Policy Learning and Adaptation in governance; a Co-evolutionary Perspective

• Author: Kristof Van Assche,Raoul Beunen,Stefan Verweij,Joshua Evans,Monica Gruezmacher
• Published date: 01 August 2022
• Date: 01 August 2022
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/00953997211059165

https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997211059165

Administration & Society

2022, Vol. 54(7) 1226 –1254

© The Author(s) 2021

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/00953997211059165

journals.sagepub.com/home/aas

Article

Policy Learning

and Adaptation in

governance; a Co-

evolutionary Perspective

Kristof Van Assche1,2, Raoul Beunen3,

Stefan Verweij4, Joshua Evans1,

and Monica Gruezmacher1

Abstract

This paper introduces the concepts and ideas that frame this special issue

on co-evolution in governance, and their implications for policy learning

and adaptation. It offers a brief overview of co-evolutionary approaches to

governance and their elementary connections with systems theories, post-

structuralism, institutionalism, and actor-network theory, and explores

how they are connected to co-evolution in governance. Co-evolutionary

approaches differ from other influential understandings of knowledge and

learning in policy and governance. It furthermore presents a typology of

learning in governance and systematically discusses how each type is affected

by patterns of coevolution in governance.

Keywords

co-evolution, governance, learning, policy, adaptation

1University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada

2Bonn University, Germany

3Open University of the Netherlands, Heerlen, The Netherlands

4University of Groningen, The Netherlands

Corresponding Author:

Monica Gruezmacher, Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Alberta,

1-26 Earth Sciences Building, Edmonton, AB T6G 2E3, Canada.

Email: gruezmac@ualberta.ca

1059165AAS0010.1177/00953997211059165Administration & SocietyVan Assche et al.

research-article2021

Van Assche et al. 1227

Introduction: Co-evolution and Learning in

Governance

The scholarship on governance, administration, and organization increas-

ingly gives weight to processes through which different systems or subsys-

tems co-evolve and mutually adapt to each other. Co-evolutionary approaches

to governance are not new (De Roo & Boelens, 2014; Kemp et al., 2007;

Koza & Lewin, 1998; Nelson, 1994; Rip, 2006; Underdal, 2013; Van Assche

et al., 2017a), but the arguments that have been accumulating in diverse and

disparate literatures have not always been considered together. As a conse-

quence, the value of co-evolutionary approaches—both in the analytic and

normative sense—has often been underestimated. Furthermore, the potential

implications of co-evolution for governance have not been fully grasped by

the community of scholars working in public policy, public administration,

and planning. Those implications are substantial, since a co-evolutionary per-

spective offers a different understanding of the ways in which different gov-

ernance elements are connected and changing in an ongoing interplay (Van

Assche et al., 2014a), and because it presents a different understanding of

how discourses and social systems constantly reconstruct an image of their

environment and adapt to changing circumstances in a self-referential man-

ner (King & Thornhill, 2003; Luhmann, 1995).

Since knowledge plays a pivotal role in governance systems (Bennett &

Howlett, 1992; Dunlop & Radaelli, 2013; Folke et al., 2005; Gerlak et al.,

2018; Moyson et al., 2017; Van Buuren, 2006), processes of learning are

immanent to co-evolution. In the literature, learning has referred to many

things. One can analyze the processes of acquiring and disseminating new

information, knowledge, and skills, the formation of new ways of seeing and

understanding things, or changing beliefs. We add that an intention is not

necessarily a requirement. That is, learning in a governance perspective can

occur both intentionally—for example, through active attempts to acquire

new knowledge or skills via search processes (Aldrich, 1999), or through

deliberate attempts to change beliefs through institutional design (e.g., Klijn

& Koppenjan, 2006)—and blindly—for example, as a consequence of unin-

tentional mistakes, surprises, or misunderstandings (Aldrich, 1999). One

can learn as an individual, as an organization, and as a governance system

involving many organizations. Furthermore, although learning in general

has a positive connotation, it is important to emphasize that governance sys-

tems, just as individuals, can also draw incorrect conclusions from their

observations, that lessons learned are skewed by politico-ideological frames,

positions, and interests, and that new knowledge can also be used to under-

mine public goods and interests.