Governance and learning in the post-Maastricht era?

Egan, Michelle

doi:10.1080/13501760903332829

Cited by 15 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To answer these questions, one needed to consider the sociological aspects of MLG -structures, processes and procedures -as well as leadership. Egan (2009Egan ( : 1248 noted how, because of the growth of transnational networks, policy learning was taking place in multiple venues; co-operation and interaction was fostering the exchange of ideas, technical expertise and information, as well as the promotion of norms and values. He referred to cross-national networks of collaboration at the international level that were emulating, copying, borrowing and imitating their neighbours.…”

Section: Problem-solving Co-ordination Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Twenty years of multi-level governance: ‘Where Does It Come From? What Is It? Where Is It Going?’ *

Stephenson¹,

Bache²,

Flinders³

2017

Frameworks of the European Union’s Policy Process

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In two decades since the Maastricht Treaty, multi-level governance (MLG) has developed as a conceptual framework for profiling the 'arrangement' of policy-making activity performed within and across politico-administrative institutions located at different territorial levels. This contribution examines the ways in which the MLG literature has been employed, effectively taking stock of applied research to date. It identifies five main uses of MLG and the different focus of emerging research over time. Considering the most recent scholarship, the contribution explores possible new directions for research, in light of global governance, culminating in a 'bird's eye view' of MLG over 20 years.

show abstract

Section: Problem-solving Co-ordination Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Twenty years of multi-level governance: ‘Where Does It Come From? What Is It? Where Is It Going?’ *

Stephenson¹,

Bache²,

Flinders³

2017

Frameworks of the European Union’s Policy Process

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In accordance with Egan [59], we argue that organizational learning can be decoupled from organizational change, i.e., organizational change does not need to be evident in order to identify learning and vice versa organizational learning does not necessarily lead to change. Organizations learn if, and only if, their knowledge alters, but this does not necessarily impact organizational behavior.…”

Section: Introducing Organizational Learningmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Here, we propose a second distinction, namely between compliant and non-compliant learning. Hence, we assume that organizational learning can take place when organizations do not comply with an external demand ( [59], p. 1247). Whereas compliant learning takes place when an organization changes its theories of action according to an environmental demand, non-compliant learning means that an organization does not obey an external demand.…”

Section: Introducing Organizational Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Bretton Woods Institutions and the Environment: Organizational Learning within the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF)

Lindenthal

Koch

2013

Administrative Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Due to a growing public awareness, in the last 40 years environmental impacts of development projects financed and supported by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) have come into view. Since then, the member states have pressured both organizations to implement environmental concerns. We analyze the reactions of the World Bank and the IMF's bureaucracies towards their principals' demands. To reveal if, and to what extent, the observed reactions of both bureaucracies towards environmental integration can be assessed as organizational learning, we develop in a first step a heuristic model that allows for a distinction between different levels of learning (compliant and non-compliant, single-loop and double-loop). In a second step we describe the efforts of the bureaucracies of the World Bank (from the 1970s until today) and the IMF (from the 1990s until today) to integrate environmental protection into their activities. Due to our interest in the quality of the organizational changes, we finally analyze if and to what extent the bureaucracies' reactions to the new external demand qualify as organizational learning. Furthermore, we discuss which factors helped or hindered organizational learning.

show abstract

“…Organizational barriers, embedded interests, past policy commitments and institutionalized routines can prevent individuals or organizations that have learnt from realizing their ambitions (Egan 2009 is not always straightforward. Moreover, uncovering learning and respondents' true motives for particular courses of action is fraught with problems, particularly because self-reported accounts of learning may be subject to bias (Radaelli 2009).…”

Section: Caveats To Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Methodologically, critiques have focused on the tendency of researchers to privilege learning, as opposed to non-learning (avoiding to learn) or no learning in the policy process (Egan 2009;Radaelli 2009). They have also drawn attention to the difficulty of distinguishing learning from other possible explanations of change (Dunlop and Radaelli 2016;Zito and Schout 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does learning matter for policy outcomes? The case of integrating climate finance into the EU budget

Rietig

Perkins

2017

Journal of European Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A considerable body of work has invoked learning in seeking to explain observed patterns of EU policy change. This paper scrutinizes the relevance of learning for understanding policy outcomes. We apply a consolidated framework based on factual, experiential and constructivist learning across the individual and organizational levels to examine the unlikely policy outcome of dedicating 20% of the EU 2014-2020 budget to climate action. Learning did play some role in the policy outcome, in that the belief that climate policy integration (CPI) was an appropriate instrument to address climate change was the result of constructivist learning over the preceding decade. However, this learning was restricted to a handful of policy entrepreneurs in the Cabinet/DG Clima, who largely "pushed" the policy through based on preexisting convictions. Conversely, beyond some experiential learning, there is little evidence that learning was a significant feature of the policy process amongst actors in other European institutions.

show abstract

Governance and learning in the post-Maastricht era?

Cited by 15 publications

References 30 publications

Twenty years of multi-level governance: ‘Where Does It Come From? What Is It? Where Is It Going?’ *

Twenty years of multi-level governance: ‘Where Does It Come From? What Is It? Where Is It Going?’ *

The Bretton Woods Institutions and the Environment: Organizational Learning within the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF)

Does learning matter for policy outcomes? The case of integrating climate finance into the EU budget

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About