Conference Agenda

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 Such an approach would move away from the outdated idea of a strict separation between politics and administration (i.e., the politico-administrative dichotomy view) (see Du Plessis & Lues, 2024; Turnbull,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.

Due to its unique geographical, historical, and ethnic circumstances, the national "pairing-assistance" program for Xinjiang serves as a crucial measure for China to promote political and economic stability in the region. Against the backdrop of the continuous advancement of counterpart assistance to Xinjiang, the "inter-regional cadre transfer" system constitutes a regularized institutional arrangement aligned with both the Party's management of cadres system and the objectives of coordinated regional development. Cadres dispatched to support Xinjiang, as leaders responsible for local governance, become significant policy entrepreneurs influencing policy innovation and diffusion during their cross-regional transfers and policy implementation processes. However, existing literature offers limited research on the dynamic impact mechanisms through which local chief executives in China's western regions drive policy innovation and diffusion. Building upon the policy diffusion model, this study constructs a process tracing methodology framework, mapping key factors affecting policy entrepreneurs' promotion of policy innovation and diffusion—namely dominant authority, problem definition, performance legitimacy, and technical feasibility—onto the policy development components of "policy environment, actors, behavioral preferences, and strategic choices." This mapping establishes a process tracing model for how Xinjiang-assisting chief executives drive policy innovation and diffusion. In recent years, old residential community renovation has emerged as one of China's significant pro-people policies, representing a typical case encompassing the process of policy innovation and diffusion. By analyzing the case of old residential community renovation in Shihezi City, Xinjiang, this study finds that at different stages of policy evolution, the behavioral preferences and strategic choices of Xinjiang-assisting chief executives are influenced by multiple internal and external factors. Through the mechanisms of demonstrating experience, embedding experience, replicating governance, and reinventing governance, they facilitate policy innovation and diffusion in their assigned regions. The study proposes that enhancing awareness, building capacity, refining incentive mechanisms, and fostering community can further improve the effectiveness of policy innovation and diffusion driven by Xinjiang-assisting chief executives, thereby providing support for the modernization of governance capacity in border regions.