Kötü Huylu Problemlerle Mücadele Stratejileri: Problem Odaklı ve Durumsalcı Bir Perspektif

Yıl 2020, , 145 - 170, 23.12.2020

Abdullah Uzun

https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.748552

Cited By: 2

Öz

Belirsiz, karmaşık, çözüme karşı dirençli ve sınırları aşan özelliklere sahip “kötü huylu problemler” kavramı, kamu yönetimi ve kamu politikası araştırmalarında giderek daha fazla dikkat çekmektedir. Bu araştırmaların çoğunda, işbirliği ve ağ yaklaşımı, hükümet birimleri ve kurumları arasındaki koordinasyon veya farklı liderlik tarzları, kötü huylu problemlerle mücadele etmek için her derde deva temel stratejiler olarak sunulmaktadır. Çalışmada, bu temel stratejilerin hiçbirinin her koşulda kötü problemlerle başa çıkmak için daha uygun olmadığı savunulmaktadır. Bu iddia doğrultusunda çalışmada, hangi koşullar altında, hangi tür stratejiler hangi kötü problem türleri için daha uygundur? Başlıca stratejilerin başarılı bir şekilde uygulanmasında sınırlayıcı veya zorlaştırıcı faktörler nelerdir? gibi sorulara cevap verilmesi amaçlanmıştır. Bu kapsamda, literatürdeki pratik ve teorik çalışmalara ve ilgili tartışmalara odaklanarak, kötü huylu problemlerin doğası ve onlarla mücadele stratejileri üzerine probleme odaklı ve durumsalcı bir perspektiften bazı temel argümanlar geliştirilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

kötü huylu problemler, mücadele stratejileri, kamu yönetimi, kamu politikası, durumsalcı perspektif

Strategies to Tackle with Wicked Problems: A Problem Oriented and Contingency Perspective

Öz

The concept of “wicked problems”-those that uncertain, complex, relentless and crosscutting- has attracted increasing attention in public management and public policy research. In most
of this research collaborative approaches and leadership styles, coordination between government units and institutions are presented as basic panacea strategies to tackling wicked problems. The paper argues that none of the major strategies are suitable for tackling wicked problems in all circumstances. It aims to search for answers to the following questions: Under what conditions, which types of strategies are more suitable for which types of wicked problem or with which distinctive features? What are the limiting or coercive factors in the successful implementation of the major strategies? In this context, some basic arguments have been developed from a problemoriented and contingency perspective on the nature of wicked problems and strategies to tackling them by focusing on practical and theoretical studies and related discussions in the literature. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

Wicked Problems, Tackling Strategies,, Public Administration, Public Policy,, Contingency Perspective.

Kaynakça

• 6, P. (2005). Joined-up government in the west beyond Britain: A provisional assessment. Bogdanor, V. (ed.). Joined-up government içinde (ss. 43-106). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Agranoff, R. ve McGuire, M. (2003). Collaborative public management: New strategies for local governments. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
• Alford, J. ve Head, B. W. (2017). Wicked and less wicked problems: A typology and a contingency framework. Policy and Society, 36, 397–413.
• Ansell, C. (2016). Collaborative governance as creative problem-solving. Torfing, J. ve Triantafillou, P. (eds.). Enhancing Public Innovation by Transforming Public Governance? İçinde (ss. 35-54). New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Ansell, C. ve Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18, 543–571.
• APSC (Australian Public Service Commission). 2007. Tackling wicked problems: A public policy perspective. Canberra: APSC. www.apsc.gov.au/publications-and-media/archive/publications-archive/tackling-wicked-problems
• Askim, J., Christensen, T., Fimreite, A. L. ve Lægreid, p. (2009). How to carry out joined-up government reforms: Lessons from the 2001–2006 Norwegian welfare reform. International Journal of Public Administration. 32(12), 1006–1025.
• Bao, G. Wang, X., Larsen, G. L ve Morgan, D. F. (2013). Beyond new public governance: A value- based global framework for performance management, governance, and leadership. Administration & Society. 45(4), 443– 467.
• Benington, J. ve Hartley, J. (2010). Knowledge and capabilities for leadership across the whole public service system. Brookes, S. ve Grint, K. (eds.). The new public leadership challenge içinde (ss. 187-189). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Bingham, L. B., ve O’Leary, R.. (2008). Big ideas in collaborative public management. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
• Bogdanor, V. (2005) Joined-up government, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Bryson, J.M. ve Crosby, B. C. (2008). Failling into cross-sector collaboration successfully. Bingham, L. B. ve O’Leary, R. (eds.). Big ideas in collaborative public management içinde (ss. 55-79). Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
• Camillus, J.C. (2008). Strategy as a wicked problem. Harvard Business Review. 86, 99-106.
• Christensen, T., Fimreite, A.L. ve Lægreid, P. (2014). Joined-up government for welfare administration reform in Norway, Public Organization Review. 14(4), 439–456.
• Christensen, T., Lægreid, P. ve Rykkja, L. (2013). After a terrorist attack: Challenges for political and administrative leadership in Norway. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 21, 167–177.
• Christensen, T., Lægreid, P. ve Rykkja, L. (2016). Ambiguities of accountability and attention: Analysing the failure of a preventive security project. Scandinavian Journal of Public Administration. 20, 21–44.
• Christensen, T. ve Lægreid, P. (2007). The whole-of-government approach to public sector reform. Public Administration Review. 67(6), 1059–1066.
• Clarke, M. ve Stewart, J. (1997). Handling the Wicked Issues: A Challenge for Government. Birmingham, UK: University of Birmingham, Institute of Local Government Studies.
• Conklin, J. (2006). Wicked problems and social complexity. Conklin, J. (ed.), Dialogue mapping: Building shared understanding of wicked problems içinde (ss. 3-40). Chichester, UK: John Wiley.
• Connolly, J. (2015). The “wicked problems” of governing UK health security disaster prevention The case of pandemic influenza. Disaster Prevention and Management. 24(3), 369-382.
• Crosby, B. C. ve Bryson, J. M. (2005). Leadership for the common good (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
• Davies, J. S. (2009). The limits of joined-up government: Towards a political analysis. Public Administration. 87(1), 80–96.
• Daviter, F. (2017). Coping, taming or solving: Alternative approaches to the governance of wicked problems. Policy Studies. 38(6), 571–588.
• Dawes, S., Cresswell, A. ve Pardo, T. (2009). From “Need to Know” to “Need to Share”: Tangled problems, information boundaries, and the building of public sector knowledge networks. Public Administration Review, 69, 392–402.
• Duit, A. ve A. Löf. (2015). Dealing with a wicked problem? A dark tale of carnivore management in Sweden 2007–2011. Administration and Society. 50(8), 1072–1096.
• Durant, R. F. ve J. S. Legge Jr. (2006). Wicked problems’, public policy, and administrative theory. Lessons from the GM food regulatory arena. Administration and Society. 38(3), 309–334.
• Emerson, K. ve Nabatchi, T. (2015). Collaborative governance regimes. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
• Ferlie, E., Fitzgerald, L., McGivern, G., Dopson, S. ve Bennett, C. (2011). Public policy networks and ‘wicked problems’: A nascent solution?. Public Administration. 89(2), 307–324.
• Gray, B. (1989). Collaborating: Finding common ground for multi-party problems. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
• Grint, G. (2010). Wicked problems and clumsy solutions: The role of leadership. Brookes, S. ve Grint, K. (eds.). The new public leadership challenge içinde (ss. 169-187). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Halligan, J. ve Adams, J. (2004). Security, capacity and post-market reforms: Public management change in 2003. Australian Journal of Public Administration. 63(1), 85-93.
• Halligan, J., Buick, F. ve O’Flynn, J. (2011). Experiments with joined-up, horizontal and whole-of- government in Anglophone countries. Massey, A. (ed.). International Handbook on Civil Service Systems içinde (ss. 74-99). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
• Head, B. W. (2010). How can the public sector resolve complex issues? Strategies for steering, administering and coping. Asia Pacific Journal of Business Administration. 2(1), 8–16.
• Head, B. W. (2019). Forty years of wicked problems literature: forging closer links to policy studies. Policy and Society. 38(2), 180-197.
• Head, B. W. ve Alford, J. (2015). Wicked problems: Implications for public policy and management. Administration and Society, 47(6), 711–739.
• Heifetz, R. (1994). Leadership without easy answers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Humpage, L. (2005). Experimenting with a ‘Whole of government’ approach: Indigenous capacity building in New Zealand and Australia. Policy Studies. 26(1), 47-66.
• Huxham, C. (2003). Theorizing collaboration practice. Public Management Review. 5(3), 401–423.
• Keast, R., Mandell, M., Brown, K. ve Woolcock, G. (2004). Network structures: Working differently and changing expectations. Public Administration Review. 64, 363-371.
• Kettl, D. F. (2003). Contingent coordination: Practical and theoretical puzzles for homeland security. American Review of Public Administration. 33(3), 253–277.
• Koppenjan, J. ve Klijn, E.-H. (2004). Managing uncertainties in networks. London: Routledge.
• Lægreid, P. ve L. H. Rykkja. (2015). Organizing for ‘wicked problems’ – Analyzing coordination arrangements in two policy areas: Internal security and the welfare administration. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 28(6), 475–493.
• Lazarus, R. J. (2009). Super wicked problems and climate change: Restraining the present to liberate the future. Cornell Law Review, 94, 1153–1234.
• Levin, K., Cashore, B., Bernstein, S. ve Auld, G. (2012). Overcoming the tragedy of super wicked problems: Constraining our future selves to ameliorate global climate change. Policy Sciences. 45(2), 123–152.
• McConnell, A. (2018). Rethinking wicked problems as political problems and policy problems. Policy & Politics. 46(1), 165–180.
• McGuire, M. (2006). Collaborative public management: Assessing what we know and how we know it. Public Administration Review. 66, 33–43.
• Newman, J. ve Head, B. W. (2017a). The national context of wicked problems: Comparing policies on gun violence in the US, Canada, and Australia. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis. 19(1), 40–53.
• Newman, J. ve Head, B. W. (2017b). Wicked tendencies in policy problems: Rethinking the distinction between social and technical problems. Policy and Society. 36(3), 414–429.
• O’Faircheallaigh, C., Wanna, J. ve Weller, P. (1999). Public sector management in Australia: New challenges, new directions, (2nd Edn.), Melbourne: Macmillan.
• O’Flynn, J. L., Buick, F., Blackman, D. A. ve Halligan, J. (2011). You win some, you lose some: Experiments with joined-up government. International Journal of Public Administration. 34(4), 244–254.
• Osborne, S. P. (2006). The New Public Governance?. Public Management Review. 8(3), 377-387.
• O’Toole, L. J. (1997). Treating networks seriously: Practical and research-based agendas in public administration. Public Administration Review. 57(1), 45–52.
• Peters, B. G. (2015). Pursuing horizontal management: The politics of public sector coordination. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
• Peters, B. G. (2017). What is so wicked about wicked problems? A conceptual analysis and a research program. Policy and Society. 36:3, 385-396,
• Pollitt, C. (2003). Joined-up Government: A Survey. Political Studies Review. 1(1), 34–49.
• Pollitt, C. (2015). Wickedness will not wait: Climate change and public management research. Public Money and Management. 35(3), 181–186.
• Provan, K. G. ve Kenis, P. (2008). Modes of network governance: Structure, management, and effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. 18(2), 229– 252.
• Rittel, H. W. J. ve Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.
• Roberts, N. (2000). Wicked problems and network approaches to resolution. International Public Management Review. 1(1), 1–19.
• Thomson, A. M. ve Perry, J. L. (2006). Collaboration Processes: Inside the Black Box. Public Administration Review. Special Issue, 20-32.
• Termeer, C. J. A. M., Dewulf, A., Breeman, G. ve Stiller, S. (2015). Governance capabilities for dealing wisely with wicked problems. Administration and Society. 47(6), 680–710.
• Uzun, A. (2020). Bir araştırma nesnesi olarak habis sorunlar ve kamu yönetimi disiplini. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi. 15(2), 663 – 676.
• Van Bueren, E. M., Klijn, E.-H. ve Koppenjan, J. F. M. (2003). Dealing with wicked problems in networks: analyzing an environmental debate from a network perspective. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. 13(2), 193–212.
• Weber, E. P. ve Khademian, A. M. (2008). Wicked problems, knowledge challenges and collaborative capacity builders in network settings. Public Administration Review. 68(2), 334–349.
• Wexler, M. N., (2009). Exploring the moral dimension of wicked problems. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy. 29(9/10), 531–542.