Jonathan Craft
University of Toronto
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Jonathan Craft.
Journal of Public Policy | 2012
Jonathan Craft; Michael Howlett
Most studies of policy formulation focus on the nature and kind of advice provided to decision-makers and think of this as originating from a system of interacting elements: a “policy advisory system”. Policy influence in such models has historically been viewed as based on considerations of the proximate location of policy advisors vis a vis the government, linked to related factors such as the extent to which governments are able to control sources of advice. While not explicitly stated, this approach typically presents the content of policy advice as either partisan “political” or administratively “technical” in nature. This article assesses the merits of these locational models against evidence of shifts in governance arrangements that have blurred both the inside vs outside and technical vs political dimensions of policy formulation environments. It argues that the growing plurality of advisory sources and the polycentrism associated with these governance shifts challenge the utility of both the implied content and locational dimensions of traditional models of policy advice systems. A revised approach is advanced that sees influence more as a product of content than location. The article concludes by raising several hypotheses for future research linking advisory system behaviour to governance arrangements.
Policy and Society | 2013
Jonathan Craft; Michael Howlett
Abstract The concept of “policy advisory systems” was introduced by Halligan in 1995 as a way to characterize and analyze the multiple sources of policy advice utilized by governments in policy-making processes. The concept has proved useful and has influenced thinking about both the nature of policy work in different advisory venues, as well as how these systems work and change over time. This article sets out existing models of policy advisory systems based on Halligans original thinking on the subject which emphasize the significance of location or proximity to authoritative decision-makers as a key facet of advisory system influence. It assesses how advisory systems have changed as a result of the dual effects of the increased use of external consultants and others sources of advice — ‘externalization’ — and the increased use of partisan-political advice inside government itself — ‘politicization’. It is argued that these twin dynamics have blurred traditionally sharp distinctions between both the content of inside and outside sources of advice and between the technical and political dimensions of policy formulation, ultimately affecting where influence in advisory systems lies.
International Journal of Public Administration | 2015
Jonathan Craft
This article argues appointed political staffs are important, yet understudied, mechanisms for core executive policy coordination. It suggests revisions to update core executive theory to better accommodate the increasingly systematic use of political staffs throughout core executives. An analytical framework for political staffs’ core executive policy coordination is set out to specify important distinctions related to the type, and nature, of their likely policy coordination. The article concludes by returning to six established modes of executive politics to update them by integrating the policy coordination functions of political staffs in each variant.
Policy and Society | 2013
Jonathan Craft
Abstract Appointed political staffs were featured in the initial elaboration of the ‘policy advisory systems’ (PAS) model yet have received considerably less attention than other components. This article revisits the PAS model and argues that political staffs engage in important procedural advisory activities masked by the PAS focus on location and control. The principle contention being that political staffs influence within advisory systems may also be a product of their procedural brokerage of other sources of policy advice. The article advances a conceptual framework to understand political staffs brokerage as ‘bridging’. Setting out ‘positive’ and ‘negative’ forms that can be arrayed along ‘administrative-technical’ and ‘partisan-political’ types. A Canadian sub-national case study is examined using the framework revealing variance in the type and nature of bridging based on institutional location of political staffs and the specific brokerage tasks they undertake. First ministers office bridging is found to be considerably more limited than that undertaken by ministers office political staffs, particularly in relation to the bridging of exogenous sources of policy advice. The framework and empirical findings enrich the policy advisory systems literature by demonstrating the importance of coupling spatial considerations with attention to the actual tasks of advisory system members. Additionally, highlighting the importance of procedural policy advisory brokerage as a source of influence within advisory systems.
Policy and Society | 2010
Michael Howlett; Jonathan Craft; Lindsay Zibrik
Abstract Government communication is now a large growth industry in many countries. Exactly what is meant by the term, however, varies from author to author. In this paper government communication is conceived as a policy tool or instrument, that is, as a means to give effect to policy goals. Key policy-relevant aspects of the term are examined including differences between the role of government communications in the ‘front-end’ of the public policy and production processes related to agenda-setting, policy formulation and producer activities as opposed to the ‘back-end’ of policy implementation, policy evaluation, consumption and distribution. Two case studies of political and policy-related information campaigns in Canada, one dealing with Elections Canada at the federal level and the second with provincial health policy-making in British Columbia, are examined in order to discern patterns in the use of government communication tools useful as a basis for comparative inquiry into Democratic governance.
Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice | 2017
Jonathan Craft; Mark Daku
Abstract Recent case studies and large-N survey evidence has confirmed long-suspected shortages of public sector “policy capacity”. Studies have found that government policy workers in various jurisdictions differ considerably with respect to types of policy work they undertake, and have identified uneven capacity for policy workers to access and apply technical and scientific knowledge to public issues. This suggests considerable difficulties for government’s ability to meet contemporary policy and governance challenges. Despite growing attention to these matters, studies have not examined the “elite” policy workers many governments recruit to address these capacity shortages. Using an established survey instrument, this study of two Canadian recruitment programs provides the first comparative analysis of elite policy recruits, as policy workers. Three research questions anchor the study: (1) What is the profile of these actors? (2) What types of policy work do “elite” policy analysts actually engage in? (3) How does their policy work compare by recruitment program? The article provides fresh comparative data on the nature of elite policy work and policy analytical capacity, but, more importantly, a crucial baseline for future comparative study of how elite recruitment may facilitate “supply-side” capacity gains expected from recruitment programs.
Archive | 2013
Michael Howlett; Jonathan Craft
Review of Policy Research | 2013
Jonathan Craft; Michael Howlett; Mark Crawford; Kathleen McNutt
Policy Sciences | 2017
Jonathan Craft; John Halligan
Review of Policy Research | 2013
Jonathan Craft; Michael Howlett