IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/policy/v55y2022i1d10.1007_s11077-022-09448-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mapping design activities and methods of public sector innovation units through the policy cycle model

Author

Listed:
  • Diana Pamela Villa Alvarez

    (Politecnico Di Milano)

  • Valentina Auricchio

    (Politecnico Di Milano)

  • Marzia Mortati

    (Politecnico Di Milano)

Abstract

Over the last two decades, the design practice has been expanding to the public sphere to generate solutions for public challenges. In particular, the reflections on the design practice of public sector innovation (PSI) units, working in or with governments, are increasingly contributing to a growing body of literature attempting to characterise the practice in policy making. Although scholars conclude that design’s significant contribution in policy refers to the implementation of public services and programs, there is also an urgent advocacy for a deeper study of the nature of design practices within earlier stages of policy processes addressing more specifically policy proposals and reforms. As part of a broader investigation, this paper seeks to shed light to this matter by identifying design-led activities and methods of PSI units in the policy making process and positioning them in the stages of the policy cycle. This research examines academic, grey literature and web content to uncover and position design activities of 46 PSI units from different continents in a policy cycle model based on Howlett, Ramesh and Perl (2009). Our work confirms that most design activities develop in the implementation stage rather than in early stages of the policy process. While design interventions are growing within policy formulation and agenda-setting stages, few of them were identified in the stage of policy evaluation. Decision-making stage remains purely political. This research may serve to a further understanding of the design practice and its potential contribution to policy making in the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Diana Pamela Villa Alvarez & Valentina Auricchio & Marzia Mortati, 2022. "Mapping design activities and methods of public sector innovation units through the policy cycle model," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 55(1), pages 89-136, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:policy:v:55:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s11077-022-09448-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s11077-022-09448-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11077-022-09448-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11077-022-09448-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Piret Tõnurist & Rainer Kattel & Veiko Lember, 2017. "Innovation labs in the public sector: what they are and what they do?," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(10), pages 1455-1479, November.
    2. Michael McGann & Emma Blomkamp & Jenny M. Lewis, 2018. "The rise of public sector innovation labs: experiments in design thinking for policy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 51(3), pages 249-267, September.
    3. Cobb, Roger & Ross, Jennie-Keith & Ross, Marc Howard, 1976. "Agenda Building as a Comparative Political Process," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 70(1), pages 126-138, March.
    4. Michael Howlett & Ishani Mukherjee, 2014. "Policy Design and Non-Design: Towards a Spectrum of Policy Formulation Types," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 2(2), pages 57-71.
    5. Jenkins-Smith, Hank C. & Sabatier, Paul A., 1994. "Evaluating the Advocacy Coalition Framework," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(2), pages 175-203, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Helen Ngozi ELEMS-IKWEGBU, Ph.D, 2024. "Comparative Analysis of Educational Policy Formulation and Implementation Strategies in Developed and Developing Countries," International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation, International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation (IJRSI), vol. 11(7), pages 922-941, July.
    2. repec:oup:rseval:v:32:y:2024:i:2:p:171-187. is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Villa-Alvarez Diana Pamela & Wellstead Adam M., 2024. "More than Semantics? Navigating the “Policy * Design” Concepts’ Landscape," Central European Journal of Public Policy, Sciendo, vol. 18(2), pages 35-51.
    4. Sojeong Kim & Adam M. Wellstead & Tanya Heikkila, 2023. "Policy capacity and rise of data‐based policy innovation labs," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 40(3), pages 341-362, May.
    5. Víctor Gómez-Valenzuela, 2023. "Stated preference methods and STI policy studies: a foreground approach," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 171-187.
    6. Jonathan Craft & Reut Marciano, 2024. "Low-fidelity policy design, within-design feedback, and the Universal Credit case," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 57(1), pages 83-99, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alfonso Unceta & Xabier Barandiaran & Natalia Restrepo, 2019. "The Role of Public Innovation Labs in Collaborative Governance—The Case of the Gipuzkoa Lab in the Basque Country, Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-16, November.
    2. Lars Fuglsang & Anne Vorre Hansen & Ines Mergel & Maria Taivalsaari Røhnebæk, 2021. "Living Labs for Public Sector Innovation: An Integrative Literature Review," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-19, June.
    3. Sojeong Kim & Adam M. Wellstead & Tanya Heikkila, 2023. "Policy capacity and rise of data‐based policy innovation labs," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 40(3), pages 341-362, May.
    4. Schiuma, Giovanni & Santarsiero, Francesco, 2023. "Innovation labs as organisational catalysts for innovation capacity development: A systematic literature review," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    5. Alessandro Pollini & Alessandro Caforio, 2021. "Participation and Iterative Experiments: Designing Alternative Futures with Migrants and Service Providers," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-13, September.
    6. Nathalie Haug & Ines Mergel, 2021. "Public Value Co-Creation in Living Labs—Results from Three Case Studies," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-22, July.
    7. Fuglsang, Lars & Hansen, Anne Vorre, 2022. "Framing improvements of public innovation in a living lab context: Processual learning, restrained space and democratic engagement," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    8. Urmanaviciene Audrone & Kostalova Jana & Baturina Danijel & Krzyworzeka Paweł & Budrytė Paulina & Lepik Katri-Liis, 2022. "Were Social Labs immune to COVID-19? Impacts and benefits," Management & Marketing, Sciendo, vol. 17(s1), pages 381-401, October.
    9. Thibaud Deguilhem & Juliette Schlegel & Jean-Philippe Berrou & Ousmane Djibo & Alain Piveteau, 2024. "Too many options: How to identify coalitions in a policy network?," Post-Print hal-04689665, HAL.
    10. Ryan Anders Whitney & David López-García, 2023. "Fast-track institutionalization: The opening of urban planning best practice agencies in Mexico City," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 41(3), pages 600-616, May.
    11. Makoza, Frank, 2023. "Analyzing policy change of Malawi ICT and Digitalization policy: Policy Assemblage Perspective," EconStor Preprints 273309, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    12. Giliberto Capano & Benedetto Lepori, 2024. "Designing policies that could work: understanding the interaction between policy design spaces and organizational responses in public sector," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 57(1), pages 53-82, March.
    13. Mockshell, Jonathan & Birner, Regina, 2020. "Who has the better story? On the narrative foundations of agricultural development dichotomies," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    14. Simon Hull & Jennifer Whittal, 2021. "Do Design Science Research and Design Thinking Processes Improve the ‘Fit’ of the Fit-For-Purpose Approach to Securing Land Tenure for All in South Africa?," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-26, May.
    15. Jungrav-Gieorgica, Natalia, 2020. "Narrative Policy Framework - polityka publiczna jako walka opowieści," Studia z Polityki Publicznej / Public Policy Studies, Warsaw School of Economics, vol. 7(2), pages 1-27, July.
    16. Gluck, Peter, 2000. "Theoretical perspectives for enhancing biological diversity in forest ecosystems in Europe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(3-4), pages 195-207, December.
    17. Garrett Ward Richards, 2019. "The Science–Policy Relationship Hierarchy (SPRHi) model of co-production: how climate science organizations have influenced the policy process in Canadian case studies," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 52(1), pages 67-95, March.
    18. Merz, Nicolas, 2017. "Gaining voice in the mass media: The effect of parties’ strategies on party–issue linkages in election news coverage," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 52(4), pages 436-460.
    19. Adam Wellstead, 2017. "Plus ça Change, Plus C’est La Même Chose? A review of Paul Sabatier’s “An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein”," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(4), pages 549-561, December.
    20. Albert Weale, 2010. "Political Theory and Practical Public Reasoning," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58(2), pages 266-281, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:policy:v:55:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s11077-022-09448-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.