Abstract
This is a diachronic comparative case study of three successive efforts by Norwegian governments over several decades to move central agencies in Oslo, Norway, to other locations outside the capital region. The key research question is how to explain the unexpected success of the latest governmental relocation program of the 2000s, in view of two previous spectacularly dismal efforts. How was it possible to realize this highly contested policy program against apparently quite adverse odds? We use a modified extended version of the MS framework through three full policy cycles to demonstrate how a remarkably audacious policy entrepreneur in cabinet position employed manipulation strategies within an open policy window to fashion a legislative optimal policy program design by organizing adversely affected stakeholders out of the policy formulation process, thus ensuring its adoption and implementation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arter, D. (1999). Scandinavian politics today. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Cohen, M. D., March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1972). Garbage can model of organizational choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(1), 1–25.
George, A. L., & Bennett, A. (2004). Case studies and theory development. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Howlett, M. (2011). Designing public policies. Principles and instruments. London: Routledge.
Isaksson, G.-E. (1989). Resultatsløs Omlokalisering [Failed Relocations]. Åbo: Åbo Academic Press.
Kingdon, J. W. (1984). Agendas, alternatives and public policies. Little, Brown and Company: Boston.
Lasswell, H. D. (1956). The decision process. Seven categories of functional analysis. College Park: University of Maryland Press.
Lowi, T. J. (1964). American business and public policy, case studies and political theory. World Politics, 16, 677–715.
March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1976). Ambiguity and choice in organizations. Bergen: University Press.
March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1984). The new institutionalism: Organizational factors in political life. American Political Science Review, 78(3), 734–749.
Marmor, T. R. (1986). Policy entrepreneurship in government. An American Study. Journal of Public Policy, 6(3), 225–253.
Marshall, J. N. (2007). Public sector relocation policies in the UK and Ireland. European Planning Studies, 15(5), 645–666.
Meyer, C. B., & Stensaker, I. G. (2009). Making radical change happen through selective inclusion of stakeholders. British Journal of Management, 20(2), 219–237.
Mintrom, M., & Norman, P. (2009). Policy entrepreneurship and policy change. Policy Studies Journal, 37(4), 649–667.
Mucciaroni, G. (1992). The garbage can model and the study of policy-making: A critique. Polity, 24(3), 459–482.
Norman, V. D. (2004). Blue notes. Bergen: Vigemostad & Bjørke.
Peters, B. G., Pierre, J., & King, D. S. (2005). The politics of path dependency: Political conflict in historical institutionalism. Journal of Politics, 67(4), 1275–1300.
Pollitt, C. (2012). New perspectives on public services. Place and technology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rabe, B. (2004). Statehouse and greenhouse. The stealth politics of America climate change. Brookings Institution: Washington.
Ridde, V. (2009). Policy implementation in an African State. An extension of Kingdon’s multiple streams approach. Public Administration, 87(4), 938–954.
Ripley, R. B., & Franklin, G. A. (1982). Bureaucracy and policy implementation. Homewood: Dorsey Press.
Roberts, N. C., & King, P. J. (1991). Policy entrepreneurs: Their activity structure and function in the policy process. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 1(2), 147–175.
Sætren, H. (1983). Iverksetting av Offentlig Politikk [Implementation of Public Policy]. Bergen: Universitetsforlaget [University Publisher].
Schlager, E. (2007). A comparison of frameworks, theories and models of policy processes. In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process. Boulder: Westview Press.
Schneider, M., & Teske, P. (1992). Towards a theory of the political entrepreneur. Evidence from local government. American Political Science Review, 86(3), 737–747.
Steinmo, S., Thelen, K., & Longstreth, F. (1992). Structuring politics. Historical institutionalism in comparative perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Thompson, C. R. (1994). The cabinet member as policy entrepreneur. Administration & Society, 25(4), 395–409.
Trondal, J., & Kiland, C. (2009). Byråkrati og Geografi. Geografisk relokalisering av norsk statsforvaltning. Norsk Statsvitenskapelig Tidsskrift, 25(4), 330–355.
Weaver, R. K., & Rockman, B. A. (1993). Do institutions matter? Government capabilities in the United States and Abroad. Washington: Brookings Institution Press.
Wilson, J. Q. (1973). Political organizations. N.Y.: Basic Books.
Zahariadis, N. (2003). Ambiguity and choice in public policy: Political decision making in modern democracies. Washington: Georgetown University Press.
Zahariadis, N. (2014). Ambiguity and multiple streams. In P. A. Sabatier & C. M. Weible (Eds.), Theories of the policy process. Boulder: Westview Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sætren, H. From controversial policy idea to successful program implementation: the role of the policy entrepreneur, manipulation strategy, program design, institutions and open policy windows in relocating Norwegian central agencies. Policy Sci 49, 71–88 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-016-9242-4
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-016-9242-4