684
Views
8
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Articles

Solving cross-sectoral policy problems: adding a cross-sectoral dimension to assess policy performance

&
Pages 526-539 | Received 15 Dec 2020, Accepted 22 Jul 2021, Published online: 29 Jul 2021

References

  • Araya, K. and others. (2014). Pesticides, Pollution, and People: An Overview of Public Health and Environment in Costa Rica. Working paper
  • Bauer, M. W., & Knill, C. (2014). A conceptual framework for the comparative analysis of policy change: Measurement, explanation and strategies of policy dismantling. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 16(1), 28–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/13876988.2014.885186
  • Burger, P., Bezençon, V., Bornemann, B., Brosch, T., Carabias-Hütter, V., Farsi, M., Hille, S. L., Moser, C., Ramseier, C., Samuel, R., Sander, D., Schmidt, S., Sohre, A., & Volland, B. (2015). Advances in understanding energy consumption behavior and the governance of its change–outline of an integrated framework. Frontiers in Energy Research, 3, 29. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.2015.00029
  • Capano, G., & Howlett, M. (2020). The knowns and unknowns of policy instrument analysis: Policy tools and the current research agenda on policy mixes. Sage Open, 10(1), 2158244019900568. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019900568
  • Capano, G., Pritoni, A., & Vicentini, G. (2020). Do policy instruments matter? Governments’ choice of policy mix and higher education performance in Western Europe. Journal of Public Policy, 40(3), 375–401. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X19000047
  • Del Rio, P., & Howlett, M. P. (2013). Beyond the'Tinbergen rule'in policy design: Matching tools and goals in policy portfolios. Annual Review of Policy Design, 1, 1–16.
  • Dermont, C., Ingold, K., Kammermann, L., & Stadelmann-Steffen, I. (2017). Bringing the policy making perspective in: A political science approach to social acceptance. Energy Policy, 108, 359–368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.05.062
  • De Vito, L., Fairbrother, M., & Russel, D. (2020). Implementing the water framework directive and tackling diffuse pollution from agriculture: Lessons from England and Scotland. Water, 12(1), 244. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12010244.
  • Doern, G. B., & Phidd, R. W. (1983). Canadian public policy Ideas, structure, process. Methuen.
  • Dupuis, J., & Knoepfel, P. (2015). The politics of contaminated sites management: Institutional regime change and actor's mode of participation in the environmental management of the Bonfol chemical waste landfill in Switzerland. Springer international.
  • Echeverría-Sáenz, S., Mena, F., Pinnock, M., Ruepert, C., Solano, K., De la Cruz, E., Campos, B., Sánchez-Avila, J., Lacorte, S., & Barata, C. (2012). Environmental hazards of pesticides from pineapple crop production in the Río Jiménez watershed (Caribbean coast, Costa Rica). Science of the Total Environment, 440, 106–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.07.092
  • Fagan, M. E., DeFries, R. S., Sesnie, S. E., Arroyo, J. P., Walker, W., Soto, C., Chazdon, R. L., & Sanchun, A. (2013). Land cover dynamics following a deforestation Ban in Northern Costa Rica. Environmental Research Letters, 8(3), 034017. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/3/034017
  • Fletcher, R., & Breitling, J. (2012). Market mechanism or subsidy in disguise? Governing payment for environmental services in Costa Rica. Geoforum; Journal of Physical, Human, and Regional Geosciences, 43(3), 402–411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2011.11.008
  • Galt, R. E. (2008). Toward an integrated understanding of pesticide use intensity in Costa Rican vegetable farming. Human Ecology, 36(5), 655–677. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-008-9190-5
  • Galt, R. E. (2014). Food systems in an unequal world: Pesticides, vegetables, and agrarian capitalism in Costa Rica. University of Arizona Press.
  • Gerber, J.-D., Knoepfel, P., Nahrath, S., & Varone, F. (2009). Institutional resource regimes: Towards sustainability through the combination of property-rights theory and policy analysis. Ecological Economics, 68(3), 798–809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.06.013
  • Gerber, J. D., Lieberherr, E., & Knoepfel, P. (2020). Governing contemporary commons: The institutional resource regime in dialogue with other policy frameworks. Environmental Science & Policy, 112, 155–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2020.06.009
  • Howlett, M. (2018). Matching policy tools and their targets: Beyond nudges and utility maximisation in policy design. Policy & Politics, 46(1), 101–124. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557317X15053060139376
  • Howlett, M. P., & Cuenca, J. S. (2017). The use of indicators in environmental policy appraisal: Lessons from the design and evolution of water security policy measures. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 19(2), 229–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2016.1207507
  • Howlett, M., Ramesh, M., & Wu, X. (2015). Understanding the persistence of policy failures: The role of politics, governance and uncertainty. Public Policy and Administration, 30(3-4), 209–220. https://doi.org/10.1177/0952076715593139
  • Howlett, M., & Rayner, J. (2007). Design principles for policy mixes: Cohesion and coherence in ‘new governance arrangements’. Policy and Society, 26(4), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1449-4035(07)70118-2
  • Ingold, K., Driessen, P. P., Runhaar, H. A., & Widmer, A. (2019). On the necessity of connectivity: Linking key characteristics of environmental problems with governance modes. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 62(11), 1821–1844.
  • Jordan, A., & Lenschow, J. (2010). Environmental policy integration: A state of the art review. Environmental Policy and Governance, 20(3), 147–158. https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.539
  • Kammerer, M., Baker, J., Ingold, K., & Castro, P. (2021, February 4–5). Measuring the words vs. deeds gap: A presentation of the vertical policy harmonization index. Manuscript presented at the Annual Conference of the Swiss Political Science Association, Bern, Switzerland.
  • Kern, F., Kivimaa, P., & Martiskainen, M. (2017). Policy packaging or policy patching? The development of complex energy efficiency policy mixes. Energy Research & Social Science, 23, 11–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2016.11.002
  • Kern, F., Rogge, K. S., & Howlett, M. (2019). Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: New approaches and insights through bridging innovation and policy studies. Research Policy, 48(10), 103832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2019.103832
  • Kivimaa, P., & Kern, F. (2016). Creative destruction or mere niche support? Innovation policy mixes for sustainability transitions. Research Policy, 45(1), 205–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.09.008
  • Knill, C., Schulze, K., & Tosun, J. (2012). Regulatory policy outputs and impacts: Exploring a complex relationship. Regulation & Governance, 6(4), 427–444. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2012.01150.x
  • Landry, R., & Varone, F. (2005). Choice of policy instruments: Confronting the deductive and the interactive approaches. In P. M. Eliadis, H. H. Hill, & M. Hill (Eds.), Designing government. from instruments to governance (pp. 106–131). McGill-Queen's University Press.
  • Lange, P., Driessen, P. P., Sauer, A., Bornemann, B., & Burger, P. (2013). Governing towards sustainability—conceptualizing modes of governance. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 15(3), 403–425. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2013.769414
  • Lee, R., den Uyl, R., & Runhaar, H. (2019). Assessment of policy instruments for pesticide use reduction in Europe; Learning from a systematic literature review. Crop Protection, 104929, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2019.104929
  • Lehoucq, F. E. (2005). Costa Rica: paradise in doubt. Journal of Democracy, 16(3), 140–154. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2005.0047
  • Li, L., & Taeihagh, A. (2020). An in-depth analysis of the evolution of the policy mix for the sustainable energy transition in China from 1981 to 2020. Applied Energy, 263, 114611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.114611
  • Lieu, J., Spyridaki, N. A., Alvarez-Tinoco, R., Van der Gaast, W., Tuerk, A., & Van Vliet, O. (2018). Evaluating consistency in environmental policy mixes through policy, stakeholder, and contextual interactions. Sustainability, 10(6), 1896. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10061896
  • Mavrot, C., Hadorn, S., & Sager, F. (2019). Mapping the mix: Linking instruments, settings and target groups in the study of policy mixes. Research Policy, 48(10), 103614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.06.012
  • McGinnis, M. D., & Ostrom, E. (2014). Social-ecological system framework: Initial changes and continuing challenges. Ecology and Society, 19(2), 30. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-06387-190230
  • Metz, F. (2017). From network structure to policy design in water protection: A comparative perspective on micropollutants in the rhine river riparian countries. Springer.
  • Metz, F., & Fischer, M. (2016). Policy diffusion in the context of international river basin management. Environmental Policy and Governance, 26(4), 257–277. https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.1716
  • Metz, F., & Glaus, A. (2019). Integrated water resources management and policy integration: Lessons from 169 years of flood policies in Switzerland. Water, 11(6), 1173. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11061173
  • Metz, F., & Ingold, K. (2014). Sustainable wastewater management: Is it possible to regulate micropollution in the future by learning from the past? A Policy Analysis. Sustainability, 6(4), 1992–2012. https://doi.org/10.3390/su6041992
  • Metz, F., & Ingold, K. (2017). Politics of the precautionary principle: Assessing actors’ preferences in water protection policy. Policy Sciences, 50, 721–743. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-017-9295-z
  • Norton, B. G. (2005). Sustainability: A philosophy of adaptive ecosystem management. University of Chicago Press.
  • Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press.
  • Pacheco-Vega, R. (2020). Environmental regulation, governance, and policy instruments, 20 years after the stick, carrot, and sermon typology. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 22(5), 620–635. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2020.1792862
  • Pedersen, A. B., Nielsen, H. Ø., & Daugbjerg, C. (2020). Environmental policy mixes and target group heterogeneity: Analysing Danish farmers’ responses to the pesticide taxes. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 22(5), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2020.1806047
  • Pischke, E. C., Solomon, B., Wellstead, A., Acevedo, A., Eastmond, A., De Oliveira, F., Coelho Suani, & Lucon, O. (2019). From Kyoto to Paris: Measuring renewable energy policy regimes in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Mexico and the United States. Energy Research & Social Science, 50, 82–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2018.11.010
  • Pollex, J., & Lenschow, A. (2020). Many faces of dismantling: Hiding policy change in non-legislative acts in EU environmental policy. Journal of European Public Policy, 27(1), 20–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2019.1574869
  • Rayner, J., Howlett, M., & Wellstead, A. (2017). Policy mixes and their alignment over time: Patching and stretching in the oil sands reclamation regime in Alberta. Canada. Environmental Policy and Governance, 27(5), 472–483. https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.1773
  • Rogge, K. S., & Reichardt, K. (2016). Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: An extended concept and framework for analysis. Research Policy, 45(8), 1620–1635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.04.004
  • Runhaar, H. (2016). Tools for integrating environmental objectives into policy and practice: What works where? Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 59, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2016.03.003
  • Schaffrin, A., Sewerin, S., & Seubert, S. (2015). Toward a comparative measure of climate policy output. Policy Studies Journal, 43(2), 257–282. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12095
  • Schmid, N., Sewerin, S., & Schmidt, T. S. (2020). Explaining advocacy coalition change with policy feedback. Policy Studies Journal, 48(4), 1109–1134. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12365
  • Schmidt, T. S., & Sewerin, S. (2019). Measuring the temporal dynamics of policy mixes–An empirical analysis of renewable energy policy mixes’ balance and design features in nine countries. Research Policy, 48(10), 103557. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.03.012
  • Stein, U., Özerol, G., Tröltzsch, J., Landgrebe, R., Szendrenyi, A., & Vidaurre, R. (2016). European drought and water scarcity policies. In H. Bressers, N. Bressers, & C. Larrue (Eds.), Governance for drought resilience (pp. 17–43). Springer.
  • Tobin, P. (2017). Leaders and laggards: Climate policy ambition in developed states. Global Environmental Politics, 17(4), 28–47. https://doi.org/10.1162/GLEP_a_00433
  • Tobin, P., Schmidt, N. M., Tosun, J., & Burns, C. (2018). Mapping states’ Paris climate pledges: Analysing targets and groups at COP 21. Global Environmental Change, 48, 11–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.11.002
  • Tosun, J., & Leininger, J. (2017). Governing the interlinkages between the sustainable development goals: Approaches to attain policy integration. Global Challenges, 1(9), 1700036. https://doi.org/10.1002/gch2.201700036
  • Tosun, J., & Treib, O.. (2018). Linking policy design and implementation styles. In M. Howlett & I. Mukherjee (Eds.), Routledge handbook of policy design (pp. 316–330). Routledge.
  • Vedung, E. (1998). Policy instruments: Typologies and theories. In M.-L. Bemelmans-Videc, R. Rist, & E. Vedung (Eds.), Carrots, sticks & sermons: Policy instruments and their evaluation (pp. 21–58). Transaction Publisher.
  • Vlek, C. (2000). Essential psychology for environmental policy making. International Journal of Psychology, 35(2), 153–167. https://doi.org/10.1080/002075900399457
  • Wang, S., Steiniche, T., Romanak, K. A., Johnson, E., Quirós, R., Mutegeki, R., Wasserman, M. D., & Venier, M. (2019). Atmospheric occurrence of legacy pesticides, current use pesticides, and flame retardants in and around protected areas in Costa Rica and Uganda. Environmental Science & Technology, 53(11), 6171–6181. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.9b00649
  • Weidner, H., & Jänicke, M. (2002). Summary: Environmental capacity building in a converging world. In H. Weidner & M. Jänicke (Eds.), Capacity building in national environmental policy (pp. 409–443). Springer.
  • Widmer, A. (2018). Mainstreaming climate adaptation in Switzerland: How the national adaptation strategy is implemented differently across sectors. Environmental Science & Policy, 82, 71–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2018.01.007
  • Zinngrebe, Y. M. (2018). Mainstreaming across political sectors: Assessing biodiversity policy integration in Peru. Environmental Policy and Governance, 28(3), 153–171. https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.1800

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.