Abstract
This chapter theorizes on how subversive action in combination with other micro-mechanisms can explain institutional stability and change. A central argument is that when subversive ideas are more or less in place within organizations minor changes in the environment can trigger them into subversive action in support for stability or change. Different forms of subversive action can work as mechanisms either to preserve stability, for instance, by secretly resisting new initiatives, or by producing change in existing institutions, for example, subversive networking. The neglect of subversive action means that institutional theory has underestimated the power of gradual change and the interactivity between endogenous and exogenous forces. The chapter elaborates also on three strategies of subversion: exploiting institutional ambiguities, handling the secrecy–openness dilemma, and subversive networking.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Alexander, E. R. (2001). The planner-prince: Interdependence, rationalities and post-communicative practice. Planning Theory & Practice, 2(3), 311–324.
Bache, I., & Flinders, M. V. (Eds.). (2004). Multi-level governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Baumgartner, F. R., & Jones, B. D. (1993). Agendas and instability in American politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Bjørkelo, B., & Høivik Bye, H. (2014). On the appropriateness of research design: Intended and actual whistleblowing. In A. J. Brown, D. Lewis, R. Moberly, & W. Vandekerckhove (Eds.), International handbook on whistleblowing research. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Blom-Hansen, J. (1997). A ‘new’ institutional perspective on policy networks. Public Administration, 75(4), 669–693.
Brunsson, N. (1989). The organization of hypocrisy: Talk, decisions and actions in organizations. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Dagens industri, Di-debatt, 2015-06-25: Absolut exportstopp vid grava demokratibrister.
della Porta, D., & Diani, M. (1999). Social movements: An introduction. Oxford: Blackwell.
Denzau, A. T., & North, D. C. (1994). Shared mental models: Ideologies and institutions. Kyklos: International Review for Social Sciences, 47, 3–30.
Dowding, K. (1995). Model or metaphor? A critical review of the policy network approach. Political Studies, 43(1), 136–158.
Fischer, F. (2009). Democracy and expertise: Reorienting policy inquiry. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Flyvbjerg, B., & Richardson, T. (2002). Planning and foucault: In search of the dark side of planning theory. In P. Allmendinger & M. Tewdwr-Jones (Eds.), Planning futures: New directions for planning theory (pp. 44–62). London: Routledge.
Greenwald, G. (2014). No place to hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. surveillance state. New York: Metropolitan Books.
Hupe, P., Hill, M., & Buffat, A. (Eds.). (2015). Understanding street-level bureaucracy. Bristol: Policy Press.
Krasner, S. (1984). Approaches to the state: Alternative conceptions and historical dynamics. Comparative Politics, 16(2), 223–246.
Lewis, D., Brown, A. J., & Moberly, R. (2014). Whistleblowing, its importance and the state of the research. In A. J. Brown, D. Lewis, R. Moberly, & W. Vandekerckhove (Eds.), International handbook on whistleblowing research. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Lindblom, C. E. (1959). The science of muddling through. Public Administration Review, 19(2), 79–88.
Lipsky, M. (1980). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Lowndes, V., & Roberts, M. (2013). Why institutions matter: The new institutionalism in political science. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Lukes, S. (1974/2005). Power. A radical view (2nd ed.). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Mahoney, J. (2000). Path dependence in historical sociology. Theory and Society, 29(2000), 507–548.
Mahoney, J., & Thelen, K. (Eds.). (2010). Explaining institutional change: Ambiguity, agency and power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1989). Rediscovering institutions. New York: Free Press.
March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1995). Democratic governance. New York: Free Press.
Marsh, D., & Rhodes, R. A. W. (1992). Policy networks in British government. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Martin, B. (2014). Research that whistleblowers want—And what they need. In A. J. Brown, D. Lewis, R. Moberly, & W. Vandekerckhove (Eds.), International handbook on whistleblowing research. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340–363.
Naughton, J. (2015). Surveillance laws are being rewritten post-Snowden, but what will really change? The Guardian, 6 June.
O’Leary, R. (2014). The ethics of dissent: Managing guerrilla government (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.
Olsen, J. (2014). Reporting versus inaction: How much is there, what explains the differences and what to measure. In A. J. Brown, D. Lewis, R. Moberly, & W. Vandekerckhove (Eds.), International handbook on whistleblowing research. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Olsson, J. (2003). Democracy paradoxes in multi-level governance: Theorizing on structural fund system research. Journal of European Public Policy, 10(2), 283–300.
Olsson, J. (2009). The power of the inside activist: Understanding policy change by empowering the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF), Planning Theory and Practice, 10(2), pp. 167–187.
Olsson, J., & Hysing, E. (2012). Theorizing inside activism: Understanding policymaking and policy change from below. Planning Theory & Practice, 13(2), 257–273.
Peters, G. B. (2011). Institutional theory in political science: The “new institutionalism”. London and New York: Pinter.
Pierre, J. (2009). Post hoc, ergo propter hoc? Path dependency and punctuated equilibria in European aviation safety regulation. Critical Policy Studies, 3(1), 105–120.
Pierre, J., & Peters, G. B. (2000). Governance, politics and the state. London: Macmillan.
Pierson, P. (2004). Politics in time. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2011). Public management reform—A comparative analysis: New public management, governance, and the neo-Weberian state. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rhodes, R. A. W. (1997). Understanding governance. Policy networks, governance, reflexivity and accountability. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Rhodes, R. A. W. (2006a). Old institutionalisms. In R. Rhodes, S. Binder, & B. Rockman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political institutions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rhodes, R. A. W. (2006b). Policy network analysis. In M. Moran, M. Rein, & R. E. Goodin (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of public policy (pp. 425–447). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Roberts, P. (2014). Motivations for whistleblowing: Personal, private and public interests. In A. J. Brown, D. Lewis, R. Moberly, & W. Vandekerckhove (Eds.), International handbook on whistleblowing research. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins-Smith, H. C. (Eds.). (1993). Policy change and learning: An advocacy coalition approach. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Socialtjänstlagen, SFS nr: 2001:453.
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.
Streek, W., & Thelen, K. (2005). Introduction: Institutional change in advanced political economies. In W. Streek & K. Thelen (Eds.), Beyond continuity. Institutional change in advanced political economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Thelen, K. (1999). Historical institutionalism in comparative politics. Annual Review of Political Science, 2(1999), 369–404.
Thelen, K. (2009). Institutional change in advanced political economies. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 47(3), 471–498.
Torfing, J., Peters, G. B., Pierre, J., & Sørensen, E. (2012). Interactive governance: Advancing the paradigm. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Uppdrag granskning. (2014). FOI:s ledning delaktig i bulvanupplägg. Publicerad: 16 September 2014, 21:34. Retrieved from http://www.svt.se/ug/foi-1
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
Copyright information
© 2016 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Olsson, J. (2016). Stability, Change, and Subversive Action. In: Subversion in Institutional Change and Stability . Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-94922-9_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-94922-9_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-94921-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-94922-9
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)