Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Beyond bureaucracy? Assessing Institutional Cha...
View graph of relations

Beyond bureaucracy? Assessing Institutional Change in the Governance of Water in England and Wales

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Beyond bureaucracy? Assessing Institutional Change in the Governance of Water in England and Wales. / Watson, Nigel; Deeming, Hugh; Treffny, Raphael.

In: Water Alternatives, Vol. 2, No. 3, 10.2009, p. 448-460.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{58a9d1dfe92a4f45a645310a144fe2a6,
title = "Beyond bureaucracy? Assessing Institutional Change in the Governance of Water in England and Wales",
abstract = "Alternative governance approaches in which non-state actors play a substantial role in policy making and implementation are currently attracting attention. Government-centred water bureaucracies have to adapt to increased complexity. Relationships among state and non-state actors in the English water sector have markedly changed in the last few decades in connection with the privatisation of water services, reform of arrangements for flood management, and implementation of the European Union Water Framework Directive (WFD). The paper assesses whether such changes represent a shift 'beyond bureaucracy' and the beginning of a new era of multi-party 'water governance'. From an examination of institutional reform in river basin management and flood risk management, the paper concludes that the water bureaucracy has actually strengthened its control, despite using language emphasizing partnerships and collaborative governance. Responsibility for policy implementation has been reallocated among a range of public, private and civic groups. This 'neo-bureaucratic' arrangement is problematic because the government-centred water bureaucracy has lost some of its accountability and legitimacy, while the newer collaborative arrangements have little real influence over the direction of water policy. Governance capacity needs to be enhanced by adopting a collaborative approach to development of water policy in addition to its implementation. ",
keywords = "Bureaucracy, governance , institutional arrangements , co-delivery , England",
author = "Nigel Watson and Hugh Deeming and Raphael Treffny",
year = "2009",
month = oct,
language = "English",
volume = "2",
pages = "448--460",
journal = "Water Alternatives",
issn = "1965-0175",
publisher = "Water Alternatives Association",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Beyond bureaucracy? Assessing Institutional Change in the Governance of Water in England and Wales

AU - Watson, Nigel

AU - Deeming, Hugh

AU - Treffny, Raphael

PY - 2009/10

Y1 - 2009/10

N2 - Alternative governance approaches in which non-state actors play a substantial role in policy making and implementation are currently attracting attention. Government-centred water bureaucracies have to adapt to increased complexity. Relationships among state and non-state actors in the English water sector have markedly changed in the last few decades in connection with the privatisation of water services, reform of arrangements for flood management, and implementation of the European Union Water Framework Directive (WFD). The paper assesses whether such changes represent a shift 'beyond bureaucracy' and the beginning of a new era of multi-party 'water governance'. From an examination of institutional reform in river basin management and flood risk management, the paper concludes that the water bureaucracy has actually strengthened its control, despite using language emphasizing partnerships and collaborative governance. Responsibility for policy implementation has been reallocated among a range of public, private and civic groups. This 'neo-bureaucratic' arrangement is problematic because the government-centred water bureaucracy has lost some of its accountability and legitimacy, while the newer collaborative arrangements have little real influence over the direction of water policy. Governance capacity needs to be enhanced by adopting a collaborative approach to development of water policy in addition to its implementation.

AB - Alternative governance approaches in which non-state actors play a substantial role in policy making and implementation are currently attracting attention. Government-centred water bureaucracies have to adapt to increased complexity. Relationships among state and non-state actors in the English water sector have markedly changed in the last few decades in connection with the privatisation of water services, reform of arrangements for flood management, and implementation of the European Union Water Framework Directive (WFD). The paper assesses whether such changes represent a shift 'beyond bureaucracy' and the beginning of a new era of multi-party 'water governance'. From an examination of institutional reform in river basin management and flood risk management, the paper concludes that the water bureaucracy has actually strengthened its control, despite using language emphasizing partnerships and collaborative governance. Responsibility for policy implementation has been reallocated among a range of public, private and civic groups. This 'neo-bureaucratic' arrangement is problematic because the government-centred water bureaucracy has lost some of its accountability and legitimacy, while the newer collaborative arrangements have little real influence over the direction of water policy. Governance capacity needs to be enhanced by adopting a collaborative approach to development of water policy in addition to its implementation.

KW - Bureaucracy

KW - governance

KW - institutional arrangements

KW - co-delivery

KW - England

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77951264778&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Journal article

AN - SCOPUS:77951264778

VL - 2

SP - 448

EP - 460

JO - Water Alternatives

JF - Water Alternatives

SN - 1965-0175

IS - 3

ER -