Search results1 – 3 of 3
The purpose of this paper is to analyse an example of non-decision making in the Nordic tripartite policy process, namely, the reform of the Finnish gender equality…
The purpose of this paper is to analyse an example of non-decision making in the Nordic tripartite policy process, namely, the reform of the Finnish gender equality legislation and the law for equal pay comparisons.
The paper uses non-decision making as a conceptual framework for qualitative analysis of the documentation of the working group that drafted the law for equal pay comparisons. The analysis focuses on the strategic responses used by the participants in order to defend the status quo and resist change in legislation.
The key findings are that the suggested law for conducting equal pay comparisons as part of gender equality planning in Finnish organisations changed dramatically in the tripartite policy process. Employer organisations successfully prevented the most relevant features from being implemented in the reformed law.
The findings of this research indicate that there is a need for more research on the tripartite policy process and its implication on developing policy.
This paper shows what kind of power employer and employee organisations use in Finnish policy making. As a result, the reformed gender equality legislation is a compromise reflecting the vested interests of different stakeholders. The findings highlight the challenges of developing policy in tripartite policy process.
The tripartite policy process and its implications have rarely been studied. The value of this paper lies in both originality of the topic and approach, and the societal importance of the findings.
Selecting an appropriate theory has always remained a critical task for the digital policy researchers. The literature seems to miss providing theoretical accounts of…
Selecting an appropriate theory has always remained a critical task for the digital policy researchers. The literature seems to miss providing theoretical accounts of policy view of the digital platforms governance and offering tools for measuring the effectiveness of policies. To this end, this paper aims to provide a critical review and comparison of dominant information systems (IS) theories used. It highlights the weaknesses of these theories to explain technology features and actor- technology interactions with the rising trend of digital platforms. The main argument of this research is that the policymakers will not have adequate tools for policymaking of digital platforms by following the assumptions of theories used dominantly in the IS field.
This paper analyzes the assumptions of dominant IS theories and their applications in the digital policy literature. Then, it shows to what extent these theories are incapable of conceptualizing features of technology and actors’ role in policymaking and governance of digital platforms.
This paper identifies three aspects of digital platforms, including layered architecture, multisided (“side” means “participants”) and user interaction based, that dominant IS theories have shortcomings in explaining them.
The findings of this research can help authorities to take a more realistic view in defining digital platform policy objectives and applying more appropriate tools in policy implementation.
Discussing insights into the shortcomings of theories helps to define the theoretical requirements for studying policymaking and governance of digital platforms. It also suggests opportunities and recommendations for future studies.