How do bureaucracies remember? The conventional view is that institutional memory is static and singular, the sum of recorded files and learned procedures. There is a growing body of scholarship that suggests contemporary bureaucracies are failing at this core task. This Element argues that this diagnosis misses that memories are essentially dynamic stories. They reside with people and are thus dispersed across the array of actors that make up the differentiated polity. Drawing on four policy examples from four sectors (housing, energy, family violence and justice) in three countries (the UK, Australia and New Zealand), this Element argues that treating the way institutions remember as storytelling is both empirically salient and normatively desirable. It is concluded that the current conceptualisation of institutional memory needs to be recalibrated to fit the types of policy learning practices required by modern collaborative governance.
Is abortion ethical? The answer to this question is often obscured by rhetoric, slogans, and politics. And the media message on abortion is often of little help. When the typical American opens up her morning newspaper, she sees the topic debated between pro-lifers and pro-choicers but receives little information that could help her make an informed moral decision. And as she reads further about the subject, it seems that the Christian church, often an ethical guide in many of her decisions, is of no use to her. Sadly, she is told that the church is just as divided as the rest of society on the topic. So our average American is left to fend for herself. She must somehow decide the right answer with little guidance from society, from the church, or even from God himself. But is our average American really without guidance? Has she gotten all the information she needs about abortion, or has she received only the five-second sound bite that leaves her as confused as she was before she heard about the abortion debate? And has God been silent on the abortion question? Has the church really shown a diversity of opinion on the sanctity of life? A Love for Lifewill provide Christians with the biblical and historical information that they need to make an informed decision on the abortion question. It will also take a critical and biblically-based look at the arguments and theologies of todayÕs most prominent pro-choice clergy. And it will determine if abortion really fulfills the will of God, as many pro-choice Christians believe, or whether abortion is a clearly sinful act. In short, readers of A Love for Lifewill discover the realmessage of the church on abortion.
This humane, accessible and lucid work will enlighten any voter, and remind any would-be – or currently serving – politician of the pitfalls to avoid' – TLS As the list of U-turns grows ever longer, the cost of living crisis intensifies and mortgage rates rise, we really need those in charge to get it right. In Why Governments Get It Wrong, Cambridge's Professor Dennis C. Grube gives a timely and incisive examination of the pitfalls, failures and successes of those in power around the world. We live in an era when we really need governments to be effective – the economy, our health and the future of the planet are at stake – but so often they can seem clueless, and their decisions leave us confused. With insight and wit, Grube explains how governments can improve their decision-making and, by examining fascinating case studies, he highlights the key factors that make for effective government. With the stakes higher than ever before, this original and important book is an essential read for any concerned citizen who wants to understand why governments make the wrong decisions and, crucially, what can be done about it. 'Convincing' – David Lammy MP 'A must-read' – Sebastian Payne, author of The Fall of Boris Johnson ‘Highly original and very entertaining' – Gavin Esler, author of How Britain Ends 'There is a real gap for this book' – Isabel Hardman, author of Why We Get the Wrong Politicians
Why is cabinet government so resilient? Despite many obituaries, why does it continue to be the vehicle for governing across most parliamentary systems? Comparing Cabinets answers these questions by examining the structure and performance of cabinet government in five democracies: the United Kingdom, Denmark, the Netherlands, Switzerland, and Australia. The book is organised around the dilemmas that cabinet governments must solve: how to develop the formal rules and practices that can bring predictability and consistency to decision making; how to balance good policy with good politics; how to ensure cohesion between the factions and parties that constitute the cabinet while allowing levels of self-interest to be advanced; how leaders can balance persuasion and command; and how to maintain support through accountability at the same time as being able to make unpopular decisions. All these dilemmas are continuing challenges to cabinet government, never solvable, and constantly reappearing in different forms. Comparing distinct parliamentary systems reveals how traditions, beliefs, and practices shape the answers. There is no single definition of cabinet government, but rather arenas and shared practices that provide some cohesion. Such a comparative approach allows greater insight into the process of cabinet government that cannot be achieved in the study of any single political system, and an understanding of the pressures on each system by appreciating the options that are elsewhere accepted as common beliefs.
How do bureaucracies remember? The conventional view is that institutional memory is static and singular, the sum of recorded files and learned procedures. There is a growing body of scholarship that suggests contemporary bureaucracies are failing at this core task. This Element argues that this diagnosis misses that memories are essentially dynamic stories. They reside with people and are thus dispersed across the array of actors that make up the differentiated polity. Drawing on four policy examples from four sectors (housing, energy, family violence and justice) in three countries (the UK, Australia and New Zealand), this Element argues that treating the way institutions remember as storytelling is both empirically salient and normatively desirable. It is concluded that the current conceptualisation of institutional memory needs to be recalibrated to fit the types of policy learning practices required by modern collaborative governance.
This will help us customize your experience to showcase the most relevant content to your age group
Please select from below
Login
Not registered?
Sign up
Already registered?
Success – Your message will goes here
We'd love to hear from you!
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.