One cheer for Jordan and Cairney: Taking the governance literature seriously

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    1 Citation (Scopus)

    Abstract

    In a recent contribution to this journal, Jordan and Cairney have helped focus attention on the concept of policy style. Here, we examine their arguments critically to make four points. First, their treatment of the extant policy networks literature is problematic in various ways. Second, the policy styles literature needs to engage more directly with the governance literature. Third, while the literature on governance suggests that there are three modes of governance-hierarchy, markets and networks-it is generally the 'mix that matters'. Consequently, there are both similarities and differences between countries' policy styles. Fourth, the policy styles literature, like the network governance literature, plays down the importance of the role that citizens, as distinct from experts, can, and to an extent do, play in policymaking.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)475-485
    Number of pages11
    JournalBritish Politics
    Volume10
    Issue number4
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2015

    Fingerprint

    Jordan
    governance
    literature
    Governance
    expert
    citizen
    market

    Cite this

    @article{1d971b80359d459a8276e031d698e640,
    title = "One cheer for Jordan and Cairney: Taking the governance literature seriously",
    abstract = "In a recent contribution to this journal, Jordan and Cairney have helped focus attention on the concept of policy style. Here, we examine their arguments critically to make four points. First, their treatment of the extant policy networks literature is problematic in various ways. Second, the policy styles literature needs to engage more directly with the governance literature. Third, while the literature on governance suggests that there are three modes of governance-hierarchy, markets and networks-it is generally the 'mix that matters'. Consequently, there are both similarities and differences between countries' policy styles. Fourth, the policy styles literature, like the network governance literature, plays down the importance of the role that citizens, as distinct from experts, can, and to an extent do, play in policymaking.",
    author = "David MARSH and Brendan McCAFFRIE",
    year = "2015",
    doi = "10.1057/bp.2015.31",
    language = "English",
    volume = "10",
    pages = "475--485",
    journal = "British Politics",
    issn = "1746-918X",
    publisher = "Palgrave Macmillan",
    number = "4",

    }

    One cheer for Jordan and Cairney: Taking the governance literature seriously. / MARSH, David; McCAFFRIE, Brendan.

    In: British Politics, Vol. 10, No. 4, 2015, p. 475-485.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - One cheer for Jordan and Cairney: Taking the governance literature seriously

    AU - MARSH, David

    AU - McCAFFRIE, Brendan

    PY - 2015

    Y1 - 2015

    N2 - In a recent contribution to this journal, Jordan and Cairney have helped focus attention on the concept of policy style. Here, we examine their arguments critically to make four points. First, their treatment of the extant policy networks literature is problematic in various ways. Second, the policy styles literature needs to engage more directly with the governance literature. Third, while the literature on governance suggests that there are three modes of governance-hierarchy, markets and networks-it is generally the 'mix that matters'. Consequently, there are both similarities and differences between countries' policy styles. Fourth, the policy styles literature, like the network governance literature, plays down the importance of the role that citizens, as distinct from experts, can, and to an extent do, play in policymaking.

    AB - In a recent contribution to this journal, Jordan and Cairney have helped focus attention on the concept of policy style. Here, we examine their arguments critically to make four points. First, their treatment of the extant policy networks literature is problematic in various ways. Second, the policy styles literature needs to engage more directly with the governance literature. Third, while the literature on governance suggests that there are three modes of governance-hierarchy, markets and networks-it is generally the 'mix that matters'. Consequently, there are both similarities and differences between countries' policy styles. Fourth, the policy styles literature, like the network governance literature, plays down the importance of the role that citizens, as distinct from experts, can, and to an extent do, play in policymaking.

    U2 - 10.1057/bp.2015.31

    DO - 10.1057/bp.2015.31

    M3 - Article

    VL - 10

    SP - 475

    EP - 485

    JO - British Politics

    JF - British Politics

    SN - 1746-918X

    IS - 4

    ER -