Page 33 - Štremfel, Urška, and Maša Vidmar (eds.). 2018. Early School Leaving: Cooperation Perspectives. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut.
P. 33
the emergence, importance and challenges of a cross-sectorial approach to esl
policy regimes). The literature uses a variety of other related (and some-
times synonymous) terms such as partnership, networks, alliances, policy
consistency, cross-cutting policymaking, concerted decision-making, pol-
icy cooperation, collaboration, coordination and integration (e.g. Andrews
& Entwistle, 2010; Stead, 2008; Thomson & Perry, 2006). Despite the vari-
ous and sometimes even overlapping terms in use, authors agree that coop-
eration, coordination, collaboration and integration differ in terms of their
depth or interaction, commitment and complexity, whereas policy cooper-
ation implies dialogue and information, policy coordination also implies
also transparency and avoidance of policy conflicts and policy integration,
which also includes joint working, attempts to create synergies between
policies, and the use of the same goals to formulate policy.2
As the practice of cross-sectoral cooperation has expanded, the na-
ture of these processes has remained poorly defined. Many untested as-
sumptions exist in terms of the definitions, components, structures and
outcomes. Cross-sectoral cooperation thus continues to be an increasingly
practised yet poorly understood phenomenon (Googins & Rochlin, 2000).
Tosun and Lang (2013, p. 1) agree with Hood (2005) that scholarship on
cross-sectoral policy coordination and integration appears to be lagging
behind the practice of policymaking, adding that “despite the vast corpus
of literature, the study of policy coordination and integration has failed to
advance clear-cut theoretical expectations and does not allow for drawing
generalizable conclusions”.
Emergence and definition of cross-sectoral cooperation
The Weberian classical model of bureaucracy specialised in sectors3 (pro-
fessionalised administrative branches) represented the dominant ap-
proach to understanding and analysing public policymaking in the twen-
tieth century. Various demands for better horizontal management among
policy sectors should thus be studied in this regard (Pollitt & Bouckaert,
2011). Steurer (2007) argues that so-called administrative silos, which are
constructed around policy domains but ignore related policies and prob-
lems, are an important factor and challenge in policy integration. Policy
2 The aim of the article is not to elaborate the differences between cooperation, coor-
dination, collaboration and integration. The article uses terms as originally applied
in the reviewed literature.
3 Policy sectors focus on a specific area of public policy and include all groups, organ-
isations and institutional rules pertaining to that arena of policymaking and imple-
mentation (Krott & Hasanagas, 2006, p. 556).
33
policy regimes). The literature uses a variety of other related (and some-
times synonymous) terms such as partnership, networks, alliances, policy
consistency, cross-cutting policymaking, concerted decision-making, pol-
icy cooperation, collaboration, coordination and integration (e.g. Andrews
& Entwistle, 2010; Stead, 2008; Thomson & Perry, 2006). Despite the vari-
ous and sometimes even overlapping terms in use, authors agree that coop-
eration, coordination, collaboration and integration differ in terms of their
depth or interaction, commitment and complexity, whereas policy cooper-
ation implies dialogue and information, policy coordination also implies
also transparency and avoidance of policy conflicts and policy integration,
which also includes joint working, attempts to create synergies between
policies, and the use of the same goals to formulate policy.2
As the practice of cross-sectoral cooperation has expanded, the na-
ture of these processes has remained poorly defined. Many untested as-
sumptions exist in terms of the definitions, components, structures and
outcomes. Cross-sectoral cooperation thus continues to be an increasingly
practised yet poorly understood phenomenon (Googins & Rochlin, 2000).
Tosun and Lang (2013, p. 1) agree with Hood (2005) that scholarship on
cross-sectoral policy coordination and integration appears to be lagging
behind the practice of policymaking, adding that “despite the vast corpus
of literature, the study of policy coordination and integration has failed to
advance clear-cut theoretical expectations and does not allow for drawing
generalizable conclusions”.
Emergence and definition of cross-sectoral cooperation
The Weberian classical model of bureaucracy specialised in sectors3 (pro-
fessionalised administrative branches) represented the dominant ap-
proach to understanding and analysing public policymaking in the twen-
tieth century. Various demands for better horizontal management among
policy sectors should thus be studied in this regard (Pollitt & Bouckaert,
2011). Steurer (2007) argues that so-called administrative silos, which are
constructed around policy domains but ignore related policies and prob-
lems, are an important factor and challenge in policy integration. Policy
2 The aim of the article is not to elaborate the differences between cooperation, coor-
dination, collaboration and integration. The article uses terms as originally applied
in the reviewed literature.
3 Policy sectors focus on a specific area of public policy and include all groups, organ-
isations and institutional rules pertaining to that arena of policymaking and imple-
mentation (Krott & Hasanagas, 2006, p. 556).
33
