ASTK15492U CANCELLED - SEMINAR: The Tools of Government Revisited. Policy design and instrumentation in the information age
Elective course IV at "Security Risk Management"
The course is open to all master students
The seminar takes its cue from Christopher Hood’s revision (together with Helen Margetts) on his seminal work on the ‘Tools of Government’, prompted by the innovations in information and communication technology at the heart of the information age and the network society. The course opens with an introduction to the NATO-model and the broader debate on policy instrumentation and design that has since developed around this model. The following sessions discuss the innovations and transformations taking place within each of the dimensions of the NATO-model, using additional literature on specific instruments and tools as well as the broader technological and socio-economic transformations behind them. The following session takes a step back and looks at the governmental toolbox in its entirety.
1. Introduction: the NATO-model and other approaches to policy design and instrumentation
2. Nodality: communication, messages, information/network society
3. Authority: legality, demands, prohibitions, sanctions/sovereignty
4. Treasure: fungible chattels, distribution, exchange/commodity
5. Organization: buildings, environments, people, treatments/security
6. Combining, comparing and evaluating the tools of government
7. Student presentation of papers
Competences and learning outcome: Students will gain proficiency in the field of policy instrumentation and design, which is central to most political, administrative and advisory functions in public agencies, as well as many forms of consultancy and functions in private organizations attempting to influence public policy. Additionally, the tools-based approach is completely cross-sectoral, equipping students with a grid of analysis and action that can be applied to any policy field. A particular advantage is also that the tools-based approach allows and even requires an understanding of the broader political, technological and socio-economic conditions at stake in the concrete choice of specific instruments and tools.
Hood, Christopher. 1983. The Tools of Government. London: Macmillan Press
Hood, Christopher, and Helen Margetts. 2007. The Tools of Government in the Digital Age. Houndsmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Salamon, Lester M., and Odus. V. Elliot, eds. 2002. The Tools of Government: A Guide to the New Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bemelmans-Videc, Marie-Louise, Ray C. Rist, and Evert Vedung, eds. 1998. Carrots, Sticks and Sermons. Policy Instruments & Their Evaluation. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
Hood, Christopher, and Helen Margetts. 2016. "Tools Approaches." In Contemporary Approaches to Public Policy. Theories, Controverses and Perspectives, eds. Guy B. Peters and Philippe Zittoun. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 133-155
Lascoumes, Pierre, and Patrick Le Galès. 2007. "Introduction: Understanding Public Policy through Its Instruments—From the Nature of Instruments to the Sociology of Public Policy Instrumentation." Governance 20 (1):1-21.
Le Galés, Patrick. 2011. ‘Policy Instruments and Governance’, in Bevir, Mark (ed.): The Sage Handbook of Governance, London: Sage
Howlett, Michael. 1991. "Policy Instruments, Policy Styles, and Policy Implementation." Policy Studies Journal 19 (2):1-21.
Howlett, Michael. 2014. "From the 'old' to the 'new' policy design: design thinking beyond markets and collaborative governance." Policy Sciences 47 (3):187-207.
Linder, Stephen. & Peters, B. Guy. 1989. ‘Instruments of Government: Perceptions and Contexts’, Journal of Public Policy, 9(1): 35-58
- 7,5 ECTS
- Type of assessment
- Written assignmentIndividuel written assignment
- Exam registration requirements
- Grade 12 is given for an outstanding performance: the student lives up to the course's goal description in an independent and convincing manner with no or few and minor shortcomings
- Grade 7 is given for a good performance: the student is confidently able to live up to the goal description, albeit with several shortcomings
- Grade 02 is given for an adequate performance: the minimum acceptable performance in which the student is only able to live up to the goal description in an insecure and incomplete manner
- Marking scale
- 7-point grading scale
- Censorship form
- No external censorship
Criteria for exam assesment
- Class Instruction