Abstract
Crisis: opportunity to reform? Reform in the wake of a crisis is often resisted by the bureaucracy and by society out of fear of, or lack of knowledge about the consequences of these proposals for change. Although policy reform and creation are generally the products of incremental change, policy makers
... read more
can sometimes implement fundamental changes. Crisis is often assumed to be a (necessary) prerequisite for change; crisis breaks down resistance and makes reform possible. Numerous hurdles, such as extant rule and routines, are placed in question in a situation of crisis. The break down of legitimacy in a particular policy sector can create new opportunities, in addition to posing a potential threat. Crises often create space in the policy field for new proposals and possibilities for far-reaching reform. While it is generally accepted that crises can generate opportunities for reform, it is also evident that crises do not automatically lead to organisational or policy change. In addition, although there is much attention to general questions of reform within the social sciences, little research as been conducted to date on the relationship between crises and reform within policy sectors. The assumed relationship between crises and reform is central to the so-called crisis-reform theory; this theory, and specifically, the relationship between institutional crisis and reform, is critically explored in this study. This thesis examines four periods of institutional crisis that together form an important phase in the history of immigration in the Netherlands and Germany. The rapid and unexpected rise in immigration has created sizeable dilemmas for both Dutch and German politics, leading to institutional crisis and sometimes, but not always, to reform. The relationship between institutional crisis and reform is not as obvious as the crisis-reform thesis would make it seem; this theory is also too general and too easily refuted. A crisis generates possibilities, but does not determine who or what makes the most of a window of opportunity during an institutional crisis, or when this occurs. In addition, the theory leaves unexplained why some crises lead to fundamental reforms and others do not. This study, therefore, goes beyond the crisis-reform theory, and concentrates on the opportunities and limitations of different actors in a crisis, in order to determine why only certain crises lead to reform. Three clusters of actors are identified as central to the policy process: political leaders, stakeholders, and those who make and implement policy. It is assumed that a deeper understanding the role of these actors, e.g. ministers, members of parliament, and civil servants, will shed light on why some crises lead to reform and others do not.
show less
