@misc{Wenzel2016,
  author    = {Wenzel, Bertolt},
  title     = {Organizing coordination in fisheries and marine environmental management: Patterns of organizational change in Europe},
  series = {Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America},
  volume    = {134},
  journal   = {Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {Oxford},
  issn      = {0964-5691},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2016.10.012},
  pages     = {194 -- 206},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Over the past decade, an increasing number of public organizations involved in marine governance in Europe have adapted their formal coordination structures for fisheries and marine environmental management. This study examines why the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES), DG FISH of the European Commission, the Norwegian Institute of Marine Research (IMR), and the Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management (SwAM) have changed their sectoral structures into organizations with a geographical focus on marine ecosystems. The study finds that the gradual convergence of formal coordination structures for fisheries and marine environmental management is driven by coercive, normative and mimetic processes of isomorphism. The structural changes reflect an organizational adaptation to a changing institutional environment and an Ecosystem Approach to Management (EAM) focusing on regional marine areas, cross-sector integration and coordination. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Wenzel2016,
  author    = {Wenzel, Bertolt},
  title     = {Organizing coordination in a public marine research and management advice organization: The case of the Norwegian Institute of Marine Research},
  series = {Marine policy},
  volume    = {64},
  journal   = {Marine policy},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {Oxford},
  issn      = {0308-597X},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.marpol.2015.11.017},
  pages     = {159 -- 167},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Public organizations involved in marine management are increasingly confronted with coordination challenges in marine governance. This study examines why and how the Norwegian Institute of Marine Research (IMR) reorganized its formal coordination structures between the areas of fisheries management and marine environmental management The findings indicate that organizing efficient and, at the same time, legitimate coordination structures between different areas of marine governance is a "wicked" organizational problem with no ultimate and single optimal solution. In contrast to the assumptions of classical organization and management theory, the study finds that the reorganization of formal coordination structures is not necessarily driven for reasons of efficiency and perceived coordination problems. Instead, public marine management organizations also change their organizational structures to live up to external expectations to adopt modern management concepts, such as the Ecosystem Approach to Management (EAM). However, the study indicates that the adoption of the EAM has stimulated coordination and integration efforts in the research and advisory activities of the IMR. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Wenzel2017,
  author    = {Wenzel, Bertolt},
  title     = {Organizing coordination for an ecosystem approach to marine research and management advice},
  series = {Marine policy},
  volume    = {82},
  journal   = {Marine policy},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {Oxford},
  issn      = {0308-597X},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.marpol.2017.05.009},
  pages     = {138 -- 146},
  year      = {2017},
  abstract  = {This study examines the reorganization of formal coordination structures of a unique international public organization involved in marine governance in Europe, namely the structural reorganizations of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) between 1999 and 2009. The findings indicate that the reorganizations of ICES' formal coordination structures were not driven primarily for reasons of efficiency, by clear and consistent goals, and by clear means-ends considerations for organizational design as proposed by rational perspectives in organization theory. Instead, the formal coordination structures have also been adapted to live up to changing expectations in the institutional environment, to modern management concepts in marine governance such as the Ecosystem Approach to Management (EAM), and to ensure the legitimacy of the organization. However, it is also found that institutional explanations alone are insufficient to comprehensively understand why the formal organizational structures of ICES were reorganized. Instrumental and cultural perspectives in organization theory as well as resource-dependence theory additionally add to understand how ICES responded to external demands and why organizational structures have been changed.},
  language  = {en}
}
@phdthesis{Wenzel2017,
  author    = {Wenzel, Bertolt},
  title     = {The organization of coordination in marine governance},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  year      = {2017},
  abstract  = {Over the past decade, an increasing number of public organizations involved in fisheries and marine environmental management in Europe have changed their formal coordination structures. Similar reorganizations of formal coordination structures can be observed for organizations at different administrative levels of governance with different mandates across the policy cycle. Against the backdrop of this phenomenon, this PhD thesis is interested in exploring how these similar organizational reforms can be explained and why the formal coordination structures for fisheries and marine environmental management have been reorganized in the cases of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES), the Directorate-General for Fisheries and Maritime Affairs of the European Commission (DG FISH), the Norwegian Institute of Marine Research (IMR) and the Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management (SwAM). Accordingly, the objective is to shed light on how public organizations actually "behave" or "tick" in the face of increasingly complex coordination challenges in fisheries and marine environmental management. To address these questions, the thesis draws on different theoretical perspectives in organization theory, namely an instrumental and an institutional perspective. These theoretical perspectives provide different explanations for how organizations deal with issues of formal organizational structure and coordination. In order to evaluate the explanatory relevance of these theoretical perspectives in the cases of ICES, DG FISH, the IMR and the SwAM, a case study approach based on congruence analysis is applied. The case studies are based on document analysis, the analysis of organizational charts and their change over time, as well as expert interviews. The aim of the thesis is to contribute to the coordination debate in the marine policy and governance literature from a hitherto omitted public administration and organization theory perspective, as well as explaining coordination efforts at the organizational level with an organization theory approach. The findings indicate that the formal coordination structures of the organizations studied have not only changed to solve coordination problems in fisheries and marine environmental management efficiently and effectively, but also to follow modern management paradigms in marine governance and to ensure the legitimacy of these organizations. Moreover, it was found that in the cases of ICES, DG FISH, the IMR and the SwAM, the organizational changes were strongly influenced by external pressures and interactions with other organizations in the organizational field of fisheries and marine environmental management in Europe. Driven by forces of isomorphism, a gradual convergence of the formal horizontal coordination structures for fisheries and marine environmental management of the organizations studied can be observed. However, the findings also indicate that although the organizational changes observed may convey a reaction to changing environments, they do not necessarily reflect actual policy change and the implementation of new management concepts.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Wenzel2018,
  author    = {Wenzel, Bertolt},
  title     = {Rational instrument or symbolic signal?},
  series = {Public Policy and Administration},
  volume    = {33},
  journal   = {Public Policy and Administration},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Sage Publ.},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {0952-0767},
  doi       = {10.1177/0952076716683764},
  pages     = {149 -- 169},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {This article examines the reorganization of formal coordination structures in the Directorate-General for Fisheries and Maritime Affairs of the European Commission. While rational approaches in organization theory emphasize functional efficiency as an explanation for organizational design and coordination structures, the findings of this study indicate that the reorganization was not driven primarily for reasons of efficiency and to increase the coordination capacity of the organization. The study demonstrates that, even in a highly technical policy area such as fisheries management in the European Union, the (re-)design of formal organizational structures does not follow primarily a technical-instrumental rationale. Instead, the formal coordination structures have also been adapted to live up to changing expectations in the institutional environment, to modern management concepts in marine governance, and to ensure the legitimacy of the organization. However, although the empirical findings of this study substantiate the theoretical assumptions of an institutional perspective, institutional explanations alone are insufficient to comprehensively understand why organizational structures are reorganized and changed.},
  language  = {en}
}