Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques

Climate change 2014 - Synthesis Report

Sustainable Development Goals

Public Management Reform. A Comparative Analysis

The third way: the renewal of social democracy

The concept of “wicked problems” has attracted increasing focus in policy research, but the implications for public organizations have received less attention. This article examines the main organizational and cognitive dimensions emerging from the research literature on wicked problems. We identify several recent approaches to addressing problem complexity and stakeholder divergence based on the literatures on systems thinking, collaboration and coordination, and the adaptive leadership roles of public leaders and managers. We raise some challenges for public management in some key functional areas of government—strategy making, organizational design, people management, and performance measurement. We argue that provisional solutions can be developed, despite the difficulties of reforming governance processes to address wicked problems more effectively.

Wicked Problems: Implications for Public Policy and Management

Some of the most difficult policy problems of the modern era have been described as complex, intractable, open-ended and 'wicked'. What are the key features of such problems? And are they really very different in nature from more routine problems? Are we developing better ways to address these wicked problems? This paper sketches some key aspects of wicked problems, and illustrates the discussion with two contemporary Australian examples - recent attempts to address the causes and possible solutions to Indigenous disadvantage; and policy responses to climate change.

https://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:167582/UQ167582OA.pdf

Wicked Problems in Public Policy

This article discusses recent trends to incorporate the results of systematic research (or ‘evidence’) into policy development, program evaluation and program improvement. This process is consistent with the New Public Management (NPM) emphasis on efficiency and effectiveness. Analysis of evidence helps to answer the questions ‘what works? and ‘what happens if we change these settings?’ Secondly, some of the well known challenges and limitations for ‘evidence-based’ policy are outlined. Policy decisions emerge from politics, judgement and debate, rather than being deduced from empirical analysis. Policy debate and analysis involves an interplay between facts, norms and desired actions, in which ‘evidence’ is diverse and contestable. Thirdly, the article outlines a distinction between technical and negotiated approaches to problem-solving. The latter is a prominent feature of policy domains rich in ‘network’ approaches, partnering and community engagement. Networks and partnerships bring to the negotiation table a diversity of stakeholder ‘evidence’, ie, relevant information, interpretations and priorities. Finally, it is suggested that three types of evidence/perspective are especially relevant in the modern era ‐ systematic (‘scientific’) research, program management experience (‘practice’), and political judgement. What works for program clients is intrinsically connected to what works for managers and for political leaders. Thus, the practical craft of policy development and adjustment involves ‘weaving’ strands of information and values as seen through the lens of these three key stakeholder groups. There is not one evidence-base but several bases. These disparate bodies of knowledge become multiple sets of evidence that inform and influence policy rather than determine it.

Three lenses of evidence-based policy

Reconsidering evidence-based policy: Key issues and challenges

Community engagement and citizen participation have long been important themes in liberal democratic theory, although managerial versions of liberal democracy have typically been dominant. In the past two decades, however, many countries have seen a shift away from a managerial or top-down approach, towards a revitalised emphasis on building institutional bridges between governmental leaders and citizenry, often termed ‘community engagement’. This paper outlines some of the main explanations for this shift, including international trends in governance and political economy; the availability of improved communications technologies; the need to share responsibility for resolving complex issues; and the local politics of managing social, economic and environmental projects. Some critical perspectives are also raised, suggesting a degree of scepticism about the intentions of government and implying serious limits on the potential influence of the citizenry and community groups. Important distinctions are draw...

Brian Head

Papers

Wicked Problems: Implications for Public Policy and Management

Wicked Problems in Public Policy

Three lenses of evidence-based policy

Reconsidering evidence-based policy: Key issues and challenges

Community Engagement: participation on whose terms?