JOURNAL ARTICLE
How does the dominant stakeholder strategically manage an innovative public policy? Evidence from the London congestion charge.
Published In: Financial Accountability & Management, 2024, v. 40, n. 4. P. 409 1 of 3
Database: Business Source Ultimate 2 of 3
Authored By: Chen, Jason C.; Roberts, Robin W. 3 of 3
Abstract
Prior studies have examined various economic, environmental, and social impacts of the London congestion charge (LCC). However, few studies have investigated how the Transport for London (TfL) managed the LCC in all stages of its policy. Without active, strategic management of policies, stakeholders affected may doubt the policies' legitimacy and reduce policy effectiveness. Thus, examining the means utilized to achieve effective policy management is critical and can potentially influence the development and management of future policies. This study adapts Mitchell et al.'s stakeholder typology to study how the TfL, as part of the management of, and as the dominant stakeholder in, environmental regulations in London, strategically managed the LCC via their own efforts to exert power, establish legitimacy, and claim urgency. Relying on Yin, we analyze publicly available data to show how the TfL actively managed the LCC to ensure its sustainability as policy. The TfL primarily used tactics to maintain and enhance the LCC's legitimacy with authoritative power and fears of unproven urgency to influence other stakeholders. Results have practical implications for policymakers contemplating policy reforms and shed additional light on less‐discussed latent factors regarding policy management. This study contributes to the literature by applying stakeholder theory to the domain of policy reform, administration, and management. Our findings have policy implications as policymakers may benefit from learning the tactics examined in this study to assess their policy management and administration. Lastly, through our discussion and conclusions, we reflect on our findings to encourage research on policy management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Additional Information
- Source:Financial Accountability & Management. 2024/11, Vol. 40, Issue 4, p409
- Document Type:Article
- Subject Area:Business and Management
- Publication Date:2024
- ISSN:0267-4424
- DOI:10.1111/faam.12380
- Accession Number:180045112
- Copyright Statement:Copyright of Financial Accountability & Management is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Looking to go deeper into this topic? Look for more articles on EBSCOhost.