From 'grey to green'- investigating the capabilities of the ... - lumes

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Two variables of Lundquist’s model are created by communication between the different sectors.The actual outcome cannot be analysed as SYNAPS have just been introduced but according to theparticipants there is an increased understanding of the complexity of the concept of SD however aconsensus is not established (Interview B 27/04-07). The overall impact is that the sectors especially theenvironmental sector is provided with a larger arena through the use of SYNAPS. Furthermore, as SDpolicies are traditionally a marginalized sector, it becomes further central positioned in the organisationthrough the discussions. As a result the professionals in the marginalized sectors find SYNAPS being abeneficial tool, while the traditionally prioritised sectors are more reluctant to use the tool (Interview B27/04-07). One can, based on the use of SYNAPS, conclude that the increased understanding andknowledge has led to that the will to implement SD has increased in some sectors, and based onLundquist’s model this theoretically should lead to an increase in implementation of the SD policies.On an actor level, one finds through the interviews that the SYNAPS program has increased thewill to implement Sustainable Development, and the knowledge about the system perspective. This is anarea that needs to be addressed when it comes to increasing the success of implementing SustainableDevelopment. After using SYNAPS the officials have found that no one group have their own arena orsecluded sector of responsibility in regards to ensuring SD policy implementation (Interview A 12/01-07).The current structures that have been the foundation of the bureaucratic organisation also becamehighlighted and the participants became more aware of that the organisation itself posed as an obstacle forsuccessful implementation of the SD policies. The bureaucrats found that their knowledge regarding theissue of SD and the 16 environmental goals and the goal of creating a more SD in the Region increased.One can see that the knowledge about the concept and the procedures, as well as their knowledge about thecompeting goals, increased after applying SYNAPS into their organisation (Interview A 12/01-07). Thisincreased the will to implement the policies on basis that the prioritisation became a part of everydepartment’s goals, in a way it had not been before where it had its major prioritisation within theenvironmental section of the organisation.One deficit is found in the SYNAPS system in regards to the ability of implementation, as therehas been no increase in economic or workforce levels to make the implementation possible. Based onLundquist’s model there is therefore a lack of the actors’ ability to implement based on economicalsupport as the SYNAPS tool is only a communicative tool and does not give financial incentives. Theinterviewees also raised the fact that the process would not have been implemented if there were not somekey actors working hard with trying to find a meeting point within the organisation. Therefore changingthe actor approach includes not only using SYNAPS it includes either legislative measures from above, orkey actors in the organisation that pushes the work of SD in the bureaucratic organisation. Based on theinterviews one can also see that the bureaucratic organisation itself was not capable of a voluntary change,and that the change in attitudes need to be a formal demand and not a chosen concept as the motivation didnot exist in the organisation on actor level before it was imposed on them to use SYNAPS tool.To address the aforementioned thesis questions, this thesis would conclude based on an actorapproach, that the bureaucratic organisation is able to change in regards to being better at handling SDpolicy implementation. However this process seems far from being a voluntary process and that furthermeasures to increase the bureaucratic organisation ability to implement SD policies could be followed byhigher levels of legislative measures to push this process further. Based on similar approaches to increasethe ability of SD policy implementation.8.2 Conclusion: Is the ‘ideal’ type - not so ideal for SD policies?The rational goal is a policy goal that can be implemented in the rational organisation, SD is not atraditional rational goal and therefore the ‘ideal’ organisation is not so ideal for implementing SustainableDevelopment. The question raised is therefore if the organisation should be re-organised in comparison tothe ‘ideal model’ or if the goals should be redesigned to fit this organisation. Neither suggestion isdesirable, as the organisation is formed to be as rational and efficient as possible in other areas withinsociety as defined during the analysis of the current structure. SD policies are designed in a way that arehorizontal and must be inter-sectoral as the environmental problems are interlinked. Therefore the ‘ideal44
type’ is not ideal but the ideal, however the SD policy is also not ideal. Therefore SYNAPS presents amerge of these perspectives, where it presents slight changes in comparison to the ‘ideal type’ organisationbut it also presents some changes in the process of goals definitions of the SD policy. The SYNAPS tooldirects the emphasis on the actor approach and instead of changing the structure it changes the perceptionsof the actors that uphold the structure. The critical points that have been brought up, based on thespecialisation that is still inherent in the organisation is a major issue. However by using the specialisationto pin point the clashing points SYNAPS and Region Skåne has utilised the current structure of theorganisation in a positive way in regards to SD policy implementation. The extreme division ofresponsibilities makes the issues and problems with SD more apparent in a discursive process and RegionSkåne has through their perspective given this traditional obstacle a new light as a tool to increase theunderstanding of the complexity and the clashing positions within the organisation as well as in thesociety.One can see that the organisational restructuring and the change in methods of communicatingwithin the organisation away from the ‘ideal type’ organisational system leads to an increase of ability toimplement SD in a system-level bureaucratic setting. One can argue that the ‘ideal type’ might be the mostefficient way of implementing old policies but in the new environment of implementing SD the ‘idealtype’ shows as lacking in capability of implementation of policies of this type. Based on this perspectivethe critique towards the bureaucratic organisations deficiency in being able to implement SD policiesseems to be valid. However, the case study implies that there can be bridging between the specialisedsectors through the communicative approach, where the generally non-defined goals can be defined andprioritised in all sectors meaning that the bureaucracy can implement the policies within the currentstructure. Therefore leading to the argument where SD policy implementation can occur without majorrestructuring of the structural construction of the organisation, but with emphasis on the actors within thestructure on can change the bureaucratic organisation ability to grasp the notion of SD policy. Ensuringunderstanding knowledge and will to implement the SD polices on an actor level.Moreover, the ‘ideal type’ division instead highlights through communication the differences thatmake the understanding of the complexity and the need for change in society clear, through the divisionthat currently exists in the Swedish bureaucratic organisation. One can still claim that the concept ofspecialisation still exists while using the SYNAPS tool though, the specialisation is now based on acommon understanding on what every departments actions impact upon another department in regards tothe overall goals of SD. The organisation has not changed but the communication and the establishment ofan overall goal has been created. The structure is intact however the actors within the organisation havechanged in their communication, hence leading to an increase in the organisational ability to implementSD polices.The formalisation with set rules can be seen as compromised as there are communications betweendifferent sectors implying that the set rules by the bureaucrat are reconstructed as the overall perspectiveand the sectoral integration leads to a change in the set and formal communicative rules. In some cases asdescribed the communication during the process of using SYNAPS can be less then formal, and in somecases even provocative. The formalisation concept based on rules and codes of conduct, becomescompromised in the SYNAPS approach as the process leads to that the issues of the actors in theorganisation must reflect over their own perspective on their sector and associated actions.By avoiding the construction based on the ‘ideal type’ that one can identify in the Swedishbureaucracy one can see that SYNAPS takes a very different approach, though, it is still based on the sameorganisation. The major differences are in the integration of all sectors, the communication between thedifferent sectors the lack of hierarchy and the more horizontal and decentralised approach ofimplementation. The lack of formal communication, the integration of issues between sections thatpreviously had not been previously integrated. At a general look one finds the system perspectives as themajor force that diverge the SYNAPS tool in comparison to the ‘ideal type’ structure. SYNAPS programhas distinct features that distinguish away from the ‘ideal type’. As the implementation of the program hasbeen this low, one can still see that it avoids some of the obstacles that the critique towards the ‘ideal type’and the Lundquist model identifies. On an actor level one finds that the increase of communication leadsto an increase in will to implement and knowledge about what to implement and how, though there is alack in ability to implement as the process is taking place without financial back up.45
Page 1 and 2: From ‘grey to green’- investiga
Page 3 and 4: 1. INTRODUCTION ...................
Page 5 and 6: 1. IntroductionNationally, we shall
Page 7 and 8: marginalized and where some section
Page 9 and 10: with an analysis of the empirical f
Page 11 and 12: field of the heuristic model when i
Page 13 and 14: 2. The Weberian bureaucratic organi
Page 15 and 16: 2.2 Definition of Weber’s rationa
Page 17 and 18: not follow the goals that are deleg
Page 19 and 20: and a branch within the field of im
Page 21 and 22: approaches the vertical organisatio
Page 23 and 24: need for an increase of sector inte
Page 25 and 26: would be able to develop a green we
Page 27 and 28: sustainable society within all fiel
Page 29 and 30: The Region or the county administra
Page 31 and 32: 2001:167). Implementing SD has ther
Page 33 and 34: 2001:115). This concept fits in to
Page 35 and 36: 6.4 Public administration and the b
Page 37 and 38: sectors of agriculture, schools and
Page 39 and 40: Figure 4. General picture of Region
Page 41 and 42: faced with SD policies and failed t
Page 43: 8.1 Analysis of will, knowledge and
Page 47 and 48: However, the discussion if the stat
Page 49 and 50: • Jörgensen, Erika. 2004. Hållb

From 'grey to green'- investigating the capabilities of the ... - lumes

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?