TY - JOUR A1 - Daviter, Falk T1 - An information processing perspective on decision making in the European Union JF - Public administration N2 - Two decades after the introduction of the punctuated equilibrium model, information processing theory now offers one of the most comprehensive analytical perspectives on decision making in public administration and policy research. This article applies information processing analysis to the decision making process in the European Union (EU). Towards this end, the article inquires into the organizational foundations of information processing at successive levels of administrative and legislative decision making and shows how this analytical perspective can be used to gain a better understanding of policy dynamics at the supranational level. The article argues that information processing in the EU is likely to produce distinct policy dynamics in key respects. It identifies promising avenues for future research and discusses some of the issues this evolving theoretical framework should address in order to allow for a more comprehensive exploration of this analytical perspective in the context of the EU. Y1 - 2014 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12071 SN - 0033-3298 SN - 1467-9299 VL - 92 IS - 2 SP - 324 EP - 339 PB - Wiley-Blackwell CY - Hoboken ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Daviter, Falk T1 - Coping, taming or solving BT - alternative approaches to the governance of wicked problems JF - Policy studies N2 - One of the truisms of policy analysis is that policy problems are rarely solved. As an ever-increasing number of policy issues are identified as an inherently ill-structured and intractable type of wicked problem, the question of what policy analysis sets out to accomplish has emerged as more central than ever. If solving wicked problems is beyond reach, research on wicked problems needs to provide a clearer understanding of the alternatives. The article identifies and explicates three distinguishable strategies of problem governance: coping, taming and solving. It shows that their intellectual premises and practical implications clearly contrast in core respects. The article argues that none of the identified strategies of problem governance is invariably more suitable for dealing with wicked problems. Rather than advocate for some universally applicable approach to the governance of wicked problems, the article asks under what conditions different ways of governing wicked problems are analytically reasonable and normatively justified. It concludes that a more systematic assessment of alternative approaches of problem governance requires a reorientation of the debate away from the conception of wicked problems as a singular type toward the more focused analysis of different dimensions of problem wickedness. KW - Wicked problems KW - complex problems KW - governance KW - problem-solving KW - policy analysis Y1 - 2017 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2017.1384543 SN - 0144-2872 SN - 1470-1006 VL - 38 IS - 6 SP - 571 EP - 588 PB - Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group CY - Abingdon ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Daviter, Falk T1 - Policy analysis in the face of complexity BT - What kind of knowledge to tackle wicked problems? JF - Public policy and administration N2 - An ever-increasing number of policy problems have come to be interpreted as representing a particular type of intractable, ill-structured or wicked policy problem. Much of this debate is concerned with the challenges wicked problems pose for program management rather than policy analysis. This article, in contrast, argues that the key challenge in addressing this type of policy problems is in fact analytical. Wicked policy problems are difficult to identify and interpret. The knowledge base for analysing wicked policy problem is typically fragmented and contested. Available evidence is incomplete, inconclusive and incommensurable. In this situation, the evidentiary and the interpretative elements of policy analysis become increasingly indistinguishable and inseparably intertwined. The article reveals the problems this poses for policy analysis and explores the extent to which the consolidation, consensualization and contestation of evidence in policy analysis offer alternative procedural paths to resolve these problems. KW - Evidence-based policy making KW - expertise KW - knowledge KW - policy analysis KW - wicked problems Y1 - 2017 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1177/0952076717733325 SN - 0952-0767 SN - 1749-4192 VL - 34 IS - 1 PB - Sage Publ. CY - London ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Daviter, Falk T1 - The framing of EU policies JF - Handbook of European Policies Interpretive Approaches to the EU N2 - This chapter discusses how framing analysis can contribute to studies of policy making in the European Union (EU). Framing analysis is understood as an analytical perspective that focuses on how policy problems are constructed and categorised. This analytical perspective allows researchers to reconstruct how shifting problem frames empower competing constituencies and create changing patterns of political participation at the supranational level. Studies that assume a longitudinal perspective on EU policy development show how the framing of EU policy is constitutive of the way in which the jurisdictional boundaries and constitutional mandates of the EU evolve over time. Reviewing the growing body of empirical studies on EU policy framing in the context of the diverse theoretical origins of framing analysis, the chapter argues that framing research which takes seriously the notion that policy-making involves both puzzling and powering allows this analytical perspective to contribute a unique perspective on EU policy making. Y1 - 2018 SN - 978-1-78471-936-4 SN - 978-1-78471-935-7 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760701314474 SP - 91 EP - 112 PB - Edward Elgar Publishing CY - Cheltenham ER -