z-logo
Premium
Managing staged policy implementation: Balancing short‐term needs and long‐term goals
Author(s) -
Carey Gemma,
Nevile Ann,
Kay Adrian,
Malbon Eleanor
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
social policy and administration
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.972
H-Index - 63
eISSN - 1467-9515
pISSN - 0144-5596
DOI - 10.1111/spol.12530
Subject(s) - futures studies , agency (philosophy) , term (time) , process (computing) , process management , business , plan (archaeology) , public economics , economics , computer science , sociology , social science , physics , archaeology , quantum mechanics , artificial intelligence , history , operating system
This study focuses on the agency of governments engaged in implementation processes that take place over a number of years and through multiple stages. The long timeframes associated with staged implementation leave reforms vulnerable to the institutional effects that may ultimately derail policy aspirations. Governments engaged in staged implementation need to be able to plan longitudinally (foresight capacity) and analyse whether implementation processes are creating endogenous sources of institutional change and the likely impact of such change (reflective capacity). In this paper, we argue that being able to exercise foresight capacity and reflective capacity is necessary but not sufficient, if long‐term policy goals are to be realised. Governments must also be able to navigate the inconsistent objectives that arise across the different stages of an implementation process by modifying implementation approaches in ways that reduce the likelihood of unwanted implementation effects occurring—what we have labelled “mitigation capacity.”

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here