Climate adaptation on the crossroads of multiple boundaries. Managing boundaries in a complex programme context

Abstract

Programme management is increasingly used in The Netherlands to realize more integrated regional development, where different sectoral policy objectives are combined. To understand how integration of different objectives is realized in programme management approaches, it is important to have in depth knowledge on how actors manage social, cognitive and physical boundaries. Therefore, this article analyses how actors manage boundaries in a regional integrative programme. Within this case we focus on two integration attempts: one which has succeeded relatively well and one which was less successful. The analysis shows the importance of boundary spanning actions, such as jointly working on strategy documents, organizing events where actors can formally and informally interact, and the activities of a political change agent. Adding to previous insights, we find four additional explanations for successful integration which shed new light on how boundaries can be best managed in future programmatic approaches: the influence of contextual factors on boundary management and its success, the need to address both the social and cognitive dimension of boundaries, the need to make the programme attractive for the actors governing the issues it wants to integrate with, and the role of boundary drawing to create an understanding and respect for boundaries.

Facing NPG implementation problems in municipal organizations: The wickedness of combined value systems

“…Second, as new values were added rather than replacing existing values, we find that civil servants’ daily experience of value conflicts and tensions created a paradox in their minds between: ‘ am I going to do it right’ – implementing traditional TPA and NPM values, such as transparency, legitimacy, and effectiveness – and ‘am I going to do the right thing’ – implementing NPG values such as sustainability, innovation, or citizen participation. On the one hand, the ability to cross internal boundaries to work in an integral way is key for innovation in NPG as discussed by Van Broek and Van Buuren (2020). On the other hand, sustaining existing boundaries is needed to defend traditional public values, such as accountability (Stafford and Stapleton, 2017).…”

“…Public and policy actors who try to justify their choices in the face of complexity are constrained and enabled in that task by the institutions available for them to draw on (Thatcher and Rein, 2004). NPG has introduced an additional set of principles and mechanisms to the modes of TPA and NPM, causing hybridity (Torfing and Triantafillou, 2013), requiring actors to coordinate their activities and seek interventions that integrate multiple objectives (Van Broekhoven and Van Buuren, 2020). Following Fossestøl et al (2015: 290), we approach hybridity in terms of “ the ability of organizations to incorporate elements from contradictory institutional logics over time, and thus as the organizational processes through which this incorporation is managed ”.…”

Managing boundaries over time in integrative planning processes. A process analysis of boundary work in two cases of multifunctional land use

“…The analysis elaborates upon earlier work on enabling and constraining effects of different types of boundary actions (cf. van Broekhoven et al 2015;Van Broekhoven and Van Buuren 2020;Westerink 2016;Hernes 2003), by providing further insight on when in integrative processes which sequences of actions help to realize effective integration of functions. We identify three patterns in the sequences of boundary actions in the 11 lineages that are studied within the two cases, which shed new light on how boundaries can be best managed over time in future integrative initiatives.…”

The balancing act

“…On the other hand, sustaining existing boundaries is needed to defend traditional public values. Further research on boundary work should thus focus on balancing innovating and sustaining boundary spanning 'actions' (Balogun, Gleadle, Hailey, & Willmott, 2005;van Broekhoven & van Buuren, 2020), which, in turn, will allow actors to "do the right thing right".…”

“…Alongside understanding more about internal hybridity, the research did not particularly focus on coping patterns for managing internal implementation problems. Consequently, in order to learn more about the key elements of managing intersections from an internal organizational perspective, I would recommend that future research apply the concepts of boundary work within this field of inquiry (Balogun et al, 2005;van Broekhoven & van Buuren, 2020). Such research could focus on how balancing innovating boundary spanning actions can help to facilitate integration, for the express purpose of embedding new values and sustaining boundary actions to defend traditional public values.…”