Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Bureaucratic interactions, from the implementation gap to the implementation trick - Vincent Dubois

290 views

Published on

I Seminário Brasileiro sobre Implementação de Políticas Públicas.

Published in: Government & Nonprofit
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Bureaucratic interactions, from the implementation gap to the implementation trick - Vincent Dubois

  1. 1. Bureaucratic interactions, from the implementation gap to the implementation trick Vincent Dubois Université de Strasbourg, France, SAGE UMR 7363 I Seminário Brasileiro sobre implementação de Políticas Públicas Enap, Brasilia, 2018-03-20/21
  2. 2. Introduction: implementation is the continuation of decision by other means • A ‘continuist’ (vs. sequential) approach to policy-making challenging taken-for-granted distinctions (politics vs. technical, decision and ideas at the top vs. routine enforcement at the bottom, etc.) • Implementation matters: from the question of efficiency (does implementation work?) to the question of process (how does implementation work?) • Using sociological methods and framework in Public Administration and Policy Analysis • A focus on individual interaction (Goffman) • A focus on social welfare: encounters in welfare offices / surveillance policies
  3. 3. Why and when do interactions matter? • One-size-fits-all vs. tailored welfare • Definition of categories and criteria to be enforced • Supervision of low-ranking officials • Behavioral monitoring? • Situations and publics fit standard criteria or not —> In contemporary social welfare 4/5 of these criteria are met
  4. 4. The bureaucrat’s two bodies and the uses of discretion • Bringing Ernst Kantorowicz to the welfare office • Services depend on the characteristics of agents • Services depend on the characteristics of clients • Stating on individual situations and sorting people: translating lives into the language of files, including non-bureaucratic criteria —> A structural pattern of welfare administration, both functional and problematic
  5. 5. The implementation trick • The implementation gap implementers do not stick to the orientations decision-makers want them to follow this discrepancy between official policy and policy in practice is seen as a flaw • The implementation trick this discrepancy is known if not organized by higher-ranking “decision makers” they want a policy orientation they cannot politically endorse (double language) they organize the implementation process in a way that SLBs realize the unofficially desired policy orientation
  6. 6. The implementation trick example 1 the non-take up of minimum benefits (RSA) • up to 58% • launched during summer, with no additional staff • complexity of files and forms to be filled by individuals in precarious situations • no real policy to fight non-take up, as opposed to welfare fraud
  7. 7. The implementation trick example 2 immigration policy in practice (Alexis Spire) • official policy: balance between human rights and containment of migration flows; policy in practice more restrictive • three types of agents at the street-level with various social backgrounds and attitudes: the custodians of national order; the resistants; the pragmatists • the custodians of national order call the tune • a restrictive policy orientation, wanted but unofficial at the head of the state, made in practice at the street- level • high / low; center / periphery; political stage / behind the scenes
  8. 8. Conclusion • The implementation trick as a “Machiavellian” hypothesis which cannot be regarded as the general situation • draws the attention on the political and not only technical dimension of implementation • more generally, for research: studying policy in practice is useful in a critical and sociological perspective • for policy, organization and political purposes: recruitment of SLBs, concrete social conditions, and how citizens experience policy
  9. 9. Muito obrigado!

×