Trommel (2009) argues that we ‘lost’ the beliefs of modernity, the beliefs that the modern institutions of the welfare state, of authority and tradition and of social capital can effectively and legitimately order society.... [ view full abstract ]
Trommel (2009) argues that we ‘lost’ the beliefs of modernity, the beliefs that the modern institutions of the welfare state, of authority and tradition and of social capital can effectively and legitimately order society. This causes social problems to become persistent. In this context of changing social conditions, Osborne (2010: 5) suggests that ‘both PA [public administration] and NPM [new public management] fail to capture the complex reality of the design, delivery and management of public services in the twenty-first century.’ NPM, Osborne argues, is no more than a transitory stage in the evolution from traditional PA to what he proposes as New Public Governance (NPG).
These concepts of stages and evolution suggest increased fit to the conditions of the twenty-first century. This, however, appears to be a primarily functional assertion. We apply a specific definition of ‘wicked problems’ to distinguish problem types. We distinguish them on the basis of their ‘complexity’ (factual uncertainty) and ‘conflict’ (normative uncertainty). Relatively simple problem conditions are characterised by either complexity or conflict. Wicked problems are characterised by the interaction of complexity and conflict. They pose a ‘double governance challenge’ (Bannink 2013). We believe that Osborne argues that PA fits low levels of complexity and conflict and NPM fits high conflict levels, provided that complexity is limited. NPG, being a superior evolutionary stage, fits the interaction of complexity and conflict. It is unclear how the functional claim of NPG is substantiated.
We, on the other hand, argue that the loss of governability is an inherent characteristic of the governance of wicked problems. This implies, in a functionalist approach, that any governance answer will, by definition, be imperfect. Imperfection, however, comes in various forms and this paper focuses on exploring “intelligent forms” of imperfect governance. We propose that processes of crafting governance arrangements based on modest rather than greedy governance, and experimentation and learning instead of blueprint implementation are intelligent forms of imperfect governance (Trommel, 2009).
We then analyse how teams in youth care cope with the highly sensitive issue of sexual abuse, where indeed complexity and conflict interact. We compare residential care settings with foster care settings and show how residential teams of youth care social workers, if given adequate room to manoeuvre, craft a response to this wicked problem, while foster care teams cannot copy the residential team’s response due to important structural differences. This supports our proposition of the importance of local crafting to find intelligent forms of imperfect governance.
Bannink, D.B.D (2013) Localized crafting. Management tools responding to a double management challenge. In D.B.D. Bannink, J.H. Bosselaar & W.A. Trommel (Eds.), Crafting Local Welfare Landscapes (pp. 79-94). The Hague: Eleven International Publishers.
Osborne, S.P. (2010) The new public governance? Emerging perspectives on the theory and practice of public governance. London: Routledge.
Trommel, W.A. (2009) Gulzig Bestuur. (Greedy Governance) Inaugural Lecture. Den Haag: Boom/Lemma.
