Making Citizen Panels a “Universal Bestseller”

The concept of instrument constituencies: accounting for dynamics and practices of knowing governance

“…Still, as Béland and Howlett (2016, 393f) point out, 'the fact that solutions sometimes chase problems remains an anomalous observation upsetting the prevailing orthodoxy in the field' . What shall we make of observations such as sweeping fashions like network access regulation for the liberalization of utility services and tradable permits for environmental protection (Voß, 2007a), or methods of small group deliberation for citizen participation (Amelung 2012;Amelung & Grabner, 2017)? And what happens around abrupt U-turns in design orientations as part of such diffusion and convergence processes, like the European Union shifting from energy taxes to emissions trading around 2000 (Christiansen & Wettestad, 2003;Voß, 2007b;?…”

“…While the latter can attract actors in supporting a specific policy instrument only temporarily as long as the problem remains salient or until it is perceived to be solved or another instrument arises as a better solution (Perl & Burke, 2015), structural promises can promote an instrument and bind support even when particular problems lose attention or appear to be solved or when functional promises shift. Maintaining a position or demand for special skills and services can be a motivation for actively engaging even in the making of new problems and functionalities in order to keep up momentum and secure wider public and political support for continuing with instrument-related activities (Amelung & Grabner, 2017;Simons & Voß, 2015;Voß, 2007a).…”

“…How policy dynamics are triggered by emerging research fields is clearly visible in the case of sustainability innovations and transition management (Voß, 2014). Yet another example is the pushing of debate about the democratic deficit of liberal-representative institutions by specialists involved in the development and provision of citizen participation methods (Amelung & Grabner, 2017;Voß & Amelung, 2016).…”

“…We can see this when looking at the history of policy instruments like emissions trading (Simons & Voß, 2015;Voß, 2007b), conservation banking , the CDM (Schroth, 2016) or transition management (Voß, 2014), as well as instruments like methods of public participation (Amelung & Grabner, 2017;Voß & Amelung, 2016). At earlier stages of the journeys of these instruments, constituencies began to form but without much self-organization.…”

“…The concept was first introduced in a study of the historical innovation journeys of instruments for trading environmental emissions permits and for liberalizing network-bound utility services (Voß, 2007a(Voß, , 2007b. It was taken up and more explicitly articulated by Voß and Simons (2014) and studied for other cases of tradable permit systems Simons & Voß, 2015;, experimental sustainability management (Voß, 2014) or social policy (Béland & Howlett, 2016), but also for instruments of political representation and legitimation such as methods of public participation and deliberative democracy (Amelung & Grabner, 2017;Voß & Amelung, 2016). The concept has also been discussed in relation to existing concepts and frameworks, such as innovation networks, regulatory communities, epistemic communities, advocacy coalitions, policy subsystems or networks (Mukherjee & Howlett, 2015;Voß, 2007a, pp.…”