Introduction: policy integration and institutional capacity: theoretical, conceptual and empirical challenges

Figures & data

Table 1. Institutional capacity and policy integration

	Institutional characteristics relevant for policy integration
	Description	Empirical measures
Levels of capacity		Formal	Informal
Systemic	A comprehensive system of norms and rules aimed at the attainment of coherent boundary spanning policy regimes	Policy programmes and plans establishing coherent and coordinated interventions across several policy sectors Dedicated instruments, methods and techniques enabling policy coordination and consistency throughout the whole policy cycle	Principles, Values, Policy paradigms and Administrative cultures underpinned by integration-oriented rationale
Organisational	Vertical and horizontal coordination mechanisms ensuring synergies, complementarity and cooperation between and across political and administrative structures	Inter-departmental boards, task forces, coordination committees Organisational and functional charts	Collaborative and inclusive practices and routines
Individual	Knowledge, competencies and skills facilitating actual coordination and collaborative interactions between and across levels	Cross-sectoral competencies and skills Specialised training	Expert knowledge, Awareness and Leadership enhancing inter-sectoral linkages and interactions

Source: Own elaboration based on NEI (2002) and Wu et al. (2015).

Table 2. Policy recommendations arising from the articles in this collection

Level	Policy recommendations
Systemic	Ensuring the resilience of policy integration goals, mechanisms and tools beyond the life of a given government or governing coalition requires couching these goals, mechanisms and tools within the framework of cross-partisan agreements. To achieve and sustain the necessary cultural shift and foster a virtuous and self-sustaining capacity-building cycle, awareness-raising and capacity-building initiatives aimed at policy integration should be tied to wider administrative reforms and linked to the performance assessment and reward mechanisms of civil servants. Monitoring systems targeting policy process and outcomes should be included in the standard operation modes. This is essential for identifying where the integration chains break and which actions are needed to address bottlenecks and shortcomings
Organisational	To assure the long-term resilience of policy integration agendas, policy integration reforms should not be limited to spelling-out integration goals and the related targets. Instead, they should include the targeted transformation of organisational structures, such as the reorganisation of government departments across cross-cutting policy competences and the creation and funding of cross-sectoral bodies and groups.
Individual	Political and administrative leaders should recognise the important role of policy entrepreneurs and adopt leadership styles that foster openness and opportunities for policy entrepreneurs at lower levels to pursue innovative integrative actions. Policy integration agendas should foresee dedicated awareness-raising, learning and capacity-building initiatives aimed, on the one hand, at generating a cultural shift among public servants and, on the other hand, at creating the skills that are needed for cross-sectoral policy design and implementation, such as negotiation skills, team-work, participatory policy design techniques, etc.

Source: Own elaboration.

NEI Regional and Urban Development. (2002). Key indicators for candidate countries to effectively manage the structural funds (Final Report). Rotterdam.

 Google Scholar

Wu, X., Ramesh, M., & Howlett, M. (2015). Policy capacity: A conceptual framework for understanding policy competences and capabilities. Policy & Society, 34(3–4), 165–171.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar