that it tries to assess to what degree the governance context is supportive or restrictive
for the realisation of the chosen policies and projects. In this chapter, this so-called
Governance Assessment Tool will be presented and explained. Also some remarks
guiding its use will be made. In the next section we will first introduce the theoretical
approach in which the Governance Assessment Tool is rooted (Sect. 3.2). In this
so-called Contextual Interaction Theory, operational decision making and implementation processes are studied from three actor characteristics (motivations, cognitions and resources) that are influenced by the three contextual layers of case
specific circumstances, the governance context and the more general wider context
like the technological development. Section 3.3 presents the Governance Assessment
Tool itself, including its descriptive and evaluative questions. Thereafter in Sect. 3.4
we will guide the reader on how to use it to facilitate governance analysis.
3.2 Understanding Policy Implementation as Multi-actor
Interaction Process: Contextual Interaction Theory
The Governance Assessment Tool is rooted in a theory of policy implementation
that is labelled Contextual Interaction Theory (Bressers 2004, 2009; De Boer and
Bressers 2011). It views implementation processes not top down, as just the
application of policy decisions, but as multi-actor interaction processes that are
ultimately driven by the actors involved. Thus it makes sense to explain the course
and results of the process from that simple starting point and to place these actors
and their main characteristics central stage in any analytical model. This is also
relevant because in the history of implementation research hundreds of crucial
success factors were proposed and used to analyse all kinds of different cases. This
can be theoretically interesting when one can try to carve out the impact of a single
factor from those of all the others. In practical reality however practitioners must
deal with situations in which all factors are around simultaneously, and thus with
combinations of all factors that are thought to matter (Bressers and O’Toole 2005).
Even in a rather simple model of fifteen factors having each only two possible
values there are some thirty thousand different combinations of circumstances that
can be imagined. That is not only unworkable as an analytical tool (Goggin 1986),
it is also overdone. There are no thirty thousand (or more) fundamentally different
implementation settings. But since interaction processes are human activities, all
influences flow via the key characteristics of the actors involved (Bressers and Klok
1988). Thus, it is possible to explain the course and effects of implementation
processes with a set of three core factors per actor. Such explanatory model is far
more parsimonious, at least to begin with. All other factors, including governance
conditions, are regarded as belonging to the context that may influence this set of
core factors. In Fig. 3.1 we include these factors: their motivations that may spur the
actors into action, their cognitions, information held to be true, and their resources,
providing them with capacity to act individually and power in relation to other
actors. Among the actors involved in the process there need to be a sufficiently
46
H. Bressers et al.
for the realisation of the chosen policies and projects. In this chapter, this so-called
Governance Assessment Tool will be presented and explained. Also some remarks
guiding its use will be made. In the next section we will first introduce the theoretical
approach in which the Governance Assessment Tool is rooted (Sect. 3.2). In this
so-called Contextual Interaction Theory, operational decision making and implementation processes are studied from three actor characteristics (motivations, cognitions and resources) that are influenced by the three contextual layers of case
specific circumstances, the governance context and the more general wider context
like the technological development. Section 3.3 presents the Governance Assessment
Tool itself, including its descriptive and evaluative questions. Thereafter in Sect. 3.4
we will guide the reader on how to use it to facilitate governance analysis.
3.2 Understanding Policy Implementation as Multi-actor
Interaction Process: Contextual Interaction Theory
The Governance Assessment Tool is rooted in a theory of policy implementation
that is labelled Contextual Interaction Theory (Bressers 2004, 2009; De Boer and
Bressers 2011). It views implementation processes not top down, as just the
application of policy decisions, but as multi-actor interaction processes that are
ultimately driven by the actors involved. Thus it makes sense to explain the course
and results of the process from that simple starting point and to place these actors
and their main characteristics central stage in any analytical model. This is also
relevant because in the history of implementation research hundreds of crucial
success factors were proposed and used to analyse all kinds of different cases. This
can be theoretically interesting when one can try to carve out the impact of a single
factor from those of all the others. In practical reality however practitioners must
deal with situations in which all factors are around simultaneously, and thus with
combinations of all factors that are thought to matter (Bressers and O’Toole 2005).
Even in a rather simple model of fifteen factors having each only two possible
values there are some thirty thousand different combinations of circumstances that
can be imagined. That is not only unworkable as an analytical tool (Goggin 1986),
it is also overdone. There are no thirty thousand (or more) fundamentally different
implementation settings. But since interaction processes are human activities, all
influences flow via the key characteristics of the actors involved (Bressers and Klok
1988). Thus, it is possible to explain the course and effects of implementation
processes with a set of three core factors per actor. Such explanatory model is far
more parsimonious, at least to begin with. All other factors, including governance
conditions, are regarded as belonging to the context that may influence this set of
core factors. In Fig. 3.1 we include these factors: their motivations that may spur the
actors into action, their cognitions, information held to be true, and their resources,
providing them with capacity to act individually and power in relation to other
actors. Among the actors involved in the process there need to be a sufficiently
46
H. Bressers et al.