The qualitative paper explores an alternative lens, that is, informed by a complexity perspective, through which to frame the adaptive role of local implementers in multi-level governance systems. It argues that three key tenets of complexity thinking – emergence, self-organisation and co-evolution – can help better explain that role. The re-conceptualisation of local actors – from agents to stewards – and of central government – from controller to enabler – are identified as the conditions that allow intelligent actors to leverage local varieties to deliver context-specific solutions. The paper ends with actionable measures that can enhance the self-steering capacity of policy systems.
AlfordJHughesO (2008) Public value pragmatism as the next phase of public management. American Review of Public Administration38(2): 130–148.
2.
AlvessonMSandbergJ (2011) Generating research questions through problematization. Academy of Management Review36(2): 247–271.
3.
AndersonP (1999) Perspective: complexity theory and organization science. Organization Science10(3): 216–232.
4.
AnsellCGeyerR (2017) Pragmatic complexity’ a new foundation for moving beyond ‘evidence-based policy making. Policy Studies38(2): 149–167.
5.
AshbyWR (1956) An Introduction to Cybernetics. London, UK: Chapman and Hall.
6.
BanninkDOssewaardeR (2011) Decentralization: new modes of governance and administrative responsibility. Administration and Society44(5): 595–624.
7.
BanninkDTrommelW (2019) Intelligent modes of imperfect governance. Policy and Society38(2): 198–217.
8.
BarrettSM (2004) Implementation studies: time for a revival? Personal reflections on 20 years of implementation studies. Public Administration82(2): 249–262.
9.
BednarJ (2016) What makes some institutions more adaptable and resilient to changes in their environment than others. In: WilsonDSKirmanA (eds) Complexity and Evolution: Toward a New Synthesis for Economics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 167–184.
10.
BerardoRLubellM (2016) Understanding what shapes a polycentric Governance system. Public Administration Review76(5): 738–751.
11.
BevirM (2013) A Theory of Governance. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
12.
BjurstrømKH (2020) Principal–agent or principal–steward: how ministry–agency relations condition the impact of performance management in the steering of government agencies. Public Performance and Management Review43(5): 1053–1077.
13.
BoultonJGAllenPMBowmanC (2015) Embracing Complexity: Strategic Perspectives for an Age of Turbulence. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, pp. 1–14.
14.
BousemaIBusscherTRauwsW, et al. (2022) Learning and adaptation in polycentric transport Governance: the case of the dutch brabant accessibility Agenda. Administration and Society54(7): 1402–1425.
15.
BristowGHealyA (2015) Crisis response, choice and resilience: insights from complexity thinking. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society8(2): 241–256.
16.
BrodkinEZ (2011) Policy work: street-level organizations under new managerialism. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory21(Supplement 2): i253–i277.
17.
ButlerMJRAllenPM (2008) Understanding policy implementation processes as self-organizing systems. Public Management Review10(3): 421–440.
18.
CairneyP (2012) Complexity theory in political science and public policy. Political Studies Review10(3): 346–358.
19.
CairneyP (2015) Debate: What is complex government and what can we do about it?Public Money and Management35(1): 3–6.
20.
CairneyPSt DennyEKippinS, et al. (2022) Lessons from policy theories for the pursuit of equity in health, education and gender policy. Policy and Politics50(3): 362–383.
21.
CapanoGLippiA (2017) How policy instruments are chosen: patterns of decision makers’ choices. Policy Sciences50(2): 269–293.
22.
CastelnovoWSorrentinoM (2018) Engaging with complexity in a public programme implementation. Public Management Review20(7): 1013–1031.
23.
CastelnovoWSorrentinoM (2022) Public sector reform trajectories: a complexity-embracing perspective. Public Money and Management: 1-9.
24.
ChapmanJ (2004) System Failure: Why Governments Must Learn to Think Differently. London, UK: Demos.
25.
CohenNAviramNF (2021) Street-level bureaucrats and policy entrepreneurship: when implementers challenge policy design. Public Administration99(3): 427–438.
26.
ColanderDKupersR (2014) Complexity and the Art of Public Policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
27.
Dal BóEFinanF (2018) Progress and perspectives in the study of political selection. Annual Review of Economics10: 541–575.
28.
DavisJHSchoormanFDDonaldsonL (1997) Toward a Stewardship theory of management. The Academy of Management Review22(1): 20–47.
29.
DaviterF (2017) Policy analysis in the face of complexity: what kind of knowledge to tackle wicked problems?Public Policy and Administration34(1): 62–83.
30.
DickeLA (2002) Ensuring accountability in human services contracting: can stewardship theory fill the bill?The American Review of Public Administration32(4): 455–470.
31.
EdelenbosJKlijnE-HKortM (2009) Managing complex process systems: Surviving at the edge of chaos. In: TeismanGvan BuurenAGerritsLM (eds) Managing complex governance systems. New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 186–206.
32.
EppelE (2017) Complexity thinking in public administration’s theories-in-use. Public Management Review19(6): 845–861.
33.
EppelEARhodesML (2018) Complexity theory and public management: a ‘becoming’ field. Public Management Review20(7): 949–959.
34.
GerritsLMarksP (2022) Learn and adapt, or perish: the case of the F35 Lightning II. Administration and Society54(7): 1357–1378.
35.
GerritsLMarksPvan BuurenMW (2009) Coevolution: a constant in nonlinearity. In: TeismanGRvan BuurenMWGerritsL (eds) Managing complex governance systems: Dynamics, self-organization and coevolution in public investments. London, UK: Routledge, pp. 134–153.
36.
GrandoriA (2013) Handbook of Economic Organization: Integrating Economic and Organization Theory. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
37.
HallsworthM (2011) System stewardship. The Future of Policy Making?London, UK: Institute for Government.
38.
HallsworthMRutterJ (2011) Making Policy Better. London, UK: Institute for Government.
39.
HarrisonNE (2006) Complexity in world politics. Concepts and Methods of a New Paradigm. New York: SUNY Press.
40.
HartleyJSancinoABennisterM, et al. (2019) Leadership for public value: political astuteness as a conceptual link. Public Administration97(2): 239–249.
41.
HaynesP (2015) Managing Complexity in the Public Services. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
42.
HjernBPorterDO (1981) Implementation structures: a new unit of administrative analysis. Organization Studies2(3): 211–227.
43.
HowlettM (2019) Moving policy implementation theory forward: a multiple streams/critical juncture approach. Public Policy and Administration34(4): 405–430.
44.
HudsonBHunterDPeckhamS (2019) Policy failure and the policy-implementation gap: can policy support programs help?Policy Design and Practice2(1): 1–14.
45.
JonesH (2011) Taking responsibility for complexity. Overseas Development Institute (ODI). Working Paper 330(June).
46.
KimYWarnerME (2016) Pragmatic municipalism: local government service delivery after the Great Recession. Public Administration93(3): 789–805.
47.
KlijnE-H (2008) Complexity theory and public administration: what's new?Public Management Review10(3): 299–317.
48.
KlijnE-HSnellenI (2009) Complexity theory and public administration: a critical appraisal. In: TeismanGvan BuurenAGerritsL (eds) Managing Complex Governance Systems. London, UK: Routledge, pp. 17–36.
49.
KooimanJ (1999) Social-political governance: overview, reflections and design. Public Management Review1(1): 67–92.
50.
LewisMSundaramurthyC (2003) Control and collaboration: paradoxes of Governance. The Academy of Management Review28(3): 397–415.
51.
LindenbergS (2004) Myopic opportunism and joint production: a relational approach to corporate Governance. In: GrandoriA (ed) Corporate Governance and Firm Organization: Microfoundations and Structural Forms. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, pp. 212–231.
52.
LindenbergS (2013) Cognition and governnance: why incentives have to take a back seat. In: GrandoriA (ed) Handbook of economic organization. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, pp. 41–61.
53.
LindenbergSFossNJ (2011) Managing joint production motivation: the role of goal framing and governance mechanisms. Academy of Management Review36(3): 500–525.
54.
LoweTFrenchMHawkinsM, et al. (2021) New development: responding to complexity in public services—the human learning systems approach. Public Money and Management41(7): 573–576.
55.
MayPJ (2015) Implementation failures revisited: policy regime perspectives. Public Policy and Administration30(3–4): 277–299.
56.
MeredithJ (1993) Theory building through conceptual methods. International Journal of Operations and Production Management13(5): 3–11.
57.
MolinaAD (2015) The virtues of administration: values and the practice of public service. Administrative Theory and Praxis37(1): 49–69.
58.
MorçölG (2012) A Complexity Theory for Public Policy. New York, NY: Routledge.
59.
MoynihanDPPandeySKWrightBE (2012) Prosocial values and performance management theory: linking perceived social impact and performance information use. Governance25(3): 463–483.
60.
O'TooleLJ (2000) Research on policy implementation: assessment and prospects. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory10(2): 263–288.
61.
OECD (2017) Debate the Issues: Complexity and Policy Making. Paris, UK: OECD.
62.
OsterlohMFreyBS (2013) Motivation governance. In: GrandoriA (ed) Handbook of economic organization. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, pp. 26–40.
63.
PawsonR (2013) The Science of Evaluation. A Realist Manifesto. London, UK: Sage.
64.
PedersenLH (2014) Committed to the public interest? Motivation and behavioural outcomes among local councillors. Public Administration92(4): 886–901.
65.
PerryJLWiseLR (1990) The motivational bases of public service. Public Administration Review50(3): 367–373.
66.
PirsonMTurnbullS (2012) Complexity theory, CSR, and corporate Governance - The need for alternative governance models. Fordham University Schools of Business Research Paper, Humanistic Management Network, Research Paper Series14(4).
67.
PressmanJLWildavskyAB (1984) Implementation. 3rd edition. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
68.
PycroftABartollasC (2014) Applying Complexity Theory: Whole Systems Approaches to Criminal Justice and Social Work. Bristol, UK: Bristol University Press.
69.
RegoniniG (2001) Capire le politiche pubbliche. Bologna, Italy: Il Mulino.
70.
RhodesMLMurphyJMuirJ, et al. (2010) Public Management and Complexity Theory: Richer Decision-Making in Public Services. New York, NY: Routledge.
71.
RhodesMLMurphyJMuirJ, et al. (2011) Public Management and Complexity Theory: Richer Decision Making in Irish Public Services. New York, NY: Routledge.
72.
RichardsonKCilliersP (2001) What is complexity science? A view from different directions. Emergence: Complexity and Organization3(1): 17–23.
73.
RitzA (2015) Public service motivation and politics: behavioural consequences among local councillors in Switzerland. Public Administration (London)93(4): 1121–1137.
74.
RitzABrewerGANeumannO (2016) Public service motivation: a systematic literature review and outlook. Public Administration Review76(3): 414–426.
75.
SætrenHHupePL (2018) Policy Implementation in an Age of Governance. In: OngaroEVan ThielS (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Public Administration and Management in Europe. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan UK, pp. 553–575.
76.
SandersonI (2009) Intelligent policy making for a complex world: pragmatism, evidence and learning. Political Studies57(4): 699–719.
77.
SandfortJRMoultonS (2020) Replication or innovation? Structuration in policy implementation. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance3(2): 141–154.
78.
SchillemansT (2013) Moving beyond the clash of interests: on stewardship theory and the relationships between central government departments and public agencies. Public Management Review15(4): 541–562.
79.
StokerG (2010) The Microfoundations of Governance: why psychology rather than economics could be the key to better inter-governmental Relations. Social and Economic Studies59(4): 3–26.
80.
StokerG (2019) Embracing complexity: a framework for exploring governance resources. Journal of Chinese Governance4(2): 91–107.
81.
TeismanGGerritsLvan BuurenA (2009) An introduction to understanding and managing complex process systems. In: TeismanGvan BuurenAGerritsL (eds) Managing complex governance systems. New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 1–16.
82.
TeismanGRKlijnE-H (2008) Complexity theory and public management. Public Management Review10(3): 287–297.
83.
TorfingJPetersBGPierreJ, et al. (2013) Interactive Governance. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
84.
Van AsscheKBeunenRVerweijS, et al. (2022) Policy learning and adaptation in governance; a Co-evolutionary Perspective. Administration and Society54(7): 1226–1254.
85.
Van SlykeDM (2007) Agents or stewards: Using theory to understand the government-nonprofit social service contracting relationship. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory17(2): 157–187.
86.
YuJ (2023) Public Management Review25(3): 522–548.
