PropertyValue
?:about
?:abstract
  • This article integrates disparate explanations for increasing (but variable) turns to ex-ante policy evaluation, such as risk analysis, across public administrations. So far unconnected silos of literature - on policy tools, policy instrumentation, the politics of evaluation and the political sociology of quantification - inconsistently portray ex-ante evaluation as rational problem-solving, symbolic actions of institutional self-defence, or (less often) political power-seeking. I synthesise these explanations in an interpretivist and institutionalist reading of ex-ante evaluation as contextually filtered process of selective meaning-making. From this methodological umbrella emerges my unified typology of ex-ante evaluation as instrumental problemsolving (I), legitimacy-seeking (L) and powerseeking (P). I argue that a) these ideal-types coexist in policymakers’ reasoning about the expected merits of ex-ante evaluation, whilst b) diverse institutional contexts will favour variable weightings of I, L and P in policymaking. By means of systematisation the typology seeks to inspire an interdisciplinary research agenda on varieties of ex-ante evaluation. (xsd:string)
?:contributor
?:dateModified
  • 2020 (xsd:gyear)
?:datePublished
  • 2020 (xsd:gyear)
?:doi
  • 10.3224/dms.v13i1.11 ()
?:duplicate
?:hasFulltext
  • true (xsd:boolean)
is ?:hasPart of
?:inLanguage
  • en (xsd:string)
?:isPartOf
?:issn
  • 2196-1395 ()
?:issueNumber
  • 1 (xsd:string)
?:linksDOI
?:linksURN
is ?:mainEntity of
?:name
  • Analyse and rule? A conceptual framework for explaining the variable appeals of ex-ante evaluation in policymaking (xsd:string)
?:provider
?:publicationType
  • Zeitschriftenartikel (xsd:string)
  • journal_article (en)
?:sourceInfo
  • GESIS-SSOAR (xsd:string)
  • In: der moderne staat - dms: Zeitschrift für Public Policy, Recht und Management, 13, 2020, 1, 124-142 (xsd:string)
rdf:type
?:url
?:urn
  • urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-68807-6 ()
?:volumeNumber
  • 13 (xsd:string)