Search

Over the past thirty years, police services in the UK and Australia have been subjected to a series of demands for change and reform. This article describes these reforms as [...]

Issues concerning the importance of traditions are discussed with emphasis on a study of British government. A study of three features of government including the public sector and their traditions is presented and analysed to understand tradition.

The paper reassesses the argument in Understanding Governance(1997). The first section summarizes where we are now in the study of governance, reviewing briefly the key concepts of policy networks, governance, core executive, hollowing out the state and the differentiated polity. The second section engages with my critics with the aim of opening new directions of research. I concentrate on the key issues of: the context of policy networks, explaining change and the role of ideas, the decline of the state, rescuing the core executive, and steering networks. Under each heading, I sketch a decentred answer to the question of where we go from here. I argue the analysis of governance should focus on beliefs, practices, traditions and dilemmas.

Despite Jeremy Moon's assertions we do not claim that there was no significant change in policy content or outcomes during the Thatcher period; or that the entire post-war period is marked by seamless continuity. We recognise that substantial change occurred. We examine Moon's sins of omission and commission before arguing that in order to establish the extent of and reasons for change in the Thatcher period, we need to undertake detailed, theoretically-informed empirical analysis rather than dealing, like Moon, in assertion.