@phdthesis{Radtke2020,
  author    = {Radtke, Ina},
  title     = {Organizing immigration},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  pages     = {174},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {Immigration constitutes a dynamic policy field with - often quite unpredictable - dynamics. This is based on immigration constituting a 'wicked problem' meaning that it is characterized by uncertainty, ambiguity and complexity. Due to the dynamics in the policy field, expectations towards public administrations often change. Following neo-institutionalist theory, public administrations depend on meeting the expectations in the organizational field in order to maintain legitimacy as the basis for, e.g., resources and compliance of stakeholders. With the dynamics in the policy field, expectations might change and public administrations consequently need to adapt in order to maintain or repair the then threatened legitimacy. If their organizational legitimacy is threatened by a perception of structures and processes being inadequate for changed expectations, an 'institutional crisis' unfolds. However, we know little about ministerial bureaucracies' structural reactions to such crucial momentums and how this effects the quest for coordination within policy-making. Overall, the dissertation thus links to both policy analysis and public administration research and consists of five publications. It asks: How do structures in ministerial bureaucracies change in the context of institutional crises? And what effect do these changes have on ministerial coordination? The dissertation hereby focusses on the above described dynamic policy field of immigration in Germany in the period from 2005 to 2017 and pursues three objectives: 1) to identify the context and impulse for changes in the structures of ministerial bureaucracies, 2) to describe respective changes with regard to their organizational structures, and 3) to identify their effect on coordination. It hereby compares and contrasts institutional crises by incremental change and shock as well as changes and effects at federal and L{\"a}nder level which allows a comprehensive answer to both of the research questions. Theoretically, the dissertation follows neo-institutionalist theory with a particular focus on changes in organizational structures, coordination and crisis management. Methodologically, it follows a comparative design. Each article (except for the literature review), focusses on ministerial bureaucracies at one governmental level (federal or L{\"a}nder) and on an institutional crisis induced by either an incremental process or a shock. Thus, responses and effects can be compared and contrasted across impulses for institutional crises and governmental levels. Overall, the dissertation follows a mixed methods approach with a majority of qualitative single and small-n case studies based on document analysis and semi-structured interviews. Additionally, two articles use quantitative methods as they best suited the respective research question. The rather explorative nature of these two articles however fits to the overall interpretivist approach of the dissertation. Overall, the dissertation's core argument is: Within the investigation period, varying dynamics and thus impulses for institutional crises took place in the German policy field of immigration. Respectively, expectations by stakeholders on how the politico-administrative system should address the policy problem changed. Ministerial administrations at both the federal and L{\"a}nder level adapted to these expectations in order to maintain, or regain respectively, organizational legitimacy. The administration hereby referred to well-known recipes of structural changes. Institutional crises do not constitute fields of experimentation. The new structures had an immediate effect on ministerial coordination, with respect to both the horizontal and vertical dimension. Yet, they did not mean a comprehensive change of the system in place. The dissertation thus challenges the idea of the toppling effect of crises and rather shows that adaptability and persistence of public administrations constitute two sides of the same coin.},
  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}
}
@phdthesis{Danken2017,
  author    = {Danken, Thomas},
  title     = {Coordination of wicked problems},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-396766},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  pages     = {VI, 237},
  year      = {2017},
  abstract  = {The thesis focuses on the inter-departmental coordination of adaptation and mitigation of demographic change in East Germany. All Eastern German States (L{\"a}nder) have set up inter-departmental committees (IDCs) that are expected to deliver joint strategies to tackle demographic change. IDCs provide an organizational setting for potential positive coordination, i.e. a joint approach to problem solving that pools and utilizes the expertise of many departments in a constructive manner from the very beginning. Whether they actually achieve positive coordination is contested within the academic debate. This motivates the first research question of this thesis: Do IDCs achieve positive coordination? Interdepartmental committees and their role in horizontal coordination within the core executive triggered interest among scholars already more than fifty years ago. However, we don't know much about their actual importance for the inter-departmental preparation of cross-cutting policies. Until now, few studies can be found that analyzes inter-departmental committees in a comparative way trying to identify whether they achieve positive coordination and what factors shape the coordination process and output of IDCs. Each IDC has a chair organization that is responsible for managing the interactions within the IDCs. The chair organization is important, because it organizes and structures the overall process of coordination in the IDC. Consequently, the chair of an IDC serves as the main boundary-spanner and therefore has remarkable influence by arranging meetings and the work schedule or by distributing internal roles. Interestingly, in the German context we find two organizational approaches: while some states decided to put a line department (e.g. Department of Infrastructure) in charge of managing the IDC, others rely on the State Chancelleries, i.e. the center of government. This situation allows for comparative research design that can address the role of the State Chancellery in inter-departmental coordination of cross-cutting policies. This is relevant, because the role of the center is crucial when studying coordination within central government. The academic debate on the center of government in the German politico-administrative system is essentially divided into two camps. One camp claims that the center can improve horizontal coordination and steer cross-cutting policy-making more effectively, while the other camp points to limits to central coordination due to departmental autonomy. This debate motivates the second research question of this thesis: Does the State Chancellery as chair organization achieve positive coordination in IDCs? The center of government and its role in the German politic-administrative system has attracted academic attention already in the 1960s and 1970s. There is a research desiderate regarding the center's role during the inter-departmental coordination process. There are only few studies that explicitly analyze centers of government and their role in coordination of cross-cutting policies, although some single case studies have been published. This gap in the academic debate will be addressed by the answer to the second research question. The dependent variable of this study is the chair organization of IDCs. The value of this variable is dichotomous: either an IDC is chaired by a Line department or by a State Chancellery. We are interested whether this variable has an effect on two dependent variables. First, we will analyze the coordination process, i.e. interaction among bureaucrats within the IDC. Second, the focus of this thesis will be on the coordination result, i.e. the demography strategies that are produced by the respective IDCs. In terms of the methodological approach, this thesis applies a comparative case study design based on a most-similar-systems logic. The German Federalism is quite suitable for such designs. Since the institutional framework largely is the same across all states, individual variables and their effect can be isolated and plausibly analyzed. To further control for potential intervening variables, we will limit our case selection to states located in East Germany, because the demographic situation is most problematic in the Eastern part of Germany, i.e. there is a equal problem pressure. Consequently, we will analyze five cases: Thuringia, Saxony-Anhalt (line department) and Brandenburg, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and Saxony (State Chancellery). There is no grand coordination theory that is ready to be applied to our case studies. Therefore, we need to tailor our own approach. Our assumption is that the individual chair organization has an effect on the coordination process and output of IDCs, although all cases are embedded in the same institutional setting, i.e. the German politico-administrative system. Therefore, we need an analytical approach than incorporates institutionalist and agency-based arguments. Therefore, this thesis will utilize Actor-Centered Institutionalism (ACI). Broadly speaking, ACI conceptualizes actors' behavior as influenced - but not fully determined - by institutions. Since ACI is rather abstract we need to adapt it for the purpose of this thesis. Line Departments and State Chancelleries will be modeled as distinct actors with different action orientations and capabilities to steer the coordination process. However, their action is embedded within the institutional context of governments, which we will conceptualize as being comprised of regulative (formal rules) and normative (social norms) elements.},
  language  = {en}
}