Main focus and working aims

The empirical focus of a proposed working group is the nature, role and functioning of a special category of officials operating at the borderline of politics and administration i.e. the class of official in between the political executive and the standing bureaucracy. In various systems and in various studies multiple names have been given to these officials.

Specific goals

Central theme for 2018: Research on Political Staff and International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP)

A substantive element of the current work on political staff has evolved from a group of scholars studying the institutional arrangements and particulars of these actors in countries derived from the Westminster model, to studies incorporating other political-administrative traditions, and developing a conceptual turn in adviser research. Central to this is the work by New Zealand academics Professor Richard Shaw and Dr Chris Eichbaum who undertook a quantitative survey of the New Zealand case and edited the publication ‘Partisan Appointees and Public Servants: An International Analysis of the Role of the Political Adviser’ (Edward Elgar, 2010). The study included studies of UK, Canada, Australia, Ireland, USA and New Zealand. Eicbaum and Shaw’s survey instrument has been used by several scholars, extending the analysis to European countries of the continental Napoleonic tradition (cabinet system),Germanic and Scandinavian traditions. A logical development is to include research from CEE states.

A further emphasis is the development of new conceptual frameworks and applying theoretical lenses to understand and interrogate the role and impact of political staff in the policy making process. This ‘second wave’ approach was initiated at the inaugural ICPP conference in Grenoble in 2013 and has been supported by continued work and participation in panels at NOPSA, ICPP and the establishment of an annual ministerial workshop. The first of which was held in KU Leuven (November 2015), followed by the University of Limerick (October 2016), whereas the proposed venue for 2017 is Berlin. Publication outputs have included a special issue of the International Journal of Public Administration (2015), a forthcoming special edition of Public Administration (forthcoming, articles in early view online), and a book edited by Richard Shaw and Chris Eichbaum titled ‘Ministers, Minders and Mandarins: An International Study of Relationships at the Executive Summit of Parliamentary Democracies’ (Edward Elgar, forthcoming). This edited collection builds on a 2010 publication by extending to include country cases ay Denmark, The Netherlands, Greece, Germany, Norway, Sweden (besides New Zealand, Australia, UK, Canada and Ireland). Each chapter focuses on a conceptual framework in order to explain a particular country phenomena/case.

What is absent from these developments is representation from Central and Eastern European country cases which would potentially yield interesting insights into the role and utilisation of special advisers/political staff/members of ministerial cabinets. This may encompass a range of roles from that of coordinators, expert advisers, partisans, loyal and agents recruited by individual ministers. Ten years on from the final work of the NISPAcee working group on politico-administrative relations and after over a decade of EU membership for several countries, it may be opportune to view developments in the relationships between political and administrative actors and their impact on the policy making process.

Guidelines for the contributors

Research questions: (adapted from draft MARC protocol, Limerick October 2016)

Basic empirical questions

·How do we define ministerial advisers? (definition, titles, etc. )

·What is the historical evolution of the phenomenon in every country? (Historical data on the evolution of the phenomenon in time)

·Who are they? (Basic socio-demographics)

·What is their current statutory framework? (type of legal framework: law, decree etc. & provisions: organisation i.e. cabinet or not, numbers, synthesis, qualifications, employment/wages, roles)

Beyond statutory issues

·Why are they appointed? (from a minister’s, an administrator’s and an adviser’s perspective)

o Whatresourcesthat are beneficial for the minister do ministerial advisers bring to the table?

§ Generic

§ Portfolio specific

·What are the perceived benefits of their work? (from a minister’s, an administrator’s and an adviser’s perspective)

·What are the perceived dysfunctions associated with their work? (from a minister’s, an administrator’s and an adviser’s perspective)

·What are the perceived benefits/dysfunction of their work – as perceived by society, media/ journalists, business or other stakeholders?

·How are they selected?

·What do they actually do?

o Substance/nature/content of advice and advisory activities,

o Dimension (Bernadette’s what and where?)

·What is their relationship with the political executive? (loyalty, PSBs)

·What is their relationship with the administration?

·What is the relationship with other advisers and the broader set of actors interacting with them? (prime minister’s office, ministers’ offices, the bureaucracy)

·What are adviser’s career patterns? (Why become an adviser, average duration of adviser career, mobility, future jobs, the professional afterlife, post-service rewards, the opportunity costs of being a ministerial adviser)

·Are advisers as influential as they appear? What defines adviser influence? (more difficult to operationalise)

o What instruments do they use? Formal or informal?

o Locational considerations

o What resources are they exchanging?