LIST OF PANELS

Since the World Economic Forum in 2011 at the latest, the interdependencies between policy fields are perceived as a core challenge for public policy and governance. At the nexus between seemingly unrelated areas such as food, water, energy, and mobility, actors are confronted with multiple interdependencies leading to complex problems of knowledge exchange and coordination. Under the conditions of climate change, decreasing stocks of natural resources or the loss of biodiversity, ‘policy silos’ are opened. Formerly separated departments, policy coalitions, policy procedures or material flows are increasingly interlinked.

For some years now, new institutional formats of policy coordination and expertise emerge that bring together administrative authorities, interest groups, think tanks and scientific actors. These new coordinative formats – e.g. participatory foresight procedures, policy assessments, multistakeholder initiatives, and transdisciplinary platforms – aim at addressing the challenges of nexus problems. Yet, their capacity to produce both effective and democratically legitimate knowledge and policies to deal with interdependencies has been questioned. Moreover, some argue that these new coordinative formats are based on very different political, epistemological and ontological understandings of how to cope with nexus problems. In some of these arrangements the very definition of problems and solutions at the nexus is subject to debates and deliberation procedures; they are open to varying or even contradictory concepts, methods and problem-solving strategies. Others combine the rigidity of methodologically ‘sound’ assessments and foresight procedures with the openness of a public dialogue on alternative policy pathways. In even more exclusive arrangements, the epistemic frame is highly focused on specific causal models and methods such as randomized controlled trials (RCTs) while the range of participants is limited to experts and specialists. It seems that the landscape of networks and arrangements at the nexus has become extremely diverse.

This panel aims at bringing current research on policy interdependencies into dialogue with critical perspectives on both nexus problems and nexus arrangements. We welcome papers from different conceptual angles and methodological backgrounds focusing mainly (but not exclusively) on the following core questions: How can we describe and compare different discourses and discursive logics related to the nexus between policy areas? What are the institutional arrangements and actor constellations addressing nexus challenges? In what ways is policy expertise produced and legitimized at the nexus? How can we conceptualize and study the social and material interlinkages at the nexus? What are the consequences of different modes of nexus coordination for democratic deliberation, participation, responsibility, public acceptance or accountability? What are the methodological implications of nexus problems for public policy research?

Since the World Economic Forum in 2011 at the latest, the interdependencies between policy fields are perceived as a core challenge for public policy and governance. At the nexus between seemingly unrelated areas such as food, water, energy, and mobility, actors are confronted with multiple interdependencies leading to complex problems of knowledge exchange and coordination. Under the conditions of climate change, decreasing stocks of natural resources or the loss of biodiversity, ‘policy silos’ are opened. Formerly separated departments, policy coalitions, policy procedures or material flows are increasingly interlinked.

For some years now, new institutional formats of policy coordination and expertise emerge that bring together administrative authorities, interest groups, think tanks and scientific actors. These new coordinative formats – e.g. participatory foresight procedures, policy assessments, multistakeholder initiatives, and transdisciplinary platforms – aim at addressing the challenges of nexus problems. Yet, their capacity to produce both effective and democratically legitimate knowledge and policies to deal with interdependencies has been questioned. Moreover, some argue that these new coordinative formats are based on very different political, epistemological and ontological understandings of how to cope with nexus problems. In some of these arrangements the very definition of problems and solutions at the nexus is subject to debates and deliberation procedures; they are open to varying or even contradictory concepts, methods and problem-solving strategies. Others combine the rigidity of methodologically ‘sound’ assessments and foresight procedures with the openness of a public dialogue on alternative policy pathways. In even more exclusive arrangements, the epistemic frame is highly focused on specific causal models and methods such as randomized controlled trials (RCTs) while the range of participants is limited to experts and specialists. It seems that the landscape of networks and arrangements at the nexus has become extremely diverse.

This panel aims at bringing current research on policy interdependencies into dialogue with critical perspectives on both nexus problems and nexus arrangements. We welcome papers from different conceptual angles and methodological backgrounds focusing mainly (but not exclusively) on the following core questions: How can we describe and compare different discourses and discursive logics related to the nexus between policy areas? What are the institutional arrangements and actor constellations addressing nexus challenges? In what ways is policy expertise produced and legitimized at the nexus? How can we conceptualize and study the social and material interlinkages at the nexus? What are the consequences of different modes of nexus coordination for democratic deliberation, participation, responsibility, public acceptance or accountability? What are the methodological implications of nexus problems for public policy research?