de.mpg.escidoc.pubman.appbase.FacesBean

Post

 
 Vis
  Truet fortidsøgle eller visionært fyrtårn: KL i en brydningstid
Item is

Ophav

 Ophav:
Bjeldbak-Olesen, Sanne 1, Forfatter
Mortensen Mortensen, Nadia 1, Forfatter
Gjelstrup, Gunnar 2, Vejleder
Tilknytninger:
1Institut for Statskundskab, Det Samfundsvidenskabelige Fakultet, Københavns Universitet, København, Danmark, diskurs:7003              
2Det Samfundsvidenskabelige Fakultet, Københavns Universitet, København, Danmark, diskurs:7001              
skjul Ophav
Vis Ophav

Indhold

Ukontrollerede emneord: KL, magt, kommuner, stat, Bogason, interviewundersøgelse, fremtid
 Abstract: Interest organizations have been the subject of much political science research, but the Danish interest organization KL (Local Government Denmark) has, despite a significant role in the making of public policy, not been under much scrutiny. KL, who represents all 98 Danish municipalities, is often described as a very powerful organization, but in recent years there has been a debate at both municipal and state level about whether KL sufficiently fulfills its role. KL is in other words in the middle of an upheaval, that has potential to change the future power of the organization. Therefore we want to use this thesis to obtain an understanding of the current and future power of KL.
We believe that in order to do this we need to abandon the classical understanding of power as ‘power over’ and instead understand it as ‘power to’. This understanding of power leads us towards the network approach where focus is on cooperation and interaction between actors instead of on hierarchy and formal organizations. Therefore Peter Bogason's framework on institutional networks guides our analysis. In this framework power consists of three power resources: legitimacy, expertise and money. These enable actors to contribute to the solving of a general policy problem the network shares. Also, we have used Bogason’s conceptions of norms, positions and meaning as a tool to open and understand our data. The data, which the analysis is based on, derives from seven interviews with high ranking politicians and officials, who represent the major actors in KL’s network: the parliament, the government, the municipalities and KL itself. As networks in Bogason’s interpretation work together to solve a common policy problem, we have analyzed KL’s power through four subordinate policy problems that the network expects KL to take part in solving: protection of the municipal autonomy, representation of the municipalities, the yearly negotiations about the municipal economy and the development of the welfare state.
The analysis showed us that KL’s power depends on which subordinate policy problem they are acting in regard to, and that they have both possibilities and challenges ahead of them. Therefore we can understand KL’s current and future power as dependent on whether or not they will be able to solve the policy problems of the network. According to the network KL have some legitimacy and expertise issues, but they seem to be heading towards solving the welfare policy problem. Therefore we conclude that for now KL will only be able to solve part of the general policy problem, but that they will have the opportunity to gain power to solve more aspects of the problem.
skjul Indhold
Vis Indhold

Filer

Bemærkninger:
-
Tilgængelighed:
Offentlig
Mime-type / størrelse:
application/pdf / 2MB
Copyright dato:
2012-06-29
Copyright information:
De fulde rettigheder til dette materiale tilhører forfatteren.
skjul Filer
Vis Filer

Basal

Bogmærk denne post: https://diskurs.kb.dk/item/diskurs:31364:2
 Type: Speciale
Alternativ titel: En analyse af KL's nuværende og fremtidige magt
Alternativ titel: Local Government Denmark in an upheaval
Alternativ titel: An analysis of the present and future power of Local Government Denmark
skjul Basal
Vis Basal

Links

Vis Links

Detaljer

Sprog: Danish - dan
 Datoer: 2012-03-29
 Sider: -
 Publiceringsinfo: København : Københavns Universitet
 Indholdsfortegnelse: Abstract 2
1 Indledning . 7
1.1 Problemfelt og motivation 7
1.2 Undersøgelsens valg og fokus . 8
1.3 Problemformulering 9
1.4 Afgrænsning 9
1.5 Undersøgelsens opbygning . 10
2 Teoretiske overvejelser og operationalisering 11
2.1 Er KL den fjerde statsmagt?: Jens Blom-Hansen . 11
2.1.1 Problem, teori, metode og resultater. 11
2.1.2 Fravalget af Blom-Hansen 12
2.2 Bogasons framework om magt og netværk 13
2.2.1 Valget af Bogasons framework.13
2.2.2 Magt og netværk 14
2.2.3 Operationalisering.16
2.2.3.1 Policyproblemer 17
2.2.3.1.1 De fire problemstillinger 18
2.2.3.2 Normer . 20
2.2.3.3 Positioner . 21
2.2.3.4 Mening 23
2.3 Opsamling . 24
3 Metodiske overvejelser . 25
3.1 Videnskabsteori og design . 25
3.2 Interviewundersøgelse 27
3.2.1 Valget af interviewundersøgelsen. 27
3.2.2 Udvælgelse af informanter. 28
3.2.3 Udvikling af spørgeguide30
3.2.4 Overvejelser om interviewprocessen32
3.2.4.1 Eliteinterviews . 32
3.2.4.2 De praktiske rammer for interviews 33
3.2.5 Erfaringer fra interviews34
3.2.6 Interviewundersøgelsens validitet og reliabilitet 36
3.3 Inddragelse af dokumenter . 37
3.4 Opsamling . 38
4 Analyse: KL’s bidrag til at løse koordinationsproblemet . 40
4.1 Analysestrategi . 40
4.2 Forsvaret af det kommunale selvstyre 41
4.2.1 Normer. 42
4.2.1.1 Stram økonomisk styring kontra frihed til lokal prioritering . 42
4.2.1.2 Respekt for det kommunale selvstyre kontra ansvarlighed i opgaveløsningen 44
4.2.1.3 Opsamling 48
4.2.2 Positioner: Forkontor til Finansministeriet kontra frihedskæmper for kommunerne 48
4.2.3 Delkonklusion 51
4.3 KL som repræsentant for kommunerne 52
4.3.1 KL som repræsentant for kommunerne for nuværende 52
4.3.1.1 Position: KL som samlet indgang for staten og kommunerne. 52
4.3.1.2 Normer: Alle kommunerne samlet kontra selvstændig interessevaretagelse 54
4.3.1.3 Mening: Vil kommunerne melde sig ud? . 58
4.3.1.4 Opsamling 60
4.3.2 KL som repræsentant for kommunerne i fremtiden. 60
4.3.2.1 Normer . 60
4.3.2.1.1 Konsensus kontra proaktivitet 60
4.3.2.1.2 Forskellighed kontra ensartethed . 61
4.3.2.1.3 Opsamling 62
4.3.3 Delkonklusion 62
4.4 Økonomiforhandlingerne 63
4.4.1 Normer. 63
4.4.1.1 Overholdelse 63
4.4.1.2 Troværdighed 66
4.4.1.3 Opsamling 67
4.4.2 Positioner 68
4.4.2.1 Stærk modpart . 68
4.4.2.2 Samlet forhandler på kommunernes vegne 69
4.4.2.3 Opsamling 69
4.4.3 Mening: At skabe et velfungerende aftalesystem69
4.4.4 Delkonklusion 70
4.5 Udviklingen af velfærdssamfundet 71
4.5.1 Normer. 72
4.5.1.1 Proaktivitet kontra konsensus . 72
4.5.1.2 Politikudvikling 73
4.5.1.3 Opsamling 76
4.5.2 Positioner 76
4.5.2.1 Vidensdeler 76
4.5.2.2 En fordelagtig position. 78
4.5.2.3 Opsamling 79
4.5.3 Mening79
4.5.3.1 Når KL ikke er vidensdeler . 79
4.5.3.2 Når KL har analyserne og argumenterne med sig . 80
4.5.3.3 Opsamling 81
4.5.4 Delkonklusion 81
4.6 Løser KL koordinationsproblemet? . 82
5 Hensigtsmæssighed af teori og metode 84
6 Konklusion 85
7 Perspektivering . 86
Litteraturliste 88
Liste over artikler 89
 Note: -
 Type: Speciale
skjul Detaljer
Vis Detaljer

Kilde

Vis Kilde