Knowledge, Politics and Organization (KPO)

The knowledge base of policy making

 It is generally recognized that policy makers increasingly should rely on knowledge. New knowledge is expected to solve political problems and legitimize policy solutions. Recently an increasing number of intermediary institutions and organizations for the production, application and dissemination of research-based knowledge have been formed to facilitate the transmission of information into politics, policies, and practices. New networks, organized actors, interest groups, social movements, institutions, and experts contribute to an abundance of various types of knowledge. New intermediary organisations have developed at the intersection between state administration, the academic sector and society, creating new conditions for the provision of information and policy advice. 

Relations between knowledge, politics and organization are continuously subjected to politicization processes. Partisan political interests will try to define issues as political. At the same time, depoliticization processes move issues in the opposite direction, towards bureaucratization, professionalization and corporativization, reducing the space for politics and expanding room for the exercise of discretion by bureaucrats, experts and interest groups. Furthermore, state modernization has expanded the organizational basis for policymaking and reshaped the provision of policy advice. The interaction of politicization, depoliticization and organizing are played out in different ways in different policy subfields, in different political-administrative systems, in different countries as well as in transnational or multilevel contexts.

Knowledge institutions

Formal knowledge institutions, from kindergartens to schools, colleges, universities, and research institutions have expanded in ways that were unimaginable after the second world war. In that process, modern society has been thoroughly transformed. Today these institutions are not just regarded as important characteristics of modern, democratic societies, but also as strategic devices and productive forces for the development of competitive strength and maintenance of advanced knowledge-based economies and welfare societies. The shift towards perceiving our societies as knowledge-based has several implications. Many actors have developed strong vested interests in how knowledge institutions are organized and governed, the resources they have and how priorities are made. 

Knowledge and democracy

Free research and knowledge development, and open public discussions about scientific knowledge are inextricably linked to democracy as a form of government. It is also tightly related to making effective policies dealing with a variety of societal challenges, such as climate change, migration, sustainable economic growth, clean energy, as well as ageing and health. At the same time research-based knowledge and its trustworthiness is increasingly challenged. Contemporary labels such as “fake news” and “alternative truth” point to strategic and opportunistic use of knowledge, including the (ab)use of knowledge claims (be they scientific or not) by various actors to legitimize particular interests or ideologies, activating core tensions between democracy and citizenship.

Research agenda

To shed light on knowledge, politics and organization, group members focus on a broad range of topics, studies of the use and abuse of knowledge in administration and governance highlight various policy sectors (e.g., health, climate, and environmental policies), and how politics and administration contribute to knowledge development and transmission – from kindergarten, via the school system and vocational education to higher education and research. Attention is also given to tensions between expertise and representativeness of policymakers (in elected office as well as the civil service), as well as between, on the one hand, institutional autonomy, and professional discretion and, on the other, demands from superior authorities and government control.  Group members ground their work on theories on public policy and administration, such as organization theory, theories of democracy, bureaucracy, corporatism as well and theories of professions, political expertise, policy advisory systems and political-administrative systems at large. They investigate such issues as the tensions between institutional autonomy and professional discretion on the one hand and demands from superior authorities and government control on the other. Empirically their focus may vary from the national Norwegian context to cross-national comparative studies and studies of international organizations.