The governance capacity of (new) policy arrangements: A reflexive approach

Abstract

The policy arrangements approach (PAA), as elucidated in the previous chapters, is mainly an analytical tool. It helps to describe, understand and explain policy practices from a specific perspective, but it does not offer instruments to evaluate and prescribe policy making. It is, of course, legitimate for any policy researcher to stick to analytical ambitions only. However, when one is involved in policy oriented research, the lack of evaluative and prescriptive tools in PAA is a disadvantage. Therefore this chapter is dedicated to designing such tools. Then, we inevitably enter into the 'normative sphere' of policy analysis. To design an instrument for evaluation and intervention compatible with the PAA, insights from the policy evaluation literature in general as well as from the 'Governance Capacity Approach' (GCA) in particular will be borrowed (Nelissen et al., 2000). The GCA is meant to assess the governance capacity of 'new modes of governance' by evaluating their legal, political and economic qualities. A distinction is made between indicative and performative capacity, the former referring to the potential governance capacity of policy arrangements, the latter to their real of the so-called JEP-triangle, which is a key element of the GCA. It integrates different logics of and criteria for the evaluation and design of policy interventions. Besides, we will use the concept of congruence in order to cover the institutional aspects of policy evaluation and design (Boonstra, 2004; Grin et al., 2004). As an instrument for an institutional assessment of governance capacity is lacking in the original GCA, we will add this concept of congruence to our framework. For several reasons, we think that both approaches PAA and GCA are compatible, even though the first is mainly analytical, the second mainly normative in nature. For example, both are rooted in the recent 'new modes of governance' literature and share a critical view on rational, instrumental policy analysis. At the same time, neither stretches this criticism to the extent that it enters the spheres of radical socialconstructivism or post-modernism. In fact, a middle ground between these paradigms is sought for in what we call a reflexive approach to policy evaluation and design. Although reflexivity can have different meanings, reflexive approaches are generally critical towards first modernity, instrumental rationality and objectivist science, which all assume the existence of a well-ordered and manageable nature and society. Such 'control and steering optimism' should in our view be questioned. At the same time, reflexive approaches maintain and cherish the idea of (collective) agency scientists, policy makers, state departments, social movements, etc. being capable and knowledgeable to reflect upon, respond towards and make a meaningful difference in a complex world. To prevent sticking to abstract notions only, we will also in this chapter come back to (a secondary analysis of) the development of Dutch organic farming. Whereas chapter 2 analyses processes of political modernisation in the Dutch agricultural domain and their impact on organic farming, and chapter 3 analyses the policy arrangement on organic farming, we will assess and evaluate the governance capacity of this latter arrangement in its context of more encompassing transformations. Again the analysis of the case is by no means exhaustive, but just illustrative for the argument. The format of this chapter is as follows. Firstly, we go into policy evaluation methodology. Different approaches and models will be reviewed. Next, the background, nature and suitability of the governance capacity approach (GCA) is addressed, including the introduction of criteria for good governance and of the so-called JEP-triangle. Thirdly, both approaches PAA and GCA are integrated into 'tools' for a reflexive evaluation and design respectively. Here the concept of congruence comes in. Then these tools are applied to the case of Dutch organic farming. Finally, some conclusions will be drawn on the applicability of our model as well as on the governance capacity of the Dutch policy arrangement on organic farming. © 2006 Springer.