فصلنامه مطالعات مدیریت راهبردی

فصلنامه مطالعات مدیریت راهبردی

راهبردهای بوروکرات‌های سطح خیابان در اجرای خط‌مشی‌های زیست‌محیطی

نوع مقاله : پژوهشی

نویسندگان
1 دانشیار، دانشکده مدیریت و حسابداری، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران
2 استاد، دانشکده مدیریت و حسابداری، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران
3 استادیار، دانشکده مدیریت و حسابداری، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران
4 دانشجوی دکتری، دانشکده مدیریت و حسابداری، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران
چکیده
   از آنجا که مطالعات بوروکرات‌های سطح خیابان و نقش آن‌ها در صحنه زیست‌محیطی متمرکز است، هدف پژوهش تبیین بوروکرات‌های سطح خیابان در اجرای خط‌مشی‌های زیست‌محیطی مطابق قانون حفاظت و بهره‌برداری از جنگل‌های شمال کشور است. رویکرد پژوهش آمیخته است. ابتدا روش کیفی تحلیل مضمون انجام شد. برای جمع‌آوری داده‌ها از مصاحبۀ نیمه‌ساختاریافته با کارشناسان و مدیران اجرایی با معیاری مانند 20 سال سابقه کاری در حوزه محیط‌زیست و جنگل، اساتید دانشیار دانشگاه و در نهایت سه جنگلبان با مدرک تحصیلی کارشناسی و کارشناسی ارشد نمونه بخش کیفی شدند. برای وزن‌دهی به مضمون‌ها از فرآیند تحلیل سلسله‌مراتبی فازی استفاده شد. داده‌های این مرحله با استفاده از پرسشنامۀ مقایسۀ زوجی از نمونۀ یازده ‌نفری از کارکنان و جنگلبانان سه استان شمالی جمع‌آوری شد. استخراج واحدهای معنایی در بخش کیفی به شناسایی 169 مضمون پایه، 29 مضمون سازمان دهنده و 9 مضمون فراگیر منجر شد که در نُه مضمونِ اصلی نگرش «عاطفی به شهروندان، ویژگی‌های سازمانی، تغییر ماهیت خط‌مشی، ضعف دانشی کارکنان، ویژگی‌های فردی تصمیم­گیرنده، تعیین چگونگی حکمرانی جنگل، اتخاذ راهبردهای مقابله‌ای، بومی‌گزینی خط‌مشی و عملیاتی کردن خط‌مشی» دسته‌بندی شد. نتایج حاصل از تحلیل سلسه‌مراتبی فازی نشان داد که در بین نه مضمون اصلی، تغییر ماهیت خط‌مشی، تعیین چگونگی حکمرانی جنگل و اتخاذ راهبردهای مقابله‌ای در جایگاه اول تا سوم قرار داشتند. زیر مضمون تطبیق خط‌مشی‌ها با شرایط محلی، روابط دولت ـ شهروند، سیاست‌گذاری پنهان و ضعف تخصص و مهارت کارکنان در اولویت‌های اول تا چهارم قرار گرفتند. نتایج نشان می‌دهد که مدیریت موفقیت‌آمیز جنگل مستلزم تصمیمات مشترک کارشناسان و مردم محلی است که به‌نوبه خود به اجرای موفقیت‌آمیز قوانین حوزه جنگل کمک شایانی می‌کند.
کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله English

The strategies of street-level bureaucrats in the implementation of environmental policies

نویسندگان English

Davoud Hosseinpour 1
Mahdi Alvani 2
Hossein Aslipour 3
Aghil Ghorbani Paji 4
1 Associate Professor, Faculty of Management and Accounting, Allameh Tabatabai University, Tehran, Iran
2 Professor, Faculty of Management and Accounting, Allameh Tabatabai University, Tehran, Iran
3 Assistant Professor, Faculty of Management and Accounting, Allameh Tabatabai University, Tehran, Iran
4 PhD student, Faculty of Management and Accounting, Allameh Tabatabai University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده English

Introduction
FAO statistics confirm widespread deforestation in Iran. The forest per capita in the country is 0.17 hectares, while the global forest per capita is 0.62 hectares. The comparison of these statistics shows the need to pay attention to the preservation, revival and development of the country's forests (Natural Resources and Watershed Management, 2019). According to the latest statistics published by the program management organization, the process of forest destruction in Iran is increasing with high intensity; So that it has reached 1.8 million hectares from 6 million hectares in 1922. One of the factors that contributed to the deforestation crisis in Iran was the street level bureaucrats who challenged the implementation of the laws and the laws were not propeZrly implemented in the field of environment and protection of northern forests. Despite the plethora of studies on street-level bureaucrats, only a very limited body of research has focused on their role in the environmental arena; Because they play an important role in the chain of policy-making and in the actual realization and implementation of policies; Therefore, the current research was conducted with the aim of Identifying and prioritizing the strategies of street-level bureaucrats in the implementation of environmental policies (Case of Study: Law on Protection and Exploitation of Northern Forests).
Methodology
This research has been based on a mixed and sequential approach. Considering that the purpose of the current research is exploratory and seeks to rank the role of street-level bureaucrats in the implementation of environmental policies (Case of Study: Law on Protection and Exploitation of Northern Forests), The goal and problem in question, the main strategy of the research is methodological pluralism with the simultaneous use of two qualitative and quantitative methods (consecutively). In the present research, in the qualitative part with the aim of identifying and extracting the role of street-level bureaucrats in the implementation of the law on the protection and exploitation of forests in the north of the country, using the "thematic analysis" method, and in the quantitative part, due to the hierarchical nature of the research factors, using the method Hierarchical analysis process is used in fuzzy environment. In the research content analysis section, 11 semi-structured professional interviews with experts and executive managers in the fields of management, including managers of the Environmental Protection Organization, managers of natural resources and forests with criteria such as 20 years of work experience in the field of environment and forests, university professors with valid degrees Faculty and at least associate professor level and finally three foresters with bachelor's and master's degrees were done. The sampling method was purposeful with snowball approach. Thus, first, an interview was conducted with one of the managers of the Environmental Protection Organization, who has 31 years of experience in his field of work. The questionnaire tool has been used to implement the hierarchical analysis process method in the fuzzy environment. In the field of sampling, the hierarchical analysis process method was adopted in the fuzzy environment of purposeful and theoretical sampling, for this purpose, 11 questionnaires were provided to the employees and foresters of the General Directorate of Natural Resources and Watershed Management of Mazandaran, Gilan and Golestan provinces.
Results and Discussion
The extraction of semantic units in the qualitative part led to the identification of 169 basic themes, 29 organizing themes and 9 overarching themes, in which the nine main themes are "emotional attitude towards citizens, organizational characteristics, changing the nature of the policy, knowledge weakness of employees, characteristic" individual decision-makers, determining how to govern the forest, adopting coping strategies, localizing the policy and operationalizing the policy" were categorized. The results of the fuzzy hierarchical analysis showed that among the nine main themes, changing the nature of the policy determining how to govern the forest and adopting coping strategies were in the first to third place. Under the theme of adaptation of policies to local conditions, government-citizen relations, hidden politics and weak expertise and skills of employees were placed in the first to fourth priorities.
Conclusion
The results show that successful forest management requires the joint decisions of experts and local people, which in turn helps in the successful implementation of forest laws. The current research has shown that street-level bureaucrats can influence the implementation. First, street-level bureaucrats influence citizens' meaningfulness because street-level bureaucrats are more able to tailor the decisions and procedures to be followed to the specific situations and needs of their citizens. Devolution, therefore, allows street-level bureaucrats to exercise their own judgment when dealing with the needs and wants of citizens. When street-level bureaucrats perceive that their work is meaningful to citizens, this strongly influences their willingness to implement it; In addition, the results also point to another, more independent effect that discretion directly affects willingness to perform. Hence, discretion is inherently valued by bureaucrats. It seems that the freedom and discretion of bureaucrats has a positive effect on the effectiveness of policy programs, because it reduces resistance. At the same time, it adds legitimacy to the policy implementation process as it enables street-level bureaucrats to meet the needs and demands of citizens. In short, the present research is one of the first researches in the field of internal studies that deals with the role of street-level bureaucrats' strategies in policy implementation, and it is the first research that examines the role of street-level bureaucrats in the field of forest protection and exploitation. And in other words, foresters and staff paid.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Forests rule
Environmental policies
Law of Protection and Exploitation of Forests
Government-Citizen Relations
  1. Abedi Ja’fari, H., Taslimi, M. S., Faghihi, A., & Sheikhzade, M. (2011). Thematic analysis and thematic networks: a simple and efficient method for exploring patterns embedded in qualitative data municipalities. Strategic Management Thought, 5(2), 151-198. doi: 30497/SMT.2011.163(in Persian)
  2. Aryal, K., Dhungana, R., & Silwal, T. (2021). Understanding policy arrangement for wildlife conservation in protected areas of Nepal. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 26(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1080/10871209.2020.1781983
  3. Bandelow, N. C., Herweg, N., Hornung, J., & Zohlnhöfer, R. (2022). Public policy research—Born in the USA, at home in the world?. Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 63(2), 165-179. DOI: 10.1007/s11615-022-00396-5
  4. Bartels, K. P. (2021). Fitting in: The double-sided work of intermediating social innovation in local governance. In The Palgrave Handbook of the Public Servant (883-899). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
  5. Brodkin, E. Z. (2012). Reflections on street‐level bureaucracy: past, present, and future. Public Administration Review 72 (6). Public Administration Review 72 (6),940-49  https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1540-6210.2012.02657.x
  6. Danaei Fard, H., &Alizadeh, T. (2012).Modern public administration: a critical research.Mehraban Publishing Institute(in Persian).
  7. Davidovitz, M., & Cohen, N. (2021). Politicians’ involvement in street-level policy implementation: Implications for social equity. Public Policy and Administration, 09520767211024033.
  • P.I(2018). Environmental performance index. Yale University and Columbia University: New Haven, CT, USA.
  • Evans, T. (2016). Street-level bureaucracy, management and the corrupted world of service. European Journal of Social Work, 19(5), 602-615.
  • Funder, M., & Mweemba, C. E. (2019). Interface bureaucrats and the everyday remaking of climate interventions: Evidence from climate change adaptation in Zambia. Global Environmental Change, 55, 130-138.
  • Furlong, K., Carré, M. N., & Guerrero, T. A. (2017). Urban service provision: Insights from pragmatism and ethics. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 49(12), 2800-2812. DOI:10.1177/0308518X17734547.
  • Ghorbanizadeh, V., Sharifzadeh, F., & Motazedian, R. (2016). Analysis of Issues Implementation Organizational Policies. Journal of Strategic Management Studies, 6(24), 67-95 (in Persian). 1001.1.22286853.1394.6.24.3.3
  • Gilson L. (2015) Lipsky’s Street Level Bureaucracy. Chapter in Page E., Lodge M and Balla S (eds) Oxford Handbook of the Classics of Public Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199646135.001.0001
  • Goleij, A., Hasanzadnaverdi, E., Mohamadi, S., & Jokar, M. (2016). Determination criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management based on the views of experts and local people (Case study: Asalem Forests, north of Iran). Iranian Journal of Forest, 8(3), 365-379 (in Persian).
  • Holstead, K., Funder, M., & Upton, C. (2021). Environmental governance on the street: Towards an expanded research agenda on street-level bureaucrats. Earth System Governance, 9, 100108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esg.2021.100108
  • Howlett, M. (2019). Designing public policies: Principles and instruments. Routledge.
  • Howlett, M., Ramesh, M., & Perl, A. (2009). Studying public policy: Policy cycles and policy subsystems (Vol. 3). Oxford: Oxford university press.
  • Hsieh, T.Y., Lu, S.T., & Tzeng, G.H. (2004). Fuzzy MCDM approach for planning and design tenders selection in public office buildings. International journal of project management, 22(7), 573-584. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2004.01.002
  • Hudson, B., Hunter, D., & Peckham, S. (2019). Policy failure and the policy-implementation gap: can policy support programs help?. Policy design and practice, 2(1), 1-14. org/10.1080/25741292.2018.1540378
  • Hughes, A., & Condon, L. (2016). Street-level bureaucracy and policy implementation in community public health nursing: a qualitative study of the experiences of student and novice health visitors. Primary health care research & development17(6), 586-598. DOI: 10.1017/S1463423616000220
  • Imperial, M. T. (2021). Implementation structures: the use of top-down and bottom-up approaches to policy implementation. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics.
  • Jafari, H. R., Rafiei, Y., Ramezani, M. M., & Nasiri, H. (2012). Urban landfill site selection using AHP and SAW in GIS environment (case study: Kohkiluye-o-Boyer Ahmad Province, Iran).
  • Johanson, J. E. (2018). Strategy formation and policy making in government. Springer.
  • Kencana, N. (2017, November). Street-level bureaucracy: bureaucratic reform strategies initiated from bottom level. In International Conference on Democracy, Accountability and Governance (ICODAG 2017) (207-211). Atlantis Press. DOI: 10.2991/icodag-17.2017.38
  • Lieberherr, E., & Thomann, E. (2020). Linking throughput and output legitimacy in Swiss forest policy implementation. Policy Sciences, 53(3), 495-533. DOI: 10.1007/s11077-020-09374-3.
  • Loyens, K., & Maesschalck, J. (2010). Toward a theoretical framework for ethical decision making of street-level bureaucracy: Existing models reconsidered. Administration & Society, 42(1), 66-100. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399710362524
  • Lukinskiy, V., Lukinskiy, V., Sokolov, B., & Bazhina, D. (2021). An Empirical Examination of the Consistency Ratio in the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). In Advances in Production Management Systems. Artificial Intelligence for Sustainable and Resilient Production Systems: IFIP WG 5.7 International Conference, APMS 2021, Nantes, France, September 5–9, 2021, Proceedings, Part V (477-485). Springer International Publishing. DOI:10.1007/978-3-030-85914-5_51
  • Lundmark, C. (2020). The connectivity dilemma in freshwater management: exploring the role of street level bureaucrats in water governance. Water Policy, 22(6), 1067-1081. DOI:10.2166/wp.2020.123
  • May, P. J., & Winter, S. C. (2009). Politicians, managers, and street-level bureaucrats: Influences on policy implementation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(3), 453-476. DOI:10.1093/jopart/mum030
  • Metcalf, G., Kijima, K., Deguchi, H., Edson, M., Jones, P., Kineman, J., ... & Wessman, C. (2020). Introduction to the Handbook of Systems Sciences (1-24). Springer Singapore.
  • Monavvarian, A. (2015). The implementation model of administrative reform with learning approach. Journal of Public Administration, 7(4), 839-864. doi: 10.22059/jipa.2015.51040 (in Persian).
  • Natural Resources and Watershed Management Organization (2019). Natural landscape of northern forest (in Persian).
  1. Omidi, A., Hasanzad Navroodi, I., Ghajar, E., & Yousefpour, R. (2020). Determining appropriate strategies for management of Hyrcanian forests, using the quantitative strategic planning matrix (Case study: Siahkal Forests). Forest Research and Development, 6(2), 329-345. doi: 10.30466/jfrd.2020.120864 (in Persian).
  • Rowe, M. (2012). Going back to the street: revisiting Lipsky’s street-level bureaucracy. Teaching Public Administration, 30(1), 10-18. DOI:1177/0144739411435439
  • Sætren, H., & Hupe, P. L. (2018). Policy implementation in an age of governance. The Palgrave handbook of public administration and management in Europe, 553-575. DOI:10.1057/978-1-137-55269-3_29
  • Schneider, A. L., & Ingram, H. M. (1997). Policy design for democracy. University Press of Kansas.
  • 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. DOI:10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.06.038
  • Sharifzadeh, F., & Alwani, M. (2014). Public policy making process. Tehran: Allameh Tabatabai University Press (in Persian).
  • Soss, J., Fording, R. C., & Schram, S. F. (2011). Disciplining the poor: Neoliberal paternalism and the persistent power of race. University of Chicago Press.
  • Sultana, F. (2021). Political ecology 1: From margins to center. Progress in Human Geography, 45(1), 156-165. https://doi.org/10.1177/030913252093675
  • Tummers, L. L., Bekkers, V., Vink, E., & Musheno, M. (2015). Coping during public service delivery: A conceptualization and systematic review of the literature. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(4), 1099-1126. DOI:10.1093/jopart/muu056
  • Zacka, B. (2017). When the state meets the street: Public service and moral agency. Harvard university press.
  • Zhan, X., Lo, C. W. H., & Tang, S. Y. (2014). Contextual changes and environmental policy implementation: a longitudinal study of street-level bureaucrats in Guangzhou, China. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24(4), 1005-1035. DOI:2139/ssrn.1516821.
دوره 15، شماره 58
تابستان 1403
صفحه 1-22

  • تاریخ دریافت 19 دی 1401
  • تاریخ بازنگری 30 بهمن 1401
  • تاریخ پذیرش 01 خرداد 1402