New Governance Arrangements (NGAs) have emerged as a lively topic in comparative policy studies and are often proposed as solutions to complex policy problems like environmental or health protection. However, assessing the merits and demerits of particular arrangements or instrument mixes is difficult. The paper proposes a variety of tools to tackle the often-overlooked problem of identifying and inventorying the instruments found in instrument mixes and assessing their likelihood to produce optimal results. A framework is developed for evaluating the likelihood of successful implementation of NGA's that exploits the fact that new policy development is almost always constrained by previous policy choices which have become institutionalized. The degree to which this institutionalization has occurred is seen as variable and the implementation to depend on a number of well-understood processes such as increasing returns and other kinds of positive feedback; sunk costs; and incremental policy learning. The applicability of the framework is demonstrated in the context of NGAs found in the forestry sector.

Thinking about policy mixes is at the forefront of current research work in the policy sciences and raises many significant questions with respect to policy tools and instruments, processes of policy formulation, and the evolution of tool choices over time. Not least among these is how to assess the potential for multiple policy tools to achieve policy goals in an efficient and effective way. Previous conceptual work on policy mixes has highlighted evaluative criteria such as "consistency" (the ability of multiple policy tools to reinforce rather than undermine each other in the pursuit of individual policy goals), "coherence" (or the ability of multiple policy goals to co-exist with each other in a logical fashion), and "congruence" (or the ability of multiple goals and instruments to work together in a uni-directional or mutually supportive fashion) as important design principles and measures of optimality in policy mixes. And previous empirical work on the evolution of existing policy mixes has highlighted how these three criteria are often lacking in mixes which have evolved over time as well as those which have otherwise been consciously designed. This article revisits this early design work in order to more clearly assess the reasons why many existing policy mixes are sub-optimal and the consequences this has for thinking about policy formulation processes and the practices of policy design.

Much attention in recent years has been focused on the idea of replacing patchworks of public policies in specific issue areas with more coordinated or 'integrated' policy strategies (IS). Such strategies are expected to display a match of coherent policy goals and consistent policy means which can produce policy outcomes optimally matched to specific large-scale problem contexts. Work on such strategies in areas such as Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM), National Forest Policies (NFPs), European transportation and energy planning, Mediterranean desertification and others, however, has shown a remarkable resilience of preexisting policy elements, leading to policy failures and other sub-optimal outcomes. On the basis of a review of this literature, this article argues that the development of IS typically follows one or more of the processes Thelen et al. have characterized as 'displacement, conversion, layering, drift and exhaustion'. Studies of IS must take this evolutionary perspective into account in developing a better understanding of issues surrounding appropriate IS design.

No abstract

When, why and how do policy mixes change and evolve? Much of the contemporary interest in such mixes is focused on distinguishing simple policies from more complex policy mixes, evaluating the relationships between single and multiple policy tools within a mix, and developing criteria to assess the likely performance of particular mixes. These are important and necessary analytical tasks. However, another required step in understanding policy mixes is to understand how and why mixes evolve and change over time and to determine whether any changes are an improvement. In this paper, we analyse the development of a complex policy mix in the case of reclamation and remediation of the Alberta oil sands from an earlier ‘simple goal, single instrument’ policy regime to a more complex one. This case study reveals the presence of at least two dynamic processes at work in policy mix development, with significant implications for the nature of the changes that result from them. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment