Kaarten: PG FIN | Quizlet

Hierarchical Governance (Origins):

Historically rooted in Napoleonic and Prussian traditions, formulated by Max Weber as tasks divided into sub-tasks with rational, rule-bound decision processes.

Hierarchical Governance (Steering):

Steering based on instructions, one-way communication, dependency, and enforcement via legitimate authority and command-and-control.

Market Governance (Core Logic):

Driven by price mechanisms, marketing, competition, and performance-based instruments where governments treat citizens as "clients".

Market Governance (Ideology):

Based on neo-liberal economics (popular since the 1980s), focusing on efficiency, cost-benefit analysis, and outsourcing public tasks.

Network Governance (Core Logic):

Steering through interdependence and trust rather than authority or price, favoring dialogue and co-creation.

Network Governance (Process):

Characterized by informal arrangements, "muddling through" (incrementalism), and voluntary agreements such as covenants.

New Public Management (NPM):

A hybrid that merges market-style task delivery with sophisticated hierarchical reporting and control mechanisms.

Knowledge Governance:

A style focusing on public investments in knowledge development, dissemination, and appealing to actors' self-organizing capacity.

Solidarity Governance:

Focuses on the collective values of communities, manifested in populist movements or grassroots activism.

Reflexive Governance:

A network variant emphasizing "value empathy," trust, and cooperation where actors realize they cannot succeed alone.

Institutional "Lasagna":

The reality that governance styles do not replace each other but coexist as layered realities for managers and politicians.

Primacy of Politics:

The political culture (e.g., in Belgium) where the decision-making authority of elected officials is viewed as superior to any governance arrangement.

Metagovernance (The "Judo Principle"):

Reframing a problem to align with a political leader's mindset so that "as soon as anything moves, new doors will open".

Failure C1 (Lack of Motivation):

A lack of political will to act on a challenge, resulting from leaders weighing pros and cons and choosing non-action.

Failure C2 (Mismatch of Framework):

Designing a governance framework that lacks the specific legal tools or implementation capabilities required for success.

Failure C3 (Lack of Knowledge):

Insufficient experience or knowledge of one or more of the three basic governance styles (Hierarchy, Market, Network).

Failure C4 (Lack of Resources):

Inadequate human or financial resources available to implement a policy at the required level (e.g., local government).

Failure C5 (Lack of Skills):

Practitioners failing to understand the root causes of the governance challenges or the environment they operate in.

Failure C6 (Lack of Compliance):

Inability to secure compliance with a policy goal despite having incentives or instruments, often requiring a switch to a different governance style.

Failure D1 (Incompatible Styles):

Conflict resulting from combining characteristics of hierarchy, market, and network that undermine each other.

Failure D2 (Style-Problem Mismatch):

Using a governance style unsuited for the issue (e.g., using Network governance for a sudden disaster that requires Hierarchy).

Failure D3 (Lack of Integration):

Failing to integrate key policy principles (like sustainability or the polluter pays principle) into the governance setup.

Failure D4 (Ineffective Institutions):

When informal institutions (culture) are so strong they subvert the goals of formal legal arrangements.

Failure D5 (Resistance to Reframe):

Continuing to use the "wrong tool for the right problem" due to a lack of political priority or insight to re-diagnose the issue.

Failure D6 (Goal-Tool Mismatch):

A fundamental tension where the desired policy goal (e.g., circular economy) does not align with the available instruments.

Failure D7 (Lack of Implementation Mechanisms):

Missing interface mechanisms between policy planning and the bodies (agencies/offices) responsible for the work.

Failure D8 (Lack of Coherence):

Failure caused by insufficient institutional coherence or contradictory policies across different sectors.

Failure D9 (Ignoring Culture):

Neglecting the specific cultural, historical, or geographical context of the governance site.

Failure D10 (Blueprinting):

Using a "one-size-fits-all" governance model or "best practice" export without adapting it to the local situation.

Failure D11 (Inadequate Data):

Diagnosis failure resulting from scattered, disputed, or inadequate knowledge about the specific policy challenge.

Failure D12 (Neglect of Long-term):

Focus on immediate outputs that undermines the long-term systemic changes required (e.g., for SDGs).

Failure D13 (Lack of Reflexivity):

Absence of "bird's-eye" perspective or sensitivity to creeping risks (the "frog in pan" situation).

Failure D14 (Lack of Inclusion):

Excluding relevant stakeholders or citizens from the policy preparation and decision-making process.

Failure M1 (Horizontal Fragmentation):

"Silo-thinking" where different government departments fail to coordinate, leading to duplicated or contradictory efforts.

Failure M2 (Vertical Incoordination):

Friction between different levels of government (e.g., Federal vs. Regional) when national goals are subverted by local constraints.

Failure M3 (Lack of Interconnectedness):

Failing to recognize the "indivisibility" of goals, such as the nexus between water, food, and energy.

Implementation Gap:

The distance between the ambitious policy targets committed to on paper and the actual results achieved in practice.

Strategic Forgetting:

Rebranding the removal of reporting, monitoring, or penalties as "simplification" to reduce administrative burden.

Joint-Decision Trap:

A situation where multiple levels must agree, leading to the preservation of ambitious goals but the watering down of implementation instruments.

Wicked Proposition 1:

There is no definitive formulation of a wicked problem (the definition itself is part of the problem).

Wicked Proposition 2:

Wicked problems have no "stopping rule" (there is no clear point where the problem is "solved").

Wicked Proposition 3:

Solutions are not "true-or-false" but "good-or-bad" based on stakeholder values.

Wicked Proposition 4:

There is no immediate or ultimate test of a solution; impacts ripple out unpredictably.

Wicked Proposition 5:

Every solution is a "one-shot operation"; because there is no chance for trial-and-error, every attempt counts.

Wicked Proposition 6:

There is no enumerable set of potential solutions; anything could be a solution depending on the frame.

Wicked Proposition 7:

Every wicked problem is essentially unique and cannot be solved by repeating a previous "success".

Wicked Proposition 8:

Every wicked problem can be considered a symptom of another problem.

Wicked Proposition 9:

Discrepancies can be explained in numerous ways, and the choice of explanation determines the resolution.

Wicked Proposition 10:

The planner has "no right to be wrong" because failures have real societal consequences.

Complexity Dimension:

Refers to the intricate interdependencies where changing one element affects the whole system.

Uncertainty Dimension:

Refers to massive knowledge gaps regarding the causes, impacts, and future trajectories of an issue.

Value Divergence Dimension:

Refers to the conflicting worldviews and interests that make reaching a reasoned consensus impossible.

Super-Wicked Problems:

Problems where time is running out, those seeking the solution are also the cause, and central authority is weak.

Tame Problems:

Problems where the knowledge base is agreed upon and optimal technical solutions can be calculated (e.g., engineering).

Strategy: Avoidance/Denial:

Downplaying a problem's significance or "strategic ignorance" to avoid accountability.

Strategy: Coercive Control:

Centrally imposed executive solutions, often used when problems are framed as "security threats".

Strategy: Micro-Management:

Breaking a system into bite-size pieces, which risks "deceiving" people that the root mess is solved.

Strategy: Technocratic Solving:

Relying on expert logic and rigorous research-based evidence to "tame" an issue.

Strategy: Incrementalism:

"Muddling through" by making small, mutual adjustments between competing interests.

Strategy: Stakeholder Collaboration:

Negotiating shared meaning through dialogue-based platforms.

Strategy: Coping/Prevention:

Long-term approaches focused on stabilizing symptoms and tackling "upstream" root causes.

Acute Crisis:

A fast-moving, immediate catastrophe (e.g., a massive flood or viral outbreak).

Creeping Crisis:

A slow-onset risk that develops gradually (e.g., biodiversity loss) until reaching a critical "tipping point".

Known Knowns:

Robust, relatively complete knowledge about a policy issue.

Known Unknowns:

Identified knowledge gaps that become the focus of research and practitioner learning.

Unknown Unknowns:

A realm of radical uncertainty where even the nature of the knowledge gap is not understood.

Precautionary Principle:

The conservative stance that high-risk innovations should not be licensed unless there is proof of no long-term harm.

Discourse (ADA Definition):

An ensemble of ideas, concepts, and categories through which meaning is given to social phenomena.

Metaphor:

A linguistic tool (e.g., "acid rain") that constructs a particular narrative and suggests "victims" and "perpetrators".

Story-line:

A condensed statement summarizing a complex narrative, used as "short hand" in policy discussions.

Discourse-Coalition:

A group of actors who share a set of story-lines and engage in a specific set of discursive practices.

Practice (Discursive):

The embedded routines and norms that provide coherence to social life and give meaning to speech.

Discourse Structuration:

When a particular discourse dominates how many people conceptualize a social unit or domain.

Discourse Institutionalisation:

When a discourse solidifies into formal institutional arrangements and organizational practices.

Discursive Affinity:

When story-lines from different origins share a similar way of conceptualizing the world.

Positioning:

How actors are "caught up" in an interplay, being forced to take specific roles or perspectives during argumentation.

Emblematic Issue:

A specific case (e.g., "acid rain") that comes to represent a larger, conceptual policy problem.

Key Incidents:

Essential events (e.g., a specific debate or inquiry) used by the analyst to understand discursive dynamics.

Sites of Argumentation:

Locations where arguments are presented, such as parliamentary debates, public inquiries, or media forums.

Helicopter Interviews:

Interviews with three or four key actors from different positions to gain an initial chronology of events.

Mission-Oriented Governance:

Public governance that prioritizes systemic thinking and holistic goals over narrow efficiency.

Planetary Boundaries:

Ecological ceilings (e.g., climate change, biodiversity) defining the safe operating space for humanity.

Polycentric Governance:

A system (pioneered by Ostrom) where progress is achieved through multiple local communities rather than one "panacea".

Adaptive Governance:

A style emphasizing the capacity of a system to "absorb disturbance" and build social learning among stakeholders.

Social-Ecological System:

An organic, interactive system where the structure influences behavior, requiring a holistic understanding.

Decoupling:

The goal of separating economic growth from environmental degradation and greenhouse gas emissions.

Inclusive Growth:

Economic growth that is distributed fairly and creates opportunities for all sections of society.

Normative Concept:

A concept (like Sustainability) that is inherently disputed due to its ambiguity and value-based weight.

SDG Indivisibility:

The principle that the 17 SDGs are interconnected and cannot be achieved in isolation.

Anthropocene:

The current era where human industrial activity is fundamentally undermining planetary systems.

Policy Lab:

A group workshop or digital network that harvests "collective intelligence" to test innovative policy ideas.

Co-design/Co-production:

Participatory approaches where stakeholders and citizens work together to design and deliver policy solutions.

Nudge Framework:

An approach using micro-focus choice options to influence individual behavior without prescriptive regulation.

Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT):

A high-rigor method used to test the efficacy of specific service delivery adjustments.

Techno-economic Imaginary:

A dominant policy logic that favors technological fixes and economic growth over social complexity.

Once Only Principle:

The service delivery principle that citizens should only provide their data to the government one time.

One-stop Shop (OSS):

A single physical or digital point of contact for multiple public services to improve user-centricity.

Digital by Design:

Inherently digital service processes rather than the mere digitization of existing paper systems.

Interoperability:

The technical and institutional ability of different government data systems to communicate with each other.

Administrative Simplification:

The systematic reduction of bureaucratic steps and interactions required to receive a public service.