Programme de la conférence

Good governance is an essential objective of public administration. Research in this field has focused on understanding the factors that contribute to this outcome from different theoretical perspectives, including contextual (e.g., Ansell et al., 2023; Kuhlmann et al., 2024), institutional and capacity-oriented (Hope, 2009; Rutherford & Wightman, 2021), and ideational and narrative (e.g., de Graaf & van Asperen, 2016; van Steden, 2020; Zaki, 2024).

Despite these advances, the relational dimension –particularly the quality and frequency of interaction between key actor groups involved in governance processes, such as politicians and civil servants– remains underexplored. Specifically, existing research most often focuses on civil servants’ perceptions, representing the administrative sphere, while neglecting how these align or conflict with those of elected politicians, representing the political sphere (e.g., Demir, 2011; Demir & Nank, 2012). However, both spheres' views should be considered and contrasted with one another, as their alignment, or the lack thereof, has been shown to influence governance outcomes (Dunn & Legge, 2002; Jacobsen, 2022). Such an approach would move away from the outdated idea of a strict separation between politics and administration (i.e., the politico-administrative dichotomy view) (see Du Plessis & Lues, 2024; Turnbull, 2010) towards a more coherent complementarity view.

Accordingly, this article develops and tests a framework to assess and compare relational factors impacting perceptions of policy decision quality and good governance among civil servants and elected politicians. It addresses the research question of how the quality and frequency of interactions between civil servants and elected politicians impact their perceptions of good governance outcomes.

To address this question, we conduct PLS-SEM analyses on two sets of perceptual data –data from both local politicians and the department heads they interact with– collected in Flemish municipalities in Belgium. The preliminary results indicate significant differences in which elements of interaction quality and frequency matter to whom, highlighting the relevance of integrating perspectives from both spheres into a single study. This paper makes three key contributions. Theoretically, it uses the relational perspective to understand better the microfoundational determinants of effective politico-administrative relationships regarding governance outcomes (e.g., Jacobsen, 2022; Svara, 2006). Empirically, it provides a comparative analysis of insights from two groups rarely studied together. Practically, by identifying how interaction quality and frequency impact policy decision quality and good governance from the perspective of the involved parties, the findings help align civil servants and politicians, contributing to enhancing the praxis of complementarity.

How do bureaucracies adapt to policy change? In this paper, we examine how legislative and executive changes in public policy affect procedural accuracy in public bureaucracies. Errors in administrative processes cost program efficiency and effectiveness and burden clientele by underserving or wrongly denying public goods or services. Understanding the causes of administrative errors is important from both a bureaucratic politics and a democratic perspective. We argue that bureaucratic expertise, legislative professionalism, and political ideology explain the impact of policy change on short-term fluctuations in procedural accuracy. We test our theory using administrative data from US Unemployment Insurance (UI) programs from 2002-2018.