Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T17:05:46.923Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Relationality: an alternative framework for analysing policy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 February 2020

Raul P Lejano Open the ORCID record for Raul P Lejano [Opens in a new window]
Raul P Lejano*
Affiliation:
School of Culture, Education, and Human Development, New York University, New York, USA
*
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Policy is ostensibly crafted upon an overarching notion of rationality, in the form of rules, roles and designs. However, sometimes policy deviates from formal templates and seems to be guided by a different governing ethic. Rather than categorising these as policy anomalies, we can understand them as the workings of what we will refer to as a relational model of policy. The relational model describes how policy outcomes emerge from the working and reworking of relationships among policy actors. We define relationality and develop its use in policy research. While the relational can be depicted as an alternative model for policy (e.g., Confucian versus Weberian), it is more accurate to understand it as a system that complements conventional policy regimes. To illustrate the concept, we examine examples from policymaking in China. We end with a discussion of how relationality should be a general condition that should be applicable to many, if not all, policy situations.

Keywords

Bourdieunetwork governancepolicy analysisrelationalrelationality
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Public Policy , Volume 41 , Issue 2 , June 2021 , pp. 360 - 383
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Argyris, C and Schön, D (1974) Theory in Practice: Increasing Professional Effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.Google Scholar
Arts, B and Van Tatenhove, J (2004) Policy and Power: A Conceptual Framework Between the ‘Old’ and ‘New’ Policy Idioms. Policy Sciences, 37(3–4): 339–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayres, I and Braithwaite, J (1995) Responsive Regulation: Transcending The Deregulation Debate. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bartels, K and Turnbull, N (2019) Relational Public Administration: A Synthesis and Heuristic Classification of Relational Approaches. Public Management Review, 1–23.Google Scholar
Béland, D (2005) Ideas and Social Policy: An Institutionalist Perspective. Social Policy & Administration, 39(1): 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beretta, S, Berkofsky, A and Zhang, L (eds.) (2017) Understanding China Today: An Exploration of Politics, Economics, Society, and International Relations. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertelli, AM and Smith, CR (2009) Relational Contracting and Network Management. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20(suppl_1): i21–i40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourdieu, P and Nice, R (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice. Volume 16. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourdieu, P (1986) The Forms of Capital. In Richardson, J (ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. New York: Greenwood, 241–258.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P and Wacquant, L (1992) An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Braithwaite, J (2013) Relational Republican Regulation. Regulation & Governance, 7: 124–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruch, S (2017). A relational lens for the study of inequality. Items. Jan. 24, 2017, https://items.ssrc.org/a-relational-lens-for-the-study-of-inequality/ (accessed 20 September 2018).Google Scholar
Brugnach, M and Ingram, H (2012) Ambiguity: The Challenge of Knowing and Deciding Together. Environmental Science & Policy, 15(1): 60–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, J, Smith, N and Vidler, E (2006) The Indeterminacy of Choice: Political, Policy and Organisational Implications. Social Policy and Society, 5(3): 327–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clegg, SR (1989) Frameworks of Power. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooke, G and Muir, R (eds.) (2012) The relational state: How recognising the importance of human relationships could revolutionise the role of the state. London: Institute for Public Policy Research.Google Scholar
De Jong, M (2013) China’s Art of Institutional Bricolage: Selectiveness and Gradualism in the Policy Transfer Style of a Nation. Policy and Society, 32(2): 89–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
della Porta, D (1988) Recruitment processes in clandestine political organizations: Italian left-wing terrorism. In Klanderman, B, Kriesi, H and Tarrow, S (eds.), From Structure to Action. Greenwich: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Deva, S (2010) The Constitution of China: What Purpose Does it (Not) Serve? Jindal Global Law Review, 2( 2): 55–77.Google Scholar
Dryzek, JS (1993) Policy Analysis and Planning: From Science to Argument. In Fischer, F and Forester, J (eds.), The Argumentative Turn In Policy Analysis And Planning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 213–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyer, JH and Singh, H (1998) The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interoganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(4): 660–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edelenbos, J and Klijn, EH (2007) Trust in complex decision-making networks: A theoretical and empirical exploration. Administration & Society, 39(1): 25–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emirbayer, M (1997) Manifesto for a Relational Sociology. American Journal of Sociology, 103(2): 281–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, R, Ury, WL and Patton, B (2011) Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
Forester, J, Kuitenbrouwer, M and Laws, D (2019) Enacting reflective and deliberative practices in action research. Policy Studies, 40(5), 456–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frank, KA, Xu, R and Penuel, WR (2018) Implementation of Evidence-Based Practice in Human Service Organizations: Implications From Agent-Based Models. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 37(4), 867–895.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Friedman, D and McAdam, D (1992) Collective identities and activism: Networks, choices, and the life of a social movement. In Morris, AD and Mueller, C (eds.). Frontiers of Social Movement Theory. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 156–173.Google Scholar
Geertz, C (1973). The Interpretation of Cultures. Volume 5019. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Giddens, A (1984) The Constitution of Society: Outline of The Theory of Structuration. Berkeley, CA: Univ. of California Press.Google Scholar
Gilligan, C (1993). In a Different Voice. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Goffman, E (1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Penguin Random House.Google Scholar
Gunningham, N, Grabosky, PN and Sinclair, D (1998). Smart Regulation–Designing Environmental Policy, Oxford Socio-Legal Studies.Google Scholar
Guo, J (2019) Relational institutions and ENGOs in China: From Nu River to Changzhou. In Lejano, R, Guo, J, Lian, H and Yin, B (eds.). A Phenomenology of Institutions: Relationality and Governance in China and Beyond. Routledge: New York.Google Scholar
Hajer, M and Versteeg, W (2005) Performing Governance Through Networks. European Political Science, 4(3): 340–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardin, A, Ragan, A and Khan, A (2018). Systematic Underutilization of WIC in Athens-Clarke County. Athens: University of Georgia.Google Scholar
Heide, JB and John, G (1992) Do norms matter in marketing relationships? Journal of Marketing, 56(2): 32–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hollstein, B (2011) Qualitative Approaches. The Sage Handbook of Social Network Analysis, 404–416.Google Scholar
Huising, R and Silbey, SS (2011) Governing the Gap: Forging Safe Science Through Relational Regulation. Regulation & Governance, 5(1): 14–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Husserl, E (1901) Logical Investigations (J.N. Finlay, trans.). Volume 2. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ingram, H and Fraser, L (2006) Path Dependency and Adroit Innovation: The Case of California Water. In Punctuated Equilibrium and the Dynamics of US Environmental Policy. New Haven, Connecticut, USA: Yale University Press, 78–109.Google Scholar
Ingram, H, Schneider, AL and DeLeon, P (2007) Social Construction and Policy Design. Theories of the Policy Process, 2: 93–126.Google Scholar
Johnson, T (2011) Environmental Information Disclosure in China: Policy Developments and NGO Responses. Policy & Politics, 39(3): 399–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kan, WS (2018) Consumer-directed care: empowerment model of community care service voucher utilisation in Hong Kong. HKU Theses Online (HKUTO). Hong Kong: The University of Hong Kong.Google Scholar
Koliba, CJ, Meek, JW, Zia, A and Mills, RW (2017) Governance Networks in Public Administration and Public Policy. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klijn, EH and Koppenjan, JF (2000) Public management and policy networks: Foundations of a network approach to governance Public Management: An International Journal of Research and Theory, 2(2): 135–158.Google Scholar
Koliba, C and Koppenjan, J (2016) Managing Networks and Complex Adaptive Systems. In Bovaird, T and Loeffler, E (eds.), Public Management and Governance. London: Routledge, 262–274.Google Scholar
Kooiman, J (1993) Governance and Governability: Using Complexity, Dynamics and Diversity. In Kooiman, J (ed.), Modern Governance. London: Sage, 35–50.Google Scholar
Kooiman, J (2003) Governing as Governance. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Lai, AHY, Kuang, Z, Yam, CHK, Ayub, S and Yeoh, EK (2018) Vouchers for primary healthcare services in an ageing world? The Perspectives of Elderly Voucher Recipients in Hong Kong. Health & Social Care in the Community, 26(3): 374–382.Google Scholar
Laird-Benner, W and Ingram, H (2010) Sonoran Desert network weavers: Surprising environmental successes on the US/Mexico Border. Environment, 53(1): 6–17.Google Scholar
Lascoumes, P and Le Galés, P (2007) Introduction: Understanding Public Policy Through its Instruments – From the Nature of Instruments to the Sociology of Public Policy Instrumentation. Governance, 20(1): 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lejano, R (2006) Frameworks for Policy Analysis: Merging Text and Context. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lejano, R (2008) The Phenomenon of Collective Action: Modeling Institutions as Structures of Care. Public Administration Review, 68(3): 491–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lejano, R, Guo, J, Lian, H and Yin, B (2018). A Phenomenology of Institutions: Relationality and Governance in China and Beyond. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lejano, R, Ingram, M and Ingram, H (2013). The Power of Narrative in Environmental Networks. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lejano, RP and Shankar, S (2013) The Contextualist Turn and Schematics of Institutional Fit: Theory and a Case Study from Southern India. Policy Sciences, 46(1): 83–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levinas, E (1969) Totality and Infinity (A. Lingis, trans.). Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press.Google Scholar
Li, JS (2003) Relation-Based versus Rule-Based Governance: an Explanation of the East Asian Miracle and Asian Crisis. Review of International Economics, 11(4): 651–673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, L (2012) Land Titling in China: Chengdu Experiment and Its Consequences. China Economic Journal, 5(1): 47–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lian, H and Lejano, RP (2014) Interpreting Institutional Fit: Urbanization, Development, and China’s “Land-Lost”. World Development, 61: 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linder, SH and Peters, BG (1984) From Social Theory to Policy Design. Journal of Public Policy, 4(3): 237–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lou, VW and Ci, Q (2014) Ageing Under the One-Child Policy: Long-Term Care Needs and Policy Choices in Urban China. International Journal of Public Policy, 10(4–5): 231–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
March, JG and Olsen, JP (2004). The Logic of Appropriateness. In The Oxford Handbook Of Political Science.Google Scholar
Maynard-Moody, S, Musheno, M and Palumbo, D (1990) Street-Wise Social Policy: Resolving the Dilemma of Street-Level Influence and Successful Implementation. Western Political Quarterly, 43(4): 833–848.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melucci, A (1989) Nomads of the Present: Social Movements and Individual Needs in Contemporary Society. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Mische, A (2011) Relational sociology, culture, and agency. In Scott, J and Carrington, P (eds.). SAGE Handbook of Social Network Analysis. California: Thousand Oaks, 80–97.Google Scholar
Mosse, D (2010) A Relational Approach to Durable Poverty, Inequality and Power. The Journal of Development Studies, 46(7): 1156–1178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muir, R and Parker, I (2014) Many To Many: How The Relational State Will Transform Public Services. London: Institute for Public Policy Research.Google Scholar
Mulgan, G (2012) Government with the people: The outlines of a relational state. In Cooke, G and Muir, R (eds.). The Relational State: How Recognising the Importance of Human Relationship could Revolutionise the Role of the State. London: Institute for Public Policy Research.Google Scholar
Nee, V and Opper, S (2012) Capitalism From Below: Markets And Institutional Change In China. Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nisar, MA and Maroulis, S (2017) Foundations of Relating: Theory and Evidence on the Formation of Street-Level Bureaucrats’ Workplace Networks. Public Administration Review, 77(6): 829–839.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ospina, S (2004) Qualitative Research. Encyclopedia of Leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E (1999) Institutional Rational Choice. In Sabatier, P (ed.), Theories of the Policy Process. Oxford: Westview Press, 35–72.Google Scholar
Pierson, P (2000). Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics. American Political Science Review, 94(2): 251–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poppo, L and Zenger, T (2002) Do Formal Contracts and Relational Governance Function as Substitutes or Complements? Strategic Management Journal, 23(8): 707–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powell, W (2003). Neither Market Nor Hierarchy. The Sociology of Organizations: Classic, Contemporary, and Critical Readings, 315: 104–117.Google Scholar
Pressman, JL and Wildavsky, A (1984) Implementation: How Great Expectations in Washington Are Dashed in Oakland; Or, Why It’s Amazing that Federal Programs Work at All, This Being a Saga of the Economic Development Administration as Told by Two Sympathetic Observers Who Seek to Build Morals on a Foundation. Univ of California Press.Google Scholar
Provan, KG and Kenis, P (2008) Modes of Network Governance: Structure, Management, and Effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(2): 229–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qiao, S and Upham, F (2015) The Evolution of Relational Property Rights: A Case of Chinese Rural Land Reform. Iowa Law Review, 100(6): 2479.Google Scholar
Qin, Y (2009) Relationality and Processual Construction: Bringing Chinese Ideas into International Relations Theory. Social Sciences in China, 30(4): 5–20.Google Scholar
Raiser, M (1997, August). Informal Institutions, Social Capital and Economic Transition: Reflections on a Neglected Dimension. EBRD.Google Scholar
Ricoeur, P (1988) Time and Narrative. Volume 3. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Rhodes, RA (1997) Understanding Governance: Policy Networks, Governance, Reflexivity and Accountability. Open University Press.Google Scholar
Sabatier, PA (1986) Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches to Implementation Research: A Critical Analysis and Suggested Synthesis. Journal of Public Policy, 6(1): 21–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sard, B and Fischer, W (2002) House VA-HUD Appropriations Bill Would Jeopardize Access to Housing Vouchers for Low-Income Families. Washington, D.C.: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.Google Scholar
Schlager, E (1999) A Comparison of Frameworks, Theories, and Models of Policy Processes. Theories of the Policy Process, 1: 233–260.Google Scholar
Schneider, A and Ingram, H (1988) Systematically Pinching Ideas: A Comparative Approach to Policy Design. Journal of Public Policy, 8(1): 61–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, J (2004) Environmental NGOs in China: Roles and Limits. Pacific Affairs, 28–49.Google Scholar
Scott, J and Carrington, PJ (2011) The SAGE Handbook Of Social Network Analysis. London: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
Shimberg Center for Housing Studies (2001) Public Housing Authority Waiting List Characteristics. Gainesville, FL: University of Florida.Google Scholar
Simmons, R (2016) Improvement and Public Service Relationships: Cultural Theory and Institutional Work. Public Administration, 94(4): 933–952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stewart, J (2009) Public Policy Values. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stewart, J and Ayres, R (2001) Systems Theory and Policy Practice: An Exploration. Policy Sciences, 34(1): 79–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stout, M and Love, JM (2015) Relational Process Ontology: A Grounding for Global Governance. Administration & Society, 47(4): 447–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stout, M and Love, JM (2017) Integrative Governance: A Method for Fruitful Public Encounters. The American Review of Public Administration, 47(1): 130–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Susskind, LE, McKearnen, S and Thomas-Lamar, J (1999) The Consensus Building Handbook: A Comprehensive Guide to Reaching Agreement. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Susskind, L (2006). Arguing, bargaining, and getting agreement. The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy, 269–295.Google Scholar
Van Meter, DS and Van Horn, CE (1975) The Policy Implementation Process: A Conceptual Framework. Administration & Society, 6(4): 445–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warne Peters, R and Mulligan, JM (2019) Introduction to a Symposium on Development Implementation: Discipline, Deception, and the Relational Work of Development. Critical Policy Studies, 13(4): 370–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, M (1922) Economy and Society. Berkeley: University of California.Google Scholar
Weber, M (1930). The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (T. Parsons, trans.). New York: Scribner (Original work published 1904).Google Scholar
Wong, KK and Zhao, XB (1999) The Influence of Bureaucratic Behavior on Land Apportionment in China: the Informal Process. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 17(1): 113–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Voß, JP (2014) Performative Policy Studies: Realizing “Transition Management”. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 27(4): 317–343.Google Scholar
Warsen, R, Klijn, EH and Koppenjan, J (2019) Mix and Match: How Contractual and Relational Conditions are Combined in Successful Public–Private Partnerships. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 29(3): 375–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilder, M and Howlett, M (2015). Paradigm construction and the politics of policy anomalies. In Hogan, J and Howlett, M (eds.), Chapter 6 Policy Paradigms in Theory and Practice: Discourses, Ideas and Anomalies in Public Policy Dynamics. Springer, 101–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wong, KK and Zhao, XB (1999) The influence of bureaucratic behavior on land apportionment in China: The informal process. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 17(1): 113–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xin, KK and Pearce, JL (1996) Guanxi: Connections as Substitutes for Formal Institutional Support. Academy of Management Journal, 39(6): 1641–1658.Google Scholar
Yeung, S (2019). The review of one country two systems of Hong Kong over two decades from the perspective of social development: The challenges and prospect. Asian Education and Development Studies.CrossRefGoogle Scholar