LIST OF PANELS

We live in an era of global megatrends, defined by the European Commission as 14 long-term driving forces that are observable now and will most likely have significant influence on the future of our planet (Joint Research Centre, 2022). These forces are: 1) diversifying inequalities; 2) increasing significance of migration; 3) aggravating resource scarcity; 4) increasing influence of new governing systems; 5) continuing urbanization; 6) increasing demographic imbalances; 7) climate change and environmental degradation; 8) diversification of education and learning;  9) changing nature of work; 10) accelerating technological change and hyperconnectivity; 11) growing consumerism; 12) expanding influence of east and south; 13) changing security paradigm; and 14) shiſting health challenges. Governing such megatrends will involve deep government interventions in several policy domains including resource management, sustainable urban development, population ageing, migration, agri-food transition, climate change, ecological transition, labor market, technological change, security, and health. Many of these policy interventions will require massive investments in megaprojects, i.e. large-scale ventures that typically cost $1 billion or more, take many years to develop and build, involve multiple public and private stakeholders, and impact millions of people (Flyvbjerg, 2017). Megaprojects include special economic zones, public buildings, power plants, dams, airports, seaports, bridges, highways, tunnels, railways, wastewater projects, oil and natural gas extraction projects, aerospace projects, weapons systems, information technology systems, and large-scale high-cost initiatives in scientific research. Since the Covid-19 outbreak, strategic long-term and large-scale policy interventions have even become more important (Clement et al., 2022). Indeed, as a response to the Covid-19 pandemic, the European Union has made available a 2021–2027 long-term budget of €1.8 trillion to fund megaprojects with ecological and digital applications. Similarly, in the US a $1.9 trillion Covid relief plan is on the way and China has planned to expedite the rollout of 102 megaprojects for the 2021-25 period.

Megatrends and related megaprojects can be defined as wicked policy fields marked by interdependence, complexity, uncertainty, ambiguity, risk, and conflict. These are indeed policy fields populated by many governmental and non-governmental stakeholders holding different interests, preferences, attitudes, visions, imaginaries, cultures, and logics of collective action (Esposito et al., 2022). In bringing together scholarship in management, public administration, and political science, the aim of this panel is to explore how policy actors make sense of long-term and large-scale policy endeavors and strategically interact with the institutional environment to govern them (Esposito et al., 2021). In particular, the panel points to the usefulness of adopting (a combination of) discursive and institutional perspectives. Whereas embracing discursive perspectives means recognizing the contestability and argumentative dimension of the great transformations linked to megatrends and megaprojects (Fischer and Forester, 1993; Wagenaar, 2011), adopting institutional perspectives means emphasizing the constraining effects of structures on policy actors as well as the way through which the latter purposefully alter the institutional context to govern megatrends and megaprojects (Sydow and Söderlund, 2022).

References

Clement J, Esposito G and Crutzen N (2022) Municipal Pathways in Response to COVID-19: A Strategic Management Perspective on Local Public Administration Resilience. Administration & Society: 009539972211003. DOI: 10.1177/00953997221100382.

Esposito G, Nelson T, Ferlie E, et al. (2021) The institutional shaping of global megaprojects: The case of the Lyon-Turin high-speed railway. International Journal of Project Management 39(6): 658–671. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2021.06.001.

Esposito G, Terlizzi A and Crutzen N (2022) Policy narratives and megaprojects: the case of the Lyon-Turin high-speed railway. Public Management Review 24(1): 55–79. DOI: 10.1080/14719037.2020.1795230.

Fischer F and Forester J (eds) (1993) The Argumentative Turn in Policy Analysis and Planning. London: Duke University Press.

Flyvbjerg B (ed.) (2017) The Oxford Handbook of Megaproject Management. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Joint Research Centre (2022) The Megatrends Hub. https://knowledge4policy.ec.europa.eu/foresight/tool/megatrends-hub_en.

Sydow J and Söderlund J (2022) Organizing Complex Projects from Neo-institutional Perspectives. In: Winch G, Brunet M, and Cao D (eds) Research Handbook on Complex Project Organizing. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Wagenaar H (2011) Meaning in Action: Interpretation and Dialogue in Policy Analysis. London and New York: Routledge.

The panel builds upon discursive and institutional scholarships in management, public administration, and political science. It is open to different theoretical and empirical approaches and embraces methodological pluralism. It welcomes either single-case or comparative studies and deals with any stage of the policy process in relation to a variety of megatrends and related megaprojects. In the definition of megatrends, we include the above-mentioned 14 global megatrends identified by the European Commission. We particularly welcome papers understanding megatrends and megaprojects as wicked policy fields, i.e. policy fields that are marked by a complex web of stakeholders’ interests and populated by problems which are resistant to a clear and  agreed solution (Head, 2022). Papers ought to bring the focus on the resolution of these problems as a complex, uncertain, and conflictual process that is shaped by the collective action of governments, businesses, and civil society (Dentoni et al., 2018). Theoretical perspectives can be drawn both from policy sciences approaches (e.g. Advocacy Coalition Framework, Multiple Streams Framework, Narrative Policy Framework) and from the literature on multi-stakeholder collaboration, such as polycentric governance (Ostrom, 2010), collaborative innovation (Sørensen and Torfing, 2011), multi-stakeholder initiatives (Zimmermann et al., 2022) as well as policy and public entrepreneurship.

Important questions that papers might examine include:

·       Role of agency: how do policy actors discursively construct competing megatrends realities? how do policy actors interpret and make sense of long-term and large-scale policy endeavors? How do actors strategically exploit the ambiguity of megatrend and megaproject concepts? How do collectives of public, private and civic actors establish relational ties with a view to address megatrends and megaprojects?  How do policy actors strategically interact with institutional structures to shape and govern megatrends and megaprojects?  

·       Role of institutions: How do institutional structures constrain and shape long-term and large-scale policy actions throughout the different stages of the policy process? How do megaprojects and megatrends are defined and operationalized within institutional texts? How do institutions reduce complexity, uncertainty and conflicts thus facilitating effective long-term and large-scale policy interventions?

References

Dentoni D, Bitzer V and Schouten G (2018) Harnessing Wicked Problems in Multi-stakeholder Partnerships. Journal of Business Ethics 150(2): 333–356. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-018-3858-6.

Head BW (2022) Wicked Problems in Public Policy: Understanding and Responding to Complex Challenges. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.

Ostrom E (2010) Polycentric systems for coping with collective action and global environmental change. Global Environmental Change 20(4): 550–557. DOI: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.07.004.

Sørensen E and Torfing J (2011) Enhancing Collaborative Innovation in the Public Sector. Administration & Society 43(8): 842–868. DOI: 10.1177/0095399711418768.

Zimmermann A, Albers N and Kenter JO (2022) Deliberating Our Frames: How Members of Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives Use Shared Frames to Tackle Within-Frame Conflicts Over Sustainability Issues. Journal of Business Ethics 178(3): 757–782. DOI: 10.1007/S10551-021-04789-1/FIGURES/4.