This paper first identifies the varied meanings and objectives of joined-up government (JUG). Subsequently it explores the costs and risks involved, and briefly reviews some of the relevant academic literature. Having thus clarified the key concepts and situated the current fashion for a ‘holistic approach’ within the broader literature on co-ordination, the paper also considers a range of approaches to the assessment of progress with JUG.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
6, P. (1997) Holistic Government. London: Demos.
2.
6, P.LeatD.SeltzerK.StokerG. (2002) Towards Holistic Governance: the New Reform Agenda. London: Palgrave.
3.
AgranoffR.McGuireM. (2001) ‘Big Questions in Public Network Management Research’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 11, 3, 295–326.
Centre for Management and Policy Studies (2000) ‘Joined-up Solutions to Policy Development’, summary of a Policy Focus Seminar on Achieving Cross-cutting policies, held at the Royal College of Pathologists, 24 October (http://cmps.gov.uk/whatson/cdt/sem).
14.
Centre for Management and Policy Studies (2001) Better Policy-making. London: Cabinet Office, November.
15.
CIPFA (1997) Building Effective Partnerships: Practical Guidance for Public Services on Working in Partnership. London: Chartered Institute of Finance and Accountancy.
16.
ClarkeJ. (2001) personal communication, 23 September.
17.
ConsidineM. (2002) ‘The End of the Line? Accountable Governance in the Age of Networks, Partnerships and Joined-up Services’, Governance, 15, 1, 21–40.
18.
Department of Health (1998) Partnership in Action (New Opportunities in Joint Working between Health and Social Services). London: Department of Health.
19.
DETR (2000) ‘Cross-cutting Issues in Public Policy and Public Service’, report for the Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions, produced by a team from the School of Public Policy, University of Birmingham (http://www.local-regions.dtlr.gov.uk/cross/ccpps/02.htm).
20.
HagenM.KubicelH. (eds) (2000) One-stop Government in Europe: Results of 11 National Surveys. Bremen: University of Bremen.
21.
HanfK.ScharpfF. (eds) (1978) Interorganizational Policy Making: Limits to Co-ordination and Central Control. London: Sage.
22.
HillM.HupeP. (2002) Implementation and Governance. London: Sage.
23.
HomburgV. (2000) ‘The Political Economy of Information Exchange Politics and Property Rights in the Development and Use of Interorganizational Systems’, Knowledge, Technology and Policy, 13, 3, 49–66.
HuxhamC.VangenS. (2000) ‘Leadership in the Shaping and Implementation of Collaboration Agendas: How Things Happen in a (not quite) Joined-up World’, Academy of Management Journal, 43, 6, 1159–75.
26.
JamesO. (2001) ‘Measuring the Performance of Joined-up Government’, Paper presented to the second Performance in Government Conference, Kensington Palace Hotel, London, 27/28 September.
27.
JuppB. (2000) Working Together: Creating a Better Environment for Cross-sector Partnerships. London: Demos.
28.
KaufmannF.-X. (ed.) (1991) The Public Sector: Challenge for Coordination and Learning. Berlin: de Gruyter.
29.
KavanaghD.RichardsD. (2001) ‘Departmentalism and Joined-up Government: Back to the Future?’, Parliamentary Affairs, 54, 1–18.
30.
KickertW.KlijnE.-H.KoppenjanJ. (eds) (1997) Managing Complex Networks: Strategies for the Public Sector. London: Sage.
31.
KillianW.WindM. (1998) ‘Changes in Interorganizational Coordination and Cooperation: the Implementation and Use of ICTs in Public Administration’, in SnellenI.van den DonkW. (eds) Public Administration in an Information Age. Amsterdam: IOS Press, pp. 273–91.
32.
KouwenhovenV. (1993) ‘The Rise of the Public Private Partnership: a Model for the Management of Public-private Cooperation’, in KooimanJ. (ed.) Modern Governance: New Government-society Interactions. London: Sage, pp. 119–30.
33.
LaneC.BachmannR. (eds) (1998) Trust within and between Organizations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
34.
LowndesV.SkelcherC. (1998) ‘The dynamics of multi-organizational partnerships: an analysis of changing modes of governance’, Public Administration, 76 (2), 313–33.
35.
LipskyM. (1980) Street-level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services. Russell Sage Foundation.
36.
MulganG. (1998) Connexity: How to Live in a Connected World. Boston MA: Harvard Business School Press.
37.
National Audit Office (2001) Measuring the Performance of Government Departments. London: Stationary Office.
38.
NewmanJ. (2001) Modernising Governance: New Labour, Policy and Society. London: Sage.
39.
NewmanJ.NutleyS. (2001) ‘Joining up Government in a Fragmenting State? Tactics, Tensions and Trajectories in Whitehall and the Scottish Executive’, paper presented to an ESRC seminar, Aston University, 8 June.
PollittC. (1984) Manipulating the Machine: Changing the Pattern of Ministerial Departments, 1960–83. London: Allen and Unwin.
42.
Prime Minister and Minister for the Cabinet Office (1999) Modernising Government, Cm4310.London: Stationary Office.
43.
RhodesR. (1997) Understanding Governance. Buckingham: Open University Press.
44.
TeismanG.KlijnE-H. (2002) ‘Partnership Arrangements: Governmental Rhetoric or Governance Scheme?’, Public Administration Review, March/April, 62, 2, 197–205.
45.
ThompsonG. (forthcoming) Between Markets and Hierarchies: the History and Significance of Network Forms of Organization.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
46.
ThompsonG.FrancesJ.LevacicR.MitchellJ. (eds) (1991) Markets, Hierarchies, and Networks: the Coordination of Social Life. London: Sage.
47.
Van BuerenE.KlijnE-H.KoppenjanJ. (2001) ‘Network Management as a Linking Mechanism in Complex Policymaking and Implementation Processes: Analysing Decision Making and Learning Processes for an Environmental Issue’, Paper presented to the Fifth International Research Symposium in Public Management (IRSPM5), University of Barcelona, 9–11 April.
48.
WilliamsonO. (1996) The Mechanisms of Governance. New York: Oxford University Press.
