Abstract
This chapter focuses directly on agency in different respects by reviewing and assessing highly interesting conceptualizations of public officials as creative political agents, such as policy entrepreneurs, administrative guerillas, and street-level actors. We discern differences and similarities between these concepts and inside activism, and further elaborates on the latter’s central characteristics. We conclude that inside activism bears resemblance to other actor concepts that stress creativity and the political nature of agency, but we also argue that inside activism brings some novelty by combining three vital dimensions in a specific way: inside–outside, political–administrative, and actor–structure. It is also more precisely defined than other comparable concepts and thus lends itself to systematic empirical testing.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Abers, R. N & Tatagiba, L. (2015). Institutional activism: Mobilizing for women’s health from inside the Brazilian bureaucracy. In F. M. Rossi and M. Von Bülow (Eds.), Social movement dynamics. New perspectives on theory and research from Latin America (pp. 73–101). UK: Ashgate.
Ahrne, G. (1993). Delvis människa, delvis organisation/Partly human, partly organization. Sociologisk Forskning, 30(1), 59–78.
Alvinius, A. (2013). Bridging boundaries in the borderland of bureaucracies. Individual impact of organisational adaption to demanding situations in civil and military contexts (Ph.D. thesis). Sweden: Karlstad University.
Banaszak, L. A. (2005). Inside and outside the state: Movement insider status, tactics, and public policy achievements. In D. S. Meyer, V. Jenness & H. Ingram (Eds.), Routing the opposition. Social movements, public policy, and democracy (pp. 149–176). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Banaszak, L. A. (2010). The women’s movement inside and outside the state. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Baumgartner, F. R., & Jones, B. D. (1993). Agendas and instability in American politics. Chicago: University of Chicago.
Brouwer, S. (2015). Policy entrepreneurs in water governance. Cham: Springer.
Campbell, H., & Marshall, R. (1999). Ethical frameworks and planning theory. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 23(3), 464–478.
Davidoff, P. (1965). Advocacy and pluralism in planning. In S. S. Fainstein & S. Campbell (Eds.), Readings in planning theory (3rd ed., 2011, pp. 191–205). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
du Gay, P. (2000). In praise of bureaucracy. Weber, organization, ethics. London: Sage.
Ebers, M. (1997). The formation of inter-organizational networks. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Eisenstein, H. (1996). Inside agitators: Australian femocrats & the state. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Ferguson, K. (1984). The feminist case against bureaucracy. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing public policy. Discursive politics and deliberative practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Forester, J. (1999). The deliberative practitioner. Encouraging participatory planning processes. London: The MIT Press.
Giddens, A. (1979). Central problems in social theory: Action, structure and contradiction in social analysis. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Goodsell, C. T. (2004). The case for bereaucracy. A public administration polemic (4th ed.). Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.
Hajer, M. A. (1995). The politics of environmental discourse. Ecological modernization and the policy process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hammond, D. R. (2013). Policy entrepreneurship in China’s response to Urban poverty. Policy Studies Journal, 41(1), 119–146.
Hardy, C., & Maguire, S. (2008). Institutional entrepreneurship. In R. C. Greenwood, C. Oliver, K. Sahlin, & R. Suddaby (Eds.), The sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 198–217). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hoffman, L. M. (1989). The politics of knowledge: Activist movements in medicine and planning. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Humphrey, M. (2006). Democratic legitimacy, public justification and environmental direct action. Political Studies, 54(2), 310–327.
Hupe, P. L., Hill, M., & Buffat, A. (Eds.). (2015). Understanding street-level bureaucracy. Bristol: Policy Press.
Hysing, E. (2009). Greening transport—explaining urban transport policy change. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 11(3), 243–261.
Hysing, E., Olsson, J., & Dahl, V. (2016). A radical public administration? Green radicalism and policy influence among local environmental officials in Sweden. Environmental Politics, 25(3), 535–552.
Ingold, K., & Varone, F. (2011). Treating policy brokers seriously: Evidence from the climate policy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(2), 319–346.
Kelly, M. (1994). Theories of justice and street-level discretion. Journal of Public Administration and Theory, 4(2), 119–140.
Kickert, W. J. M., Klijn, E. H., & Koppenjan, J. F. M. (1997). (Eds.), Managing complex networks. Strategies for the public sector. London: Sage.
Kingdon, J. W. (1984/1995). Agendas, alternatives and public policies. New York: HarperCollins College Publishers.
Kjær, A. M. (2004). Governance. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Klemp, N., McDermott, R., Raley, J., Thibeault, M., Powell, K., & Levitin, D. J. (2008). Plans, Takes, and Mis-takes. Critical Social Studies, 1, 4–21.
Laws, D., & Forester, J. (2015). Conflict, improvisation, governance. Street level practices for Urban democracy. New York and London: Routledge.
Lipsky, M. (1980). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Lovell, H. (2009). The role of individuals in policy change: The case of UK low-energy housing. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 27(3), 491–511.
Lowndes, V. (2005). Something old, something new, something borrowed…. Policy Studies, 26(3–4), 291–309.
Lowndes, V., & Roberts, M. (2013). Why institutions matter: The new institutionalism in political science. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Mackenzie, C. (2004). Policy entrepreneurship in Australia: A conceptual review and application. Australian Journal of Political Science, 29(2), 367–386.
Maguire, S., Hardy, C., & Lawrence, T. (2004). Institutional entrepreneurship in emerging fields: HIV/AIDS treatment advocacy in Canada. Academy of Management Journal, 47(5), 657–679.
March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1989). Rediscovering institutions. New York: Free Press.
Marsh, D., & Rhodes, R. A. W. (1992). Policy networks in british government. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Meyers, M. K., & Vorsanger, S. (2007). Street-level bureaucrats and the implementation of public policy. In B. G. Peters & J. Pierre (Eds.), The handbook of public administration (pp. 153–163). London: Sage.
Mintrom, M., & Norman, P. (2009). Policy entrepreneurship and policy change. Policy Studies Journal, 37(4), 649–667.
Needleman, M. L., & Needleman, C. E. (1974). Guerrillas in the bureaucracy: The community planning experiment in the United States. New York: John Wiley.
Niskanen, W. A. (1973). Bureaucracy: Servant or master? London: The institute of economic affairs.
O’Leary, R. (2010). Guerrilla employees: Should managers nurture, tolerate, or terminate them? Public Administration Review, 70(1), 8–19.
O’Leary, R. (2014). The ethics of dissent: Managing guerrilla government (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.
Olsen, J. P. (2010). Change and continuity: An institutional approach to institutions of democratic government. In J. Pierre and P. W. Ingraham (Eds.), Comparative administrative change and reform: Lessons learned. Montreal & Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
Olsson, J. (2016). Subversion in institutional change and stability. A neglected mechanism. London: Palgrave MacmillanWaterman.
Petridou, E. (2017). Political entrepreneurship in swedish: Towards a (re)theorization of entrepreneurial agency (Ph.D. thesis). Sweden: Mid Sweden University.
Pettinicchio, D. (2012). Institutional activism: Reconsidering the insider/outsider dichotomy. Sociology Compass, 6(6), 499–510.
Pierre, J., & Peters, B. G. (2000). Governance, politics and the state. London: Macmillan.
Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2011). Public management reform. A comparative analysis: New public management, governance, and the new-Weberian state (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pressman, J. L., & Wildavsky, A. (1984). Implementation. How great expectations in Washington are dashed in Oakland, or why it’s amazing that federal programs work at all (3rd ed.). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Roberts, N. C., & King, P. J. (1991). Policy entrepreneurs: Their activity structure and function in the policy process. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 1(2), 147–175.
Sabatier, P. A. (1993). Policy change over a decade or more. In P. A. Sabatier & H. C. Jenkins-Smith (Eds.), Policy change and learning: An advocacy coalition approach (pp. 13–39). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Sabatier, P. A. (1998). The advocacy coalition framework: Revisions and relevance to Europe. Journal of European Public Policy, 5(12), 98–130.
Sabatier, P. A. (2007). Fostering the development of policy theory. In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process (2nd ed., pp. 321–336). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Sabatier, P. A., & Weible, C. M. (2007). The advocacy coalition framework, innovations and clarifications. In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process (2nd ed., pp. 189–220). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Santoro, W. A., & McGurie, G. M. (1997). Social movement insiders: The impact of institutional activists on affirmative action and comparable worth policies. Social Problems, 44(4), 503–519.
Schmidt, V. A. (2010). Taking ideas and discourse seriously: Explaining change through discursive institutionalism as the fourth “new institutionalism”. European Political Science Review, 2(1), 1–25.
Schneider, M., Teske, P. E., & Mintrom, M. (1995). Public entrepreneurs: Agents for change in American government. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Sevä, M., & Jagers, S. C. (2013). Inspecting environmental management from within: The role of street-level bureaucrats in environmental policy implementation. Journal of Environmental Management, 128, 1060–1070.
Sørensen, E. (2002). Democratic theory and network governance. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 24(4), 693–720.
Sørensen, E. (2004). Democratic governance and the role of public administrators. In P. Bogason, S. Kensen, & H. T. Miller (Eds.), Tampering with tradition (pp. 107–131). Oxford: Lexington.
Sørensen, E. (2006). Metagovernance. The changing role of politicians in processes of democratic governance. American Review of Public Administration, 36(1), 98–114.
Sørensen, E. (2013). Institutionalizing interactive governance for democracy. Critical Policy Studies, 7(1), 72–86.
Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (Eds.). (2007). Theories of democratic network governance. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Spicer, M. W. (2014). In defense of politics in public administration. A value pluralist perspective. Tuscaloosa, AL: The University of Alabama Press.
Torfing, J., Peters, B. G., Pierre, J., & Sørensen, E. (2012). Interactive governance: Advancing the paradigm. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organization. edited with an introduction by Talcott Parsons. New York: Free Press.
Weible, C. M., Sabatier, P. A., & McQueen, K. (2009). Themes and variations: Taking stock of the advocacy coalition framework. Policy Studies Journal, 37(1), 121–140.
Welchman, J. (2001). Is ecosabotage civil disobedience? Philosophy & Geography, 4(1), 97–107.
Williams, P. (2002). The competent boundary spanner. Public Administration, 80(1), 103–124.
Yeatman, A. (1990). Bureaucrats, femocrats, technocrats. Essays on the contemporary Australian State. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hysing, E., Olsson, J. (2018). The Political Nature of Inside Activism. In: Green Inside Activism for Sustainable Development. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56723-5_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56723-5_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-56722-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-56723-5
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)