programme prioritised dike strengthening projects for the near future with a yearly budget of around 350 million Euros. A safety assessment 2011–2013 indicated the need to strengthen 748 km of dikes. To achieve this, it was recognised that generation and dissemination of state-of-the-art-knowledge was necessary. For this purpose, four Spatial and Technical Research Projects (STRPs) were initiated. The challenge for these STRPs is to generate and disseminate the developed knowledge that is relevant for other dike strengthening projects within the HWPP. This paper examines whether the STRPs have successfully undertaken activities to generate and disseminate new knowledge to relevant stakeholders. We examine how the generation and dissemination of knowledge from the STRPs to the HWPP-projects and water management organisations in the Netherlands took place and might be further facilitated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For public service organizations (PSOs) it is essential to be able to simultaneously optimize and innovate policies, processes and services. This article explores how PSOs shape these dual practices by examining optimization and innovation practices in eight Dutch regional water authorities (RWAs) using focus groups. It uncovers mutually reinforcing differences in culture, strategy and management leading to different ambidextrous configurations. In low ambidextrous RWAs a legalistic task-orientation goes along with a transactional management style and focus on optimization only. In high ambidextrous RWAs a societal value-orientation, integrative strategies, and a more transformational management style lead to more embedded innovation practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Community-based initiatives (CBIs) are emerging in many domains such as care, sustainable energy and water management. This paper examined three initiatives in Dutch water management, focusing on their relationship with water boards. CBIs present issues that water boards find difficult to respond to because of two reasons. First, CBIs are demarcated very differently from the formal tasks that water boards pursue. This calls for internal alignment within water boards to respond adequately. Second, CBIs necessitate external alignment with other water-managing governments. Water boards must therefore implement double helix alignment to relate productively to initiatives emerging in society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Innovative policy measures often imply institutional adjustments. Whether such adjustments are accomplished often depends upon the presence of institutional entrepreneurship: actors who take responsibility to initiate the necessary actions to redesign existing institutional practices. The question arises under which conditions can institutional entrepreneurship be developed? And, what might be the cause of lacking institutional entrepreneurship? In this article, the latter question is examined through in-depth collaborative research project for exploring alternative, adaptive flood risk strategies for flood proofing the unembanked area of the north-end of the city district Feijenoord in Rotterdam. Due to climate change, these areas are increasingly vulnerable to flooding. The traditional, institutionalized solution of raising the ground level before initiating new spatial developments does not suffice in the long term. Therefore, the city government explored alternative strategies for more adaptive ways of dealing with flood risks. Together with representatives of key stakeholders in the area, two key strategies for the unembanked areas were elaborated. These strategies have significant implications for the distribution of costs, risks and responsibilities and necessitate alternative governance architectures that exceed the current institutional structures. During the research project, it became clear that the developed alternative strategies fundamentally differed from the current institutional system. Thus, institutional redesign was necessary. This proved to be virtually impossible, especially because none of the involved actors was willing nor capable of undertaking entrepreneurial activities to start such redesign. This observation led us to further investigate into the causes and the consequences of the absent entrepreneurship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aims at describing, analyzing and evaluating the relation between management styles and process dynamics of a complex planning process confronted with unexpected dynamics. The development of an aquatic disposal site for dredged contaminated sediments in Oslo was managed by a project management style focused on timely and cost-effective implementation. Coupling the remediation project with another infrastructural project and the actual construction of the site led to unexpected dynamics in terms of resistance and controversy. Project management had difficulties in adjusting its style accordingly, resulting in even more delay and resistance. Managing complex planning projects requires a style suitable to the characteristics of the project and the capability of adjusting it to changing circumstances. The paper concludes with some explanations why it is difficult to change management styles in complex planning and implementation processes and complexity-embracing approaches to deal with this. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

In order for co-production to become a viable way of working in public sector management and policy-making, practitioners need to be more reflective and researchers need to be more action oriented. This article discusses reflective practice, action research and the idea of a community of inquiry in which both practice and science work together. The authors illustrate their ideas with an example from their own practice and explain the advantages of their approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Governments are increasingly challenged by self-organizing community initiatives that seek to contribute to or even take the lead in public value creation. The reason for citizen-led instead of government-led public value creation is part of two larger governance trends. The first is the increased specialized, mission-oriented approach to large social challenges by government agencies. The second trend is the increased emphasis on accountability, productivity, and efficiency, following the New Public Management philosophy. As a response to these trends, community initiatives challenge the usual mechanisms, principles, and practices of government agencies. These initiatives are characterized by more integrated and inclusive approaches for dealing with societal problems. In turn, government agencies struggle with the way they can organize productive responses to the initiatives communities take in creating public value. In this study, we explore the rationales behind processes of public value creation in which communities take the lead. We explored these processes in Dutch water management. In this highly functionally specialized domain, we compared two cases in which communities take on leadership for integrated initiatives, including other societal functions and tasks adjacent to water management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]