Public Affairs: A field's maturation from 2000+ to 2030

This paper explores the development of the field of public affairs (PA) through the observations, research and experiences of two of its most cited scholars, deputy editors, and longtime contributors to the Journal of Public Affairs. We examine how PA and its practitioners have moved non‐linearly from 2000+ PA, to Public Affairs 2.0, toward a still evolving model of practice. Three areas of practice are explored in depth, including (a) how the function is managed, (b) its communication activity, and (c) how it supports organizations in interacting and engaging with stakeholders and issues. Finally, four alternative futures are laid out as possible paths along which the function may evolve as it moves forward to its next decade's end in 2030.     

The New Governance: Practices and Processes for Stakeholder and Citizen Participation in the Work of Government

Leaders in public affairs identify tools and instruments for the new governance through networks of public, private, and nonprofit organizations. We argue the new governance also involves people—the tool makers and tool users—and the processes through which they participate in the work of government. Practitioners are using new quasi-legislative and quasi-judicial governance processes, including deliberative democracy, e-democracy, public conversations, participatory budgeting, citizen juries, study circles, collaborative policy making, and alternative dispute resolution, to permit citizens and stakeholders to actively participate in the work of government. We assess the existing legal infrastructure authorizing public managers to use new governance processes and discuss a selection of quasi-legislative and quasi-judicial new governance processes in international, federal, state, and local public institutions. We conclude that public administration needs to address these processes in teaching and research to help the public sector develop and use informed best practices.     

Workplace and Non‐workplace Pro‐environmental Behaviors: Empirical Evidence from Florida City Governments

Public employees are expected to be good stewards of public resources and engage in pro‐environmental behaviors (PEBs). Using different categorizations of PEBs, this article examines whether public employees perform these PEBs in workplace and non‐workplace settings. The article further investigates how PEBs are influenced by salient characteristics of public organizations—that is, public service motivation (PSM) and civic participation categorized as civic engagement and cognitive engagement. Data were collected through a survey of public employees in two city governments in Florida. A structural equation model was employed to test the proposed model. Findings indicate that PSM has a positive influence on workplace PEBs and similar PEBs in the non‐workplace settings. Civic engagement has a positive influence on both workplace and non‐workplace PEBs. Barriers significantly moderate the effects of PSM and cognitive engagement on workplace and non‐workplace PEBs.     

Collaborative Innovation: A Viable Alternative to Market Competition and Organizational Entrepreneurship

There are growing pressures for the public sector to be more innovative but considerable disagreement about how to achieve it. This article uses institutional and organizational analysis to compare three major public innovation strategies. The article confronts the myth that the market‐driven private sector is more innovative than the public sector by showing that both sectors have a number of drivers of as well as barriers to innovation, some of which are similar, while others are sector specific. The article then systematically analyzes three strategies for innovation: New Public Management, which emphasizes market competition; the neo‐Weberian state, which emphasizes organizational entrepreneurship; and collaborative governance, which emphasizes multiactor engagement across organizations in the private, public, and nonprofit sectors. The authors conclude that the choice of strategies for enhancing public innovation is contingent rather than absolute. Some contingencies for each strategy are outlined.     

Exploring How Institutional Arrangements Shape Stakeholder Influence on Policy Decisions: A Comparative Analysis in the Energy Sector

In recent years, there has been an expansion of efforts to include stakeholders in administrative policy making. Despite significant potential to improve policy decisions, empirical evidence suggests that not all participatory processes provide meaningful opportunities for stakeholders to shape policy and may even give the most powerful stakeholder groups disproportionate influence over policy decisions. This article argues that the institutional arrangements for stakeholder engagement—the rules and norms that determine which stakeholders can participate and how—affect stakeholders’ influence on policy decisions. This article uses state energy efficiency policy making as a context in which to compare how different institutional arrangements shape the ways in which stakeholders engage in and influence the policy process across two states, Connecticut and Maryland. Findings highlight that institutional arrangements can be used to increase participation, mitigate undue influence of industrial stakeholders, and increase the influence of public interest stakeholder organizations.     

Traveling frames: How corporate and civil society actors try to influence public administration and courts in a case on nuclear emission data in Switzerland

This paper focuses on the framing strategies lobbyists apply to influence public policy in a case on nuclear emission data in Switzerland. Framing analysis is at the heart of communication science and has been applied in lobbying settings, but framing theory has not yet been fine‐tuned to the specificities of public affairs research. This qualitative case study gives insights into the dominant frames seven actors ranging from corporations to nongovernmental organizations to public institutions employ to defend a legal court case in the nuclear power industry. The results of the document analysis and the interviews show that frames travel among diverse actors and only some are picked up by the courts, at times stating a position opposite to the one initially intended by the frame sponsor. A public affairs‐specific integrated process model of framing is presented that views the media in the role of a moderator in the framing process and pronounces the lobbying organizations' strategic goals, the different stakeholders as target audiences, and the outcomes of the public affairs process.     

The Power of Nonprofits: Mechanisms for Nonprofit Policy Influence

The dramatic increase in public funding for nonprofit organizations has raised concerns about the potential disadvantages of a nonprofit sector that is too reliant on government funding. Using nonprofits to deliver public programs also presents risks for the public sector, but the question of nonprofit policy influence is largely absent from discussions of public–nonprofit service collaborations. The motivation for this article stems from the contradiction between the perceived weakness of publicly funded nonprofits and their potential for policy influence. This research asks, how do nonprofits exert policy influence? Using a grounded theory approach, the research draws on the attitudes and experiences of professionals and elected officials involved in policy making and policy implementation in the area of low‐income housing. The findings indicate a variety of mechanisms through which the government–nonprofit relationship can strengthen the power of nonprofit organizations, sometimes while weakening their government counterparts.     

Emerging US public affairs practice: the 2000+ PA model

Many larger US corporations are re‐assessing their participation in the public policy process and their entire approach to managing public affairs. This paper will attempt to synthesise much of what is happening to US corporate public affairs. It describes the forces driving the changes and addresses the ways corporations are responding to these forces. Finally, the paper offers an argument of the ‘New Public Affairs’ 2000 and beyond model as it will likely be practised in the USA, and perhaps elsewhere, at least early into this decade. Copyright © 2001 Henry Stewart Publications     

Intersectoral differences in public affairs: the duty of public reporting in public administration

Public reporting is a requirement for public affairs practitioners in public administration because of the democratic context in which government operates. By reporting to the public‐at‐large on agency activities, government agencies contributed to an informed citizenry, the essential foundation of a democracy. For public affairs in business administration and non‐profit administration, public reporting is desirable rather than mandatory. Public reporting was traditionally accomplished indirectly, through news media coverage of government. However, recent research suggests a diminution of interest by the media in fulfilling its role as an instrument of democracy. This means that the public reporting obligation of public affairs professionals in public administration needs to shift to direct reporting, through such products as annual reports, newsletters, TV programmes, Internet websites etc. Copyright © 2002 Henry Stewart Publications.     

Toward More “Evidence‐Informed” Policy Making?

The quality of public decision making depends significantly on the quality of analysis and advice provided through public organizations. Champions of “evidence‐informed” policy making claim that rigorous evaluation practices can significantly improve attainment of cost‐effective outcomes. After decades of experience, performance information is more sophisticated, but evaluation practices and capabilities vary enormously. Public agencies gather and process vast amounts of information, but there has been little analysis of how this information is actually utilized for policy and program improvement. This article examines how government agencies use evidence about policy and program effectiveness, with attention to four themes: (1) the prospects for improving “evidence‐informed” policy making, (2) the diversity of practices concerning evidence utilization and evaluation across types of public agencies and policy arenas, (3) recent attempts to “institutionalize” evaluation as a core feature of policy development and budget approval, and (4) the relationships between public agencies and nongovernmental sources of expertise.     

Does social media matter in developing democracies? Examining its impact on citizen political participation and expression in Uganda

This study examines the impact of citizens' use of social media for political participation and expression in developing democracies of Africa in particular Uganda. Findings from studied N = 2,400 respondents, evidenced social media does matter in the developing democracy of Uganda as the second most preferred form of media (.95 ± 2.37). Findings also showed the use of social media for political participation in persuading others to vote for a given candidate or party was positively correlated r = .043*(p value at .05), n = 2,400, and p = .035 with R² = .002. Future studies should examine the use of social media platforms for policy implementation, civic engagement, and inclusiveness.     

Multi-stakeholder public policy and governance in China: an analysis

In this article, public policy is put into a multi-stakeholder rather than adversarial perspective: we argue that there is a role for multi-stakeholder involvement in both the development and implementation of public policy; these are separate processes that can involve different patterns of stakeholder involvement (stakeholders have different skills and levels of interest in public policy) in either one or both the development and implementation phases. We need new models, approaches and examples of such multi-stakeholder public policy, and in this Special Issue, we focus on China, where such research is only slowly emerging. We present and analyse six papers that fall naturally into three categories: (1) corporate social responsiveness and societal relationships; (2) public affairs (particularly reputation management) and citizen involvement; and (3) public-management-oriented, data-based analyses. These articles, taken together, increase our understanding of multi-stakeholder research and practice, but equally as important, they give us insights into how Chinese public policy academics research and report public policy. This window into academic research and thinking offers us an opportunity to expand and deepen our understanding of public policy and its implications for public affairs in China. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Community engagement and public administration: Of silos,overlays and technologies of government

The public policy process in Australia is changing towards a more interactive, collaborative model, where governments seek to develop partnerships with civil society and private sector organisations to manage complex policy challenges. This article discusses research conducted into a project implemented by a Victorian government department that sought to involve stakeholders in addressing natural resource management issues in the agricultural sector. The research revealed that public administration practices associated with the new public management approach impeded the ability of the project to facilitate participation by diverse stakeholders in the decision‐making process. The article challenges the view that the discourse of collaboration and community engagement takes public administration down a constructivist path and suggests that agencies need to become reflexive about the way in which public administration practices are constitutive of the community engagement process if they are to facilitate genuine participation of other stakeholders.     

Self‐interest in new wrapping: “Appeal to the public interest” as a topos in lobbying

This article explores public affairs and lobbying strategies that make public appeals beyond organizational self‐interest and instead focus on appeals to the public interest. While research has highlighted such appeals as a staple for lobbying campaigns, there is scant research exploring the communicative construction of this notion. Thus, this article uses the rhetorical concept of topos to explore how lobbyists attempt to fuse their private interests with a broader appeal to what is best for society. In particular, we discuss how different types of organizations have different rhetorical opportunities to ground their arguments. Finally, we discuss the democratic implications of appeals to the public interest as a standard lobbying strategy.     

External affairs and trusted family businesses: A research agenda

In the past two decades, the Journal of Public Affairs has solidified corporate public affairs as a legitimate leadership skillset vital to driving future business growth. Yet, more work at a persistently overlooked gap in the Journal, the intersection of public affairs and family businesses, might shed new light on thriving, trusted, and sustainable business practices. This paper examines the unique contributions of family businesses as trusted influencers. As one of the most prominent forms of business, worldwide, family businesses persistently enjoy unusually high levels of public trust while collectively employing millions of wage earners yet their contributions to corporate external affairs research ostensibly have been largely overlooked. These “silent” community and social influencers offer a potentially new perspective on effective public outreach given their persistent and unique trust advantage. Family business' trust-based capabilities can potentially bring new insights to understanding effective stakeholder engagement, credible communications, and issues management—the sweet spot of corporate public affairs functions. Future research opportunities based on relational- and locational- advantages of trusted family businesses are identified.     

The evolving discipline of public affairs

• Approaching the tenth anniversary of this Journal of Public Affairs, as the editorial team we offer this extended literature review as our reflection on the evolution and development of public affairs, both as an academic discipline and a professional practice. It is a necessarily personal and subjective contribution, highlighting the issues and areas which we believe represent significant continuing debates. The article considers how public affairs is, and should be, defined; examines the range of activities which theorists and practitioners understand as falling within the scope of corporate public affairs; analyses the relationship between public affairs and corporate political activity as different though complementary fields; discusses the importance of the public issues life cycle and the issues management models; and calls upon the public affairs community to defend the position of public affairs as the fundamental bridge between the organisation, society and government, in the face of challenges from other organisational functions.

Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Global governance and communicative action: a study of democratic participation during planning for the Lyon–Turin rail link

Organisation–stakeholder engagement during planning of a high‐speed rail link between France and Italy is described and analysed in this paper. Conceptualising organisation–citizen engagement as a form of deliberative democracy, the study's theoretical framework draws upon literature from communication, social and political science. Following a review of governance for transnational organisation–stakeholder engagement, communication methods used by one transnational organisation, Lyon‐Turin Ferroviaire (LTF), to engage in ‘discursive legitimacy’ with affected parties, is studied. A qualitative case study approach examines whether LTF's engagement with stakeholders provides opportunities for democratic participation rather than creating a democratic deficit in the public sphere. Results point to a lack of mechanisms through which transnational policy makers can be held accountable‐leading in this case, to a legitimacy crisis for institutions involved, threatening their ability to justify the economic and transportation viability of the project. This article is of interest to academics in communication and social sciences, managers working in an international context and communication professionals. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Using Data to Manage for Performance at Public Universities

As performance‐oriented reforms have become more commonplace in recent years, questions about the factors that drive organizational adoption and use of performance systems for internal management are of central importance. This article uses data taken from a survey of presidents at public universities to advance our understanding about the use of data and performance management strategies within public organizations. The central research question is, why do public administrators choose to employ performance management strategies? In addition, the author also explores variation in the extent to which public universities use performance management strategies for three tasks that are central to public management: (1) strategic planning, (2) evaluating employees, and (3) interacting with external stakeholders. Findings indicate that public universities often use performance data to help manage, but many of the causal factors that lead to data use vary across management functions.     

Creating Broader Research Impacts through Boundary Organizations

Climate science research documents and predicts changes in the physical environment. This information informs policy decisions and public programs through the design of human interventions that promote adaptive management. Since the early 2000s, federal funding has led to the creation of transdisciplinary regional climate workgroups to facilitate integrative knowledge coproduction and promote shared use of research results by scientific and nonscientific stakeholders. Labeled “boundary organizations,” these workgroups are tasked with facilitating partnerships between climate science researchers and practitioners with expertise in multiple physical and social science disciplines. When these organizations are successful, scientific findings and practitioner experiences are integrated to synergistically create usable knowledge about adaptive management that provides direct public value and creates broader societal impacts. This article explores the broader impacts provided by these boundary organizations through the establishment of regional research agendas and the communication of research results in ways that influence regional public policy and promote adaptive management.