Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Devolution and Local Cohesion Policy: Bureaucratic Obstacles to Policy Integration in Italy

  • SERIDA L. CATALANO (a1), PAOLO R. GRAZIANO (a2) and MATTEO BASSOLI (a3)

Abstract

This article analyses and compares the multi-dimensional co-ordination of employment and social policies at the Italian local level, especially focusing on the policy implementation stage. It departs from developing a theoretical framework to take into account the crucial variables that might potentially impact on the co-ordination of social cohesion policies. In particular, following a neo-institutionalist approach, great emphasis is placed on the legacy of the Weberian bureaucratic model, and its implied ‘specialisation ethos’. In addition, the effect of other contextual variables, such us social capital and the rate of unemployment, are considered.

The empirical analysis confirms the crucial impact of the specialisation ethos in preventing inter-policy co-ordination from occurring at the Italian local level, and the relevance of other contextual variables in causing policy integration within services, rather than between services.

Copyright

References

Hide All
Barzeley, M. (2003), ‘Introduction: the process dynamics of public management policy making’, International Public Management Journal, 6: 311.
Bassoli, M. (2010), ‘Local governance arrangements and democratic outcomes (with some evidence from the Italian Case)’, Governance, 23: 3, 485508.
Bifulco, L. and Centemeri, L. (2008), ‘Governance and participation in local welfare: the case of the Italian Piani di Zona’, Social Policy and Administration, 42: 3, 211–27.
Bifulco, L. and Vitale, T. (2006), ‘Contracting for welfare services in Italy’, Journal of Social Policy, 5: 3, 495513.
Borghi, V. and van Berkel, R. (2007), ‘New modes of governance in Italy and the Netherlands: the case of activation policies’, Public Administration, 85: 1, 83101.
Capano, G. (2003), ‘Administrative traditions and policy change: when policy paradigms matter ‒ the case of Italian administrative reform during the 1990s’, Public Administration, 81: 4, 781801.
Cartocci, R. (2007), Mappe del Tesoro. Atlante del capitalesociale in Italia, Bologna: Il Mulino.
Champion, C. and Bonoli, G. (2011), ‘Institutional fragmentation and co-ordination initiatives in western European welfare states’, Journal of European Social Policy, 21: 4, 323–34.
Christensen, T. and Lægreid, P. (1999), ‘New public management.design: resistance, or transformation’, Public Productivity and Management Review, 23: 2, 169–93.
Christensen, T. and Lægreid, P. (2011), ‘Complexity and hybrid public administration ‒ theoretical and empirical challenges’, Public Organization Review, 11: 4, 407–23.
Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.), (2005), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2nd edn, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Genova, A. (2008), ‘Integrated services in activation policies in Finland and Italy: a critical appraisal’, Social Policy and Society, 7: 3, 379–92.
Goetz, K. and Hix, S. (eds.), (2000), Europeanised Politics? European Integration and National Political Systems, London: Frank Cass.
Graziano, P. (2007), ‘Adapting to the European employment strategy? Recent developments in Italian employment policy’, International Journal of Labour Law and Industrial Relations, 23: 4, 543–65.
Graziano, P. (2008), ‘The European Employment Strategy and National Welfare States: Italy and France Compared’, Les Cahiers Européens de Science Po, 2/2008.
Graziano, P. (2009), ‘Choosing welfare or losing social citizenship? Citizens’ free choice in recent Italian welfare state reforms’, Social Policy and Administration, 43: 6, 601–16.
Graziano, P. (2011), ‘Europeanization and domestic employment policy change: conceptual and methodological background’, Governance, 24: 3, 581602.
Graziano, P. and Raué, A. (2011), ‘The governance of activation policies in Italy: from centralized and hierarchical to a multi-level open system model?’, in van Berkel, Riket al. (eds.), The Governance of Active Welfare States in Europe, London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 110–31.
Graziano, P. and Winkler, J. (2012), ‘Governance and implementation of activation policies: Czech Republic and Italy compared’, International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 32: 5/6, 340–52.
Gualmini, E. (1998), La politica del lavoro, Bologna: Il Mulino.
Gualmini, E. (2008), ‘Restructuring Weberian bureaucracy: comparing managerial reforms in Europe and the United States’, Public Administration, 86: 1, 7594.
Heidenreich, M. and Graziano, P. R. (2014), ‘Lost in Activation? The governance of activation policies in Europe’, International Journal of Social Welfare, forthcoming.
ISFOL(2008), Le procedure di accertamento dello stato di disoccupazione e di attivazione dei disoccupati nei Centri per l’impiego, Rome: ISFOL.
Kazepov, Y. (2008), ‘The subsidiarization of social policies: actors, processes and impacts’, European Societies, 10: 2, 247–73.
Kuhlmann, S. (2010), ‘New public management for the “classical continental European administration”: modernization at the local level in Germany, France and Italy’, Public Administration, 88: 4, 1116–30.
March, J. G. and Olsen, J. P. (1984), ‘The new institutionalism: organizational factors in political life’, American Political Science Review, 78: 3, 734–49.
March, J. G. and Olsen, J. P. (1989), Rediscovering Institutions, New York: Free Press.
Minas, R. (2009), ‘Activation in integrated services? Bridging social and employment services in European countries’, Working Paper, Institute for Future Studies, Stockholm.
Monticelli, L. and Catalano, S. L. (2014), ‘The impact of an integrated approach to social cohesion: Italian country analysis’, Localise WP7 Italian report, March 2014.
Ongaro, E. (2006), ‘The dynamics of devolution processes in legalistic countries: organizational change in the Italian public sector’, Public Administration, 84: 3, 737–70.
Ongaro, E. (2009), Public Management Reform and Modernization: Trajectories of Administrative Change in Italy, France, Greece, Portugal and Spain, Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
Ongaro, E. (2011), ‘The role of politics and institutions in the Italian administrative reform trajectory’, Public Administration, 89: 3, 738–55.
Ongaro, E. and Valotti, G. (2008), ‘Public management reform in Italy: explaining the implementation gap’, International Journal of Public Sector Management, 21: 2, 174204.
Peters, G. B. and Pierre, J. (1998), ‘Governance without government? Rethinking public administration’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 8: 2, 223–44.
Pollitt, C. and Bouckaert, G. (2004), Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis, 2nd edn, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Przeworski, A. and Teune, H. (1970), The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry, New York: John Wiley.
Putnam, R. (1993), Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
van Berkel, R. and Borghi, V. (2007), ‘New modes of governance in activation policies’, International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 27: 7/8, 277–86.
van Berkel, R., de Graaf, W. and Sirovátka, T. (2011), The Governance of Active Welfare States in Europe, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
van Berkel, R. and Møller, I. H. (2002), Active Social Policies in the EU: Inclusion through Participation?, Bristol: The Policy Press.
Weber, M. (1947), The Theory of Social and Economic Organisation, Henderson, A.M. and Parsons, Talcott (trans.), Gloncoe, IL: The Free Press.

Devolution and Local Cohesion Policy: Bureaucratic Obstacles to Policy Integration in Italy

  • SERIDA L. CATALANO (a1), PAOLO R. GRAZIANO (a2) and MATTEO BASSOLI (a3)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed