Why do governments change in areas

In the future Internet economy, the use of IoT and artificial intelligence will increase the need to be vigilant about transparency and accountability in decision-making and governance. Transparency and accountability will also be needed to understand and manage an increasingly complicated relationship between the public and private sectors.

Although cybersecurity concerns will continue to be front and centre, governments will also grapple with IoT and AI. In the face of new technologies, are the existing policy tools able to address the complexity of the challenges ahead? According to our community, policymakers will struggle to keep pace with change in Internet technology in the future.

Governments need to prepare for dramatic changes in the economy, especially in traditional industries most challenged by technology. Whether or not governments chose to take such an approach, the scope of market change driven by dramatic advances in technology will inevitably force a fundamental rethink of existing approaches in competition law and traditional communications regulation.

Data will increasingly be seen as an asset linked to competitive advantage, changing the nature of merger reviews, evaluations of dominance and, importantly, consumer protection. Governments may turn to multi-stakeholder models of policy development out of necessity, as traditional telecommunications and Internet regulatory approaches are longer seen as fit for purpose.

In a closely guarded deal, the Republic of Angerland has effectively sold its rotating UN Security Council seat to the global information giant, Majuscule.

Will governments embrace globalisation, or will they respond to domestic pressures to strengthen both physical and cyber borders? Will they support and promote multistakeholder approaches to policy, or will they retrench behind the walls of multilateralism? The rise of nationalism and populism around the globe could cause governments to build national policy barriers that fragment the Internet.

If current trends are any indication, more and more governments will restrict and control Internet use and access through censorship, network shutdowns and other means.

At the same time, governments could become more attuned to the need for cross-border and cross-sector cooperation on cyber threats like crime and terrorism. The complexity of the challenges should compel governments to work with other stakeholders.

However, for such efforts to work and to have legitimacy, they will need to move beyond traditional public-private partnerships and include civil society.

Multistakeholder approaches will continue to receive measured support from some governments, particularly when it comes to setting norms and best practices for cyberspace. But political change is slow, and the tension between multilateralism and multistakeholderism will continue for the foreseeable future. The answer to this question will have significant implications for the future of online rights and freedoms. Will we see new models of Internet governance in an evolving multipolar world?

How will these diverging models and the rise of new powers shape the global Internet and its core principles? If the international system continues to turn inwards, the implications for the global Internet will become ever more profound. We believe that the key to the future is to put humanity at the centre of the online world.

Qual Inq. Ann Intern Med. Cowell R, Martin S: The joy of joining up: modes of integrating the local government modernisation agenda. Environ Plann C Govern Pol. Local Gov Stud. Burnett R, Appleton C: Joined-up services to tackle youth crime. Br J Criminol. Larner W, Craig D: After neoliberalism? Community activism and local partnerships in Aotearoa New Zealand. The experiences of the individual budget pilot projects for older and disabled people in England.

Naidoo V: The challenges of policy coordination at a programme level: Why joining-up is hard to do. Dev South Afr. Gend Work Organ. Land Use Policy. Day R: Implementation of whole of government reports in Australia. Publ Money Manag. J Inf. Am J Community Psychol. Schensul JJ: Community, culture and sustainability in multilevel dynamic systems intervention science. Butler S: Obstacles to the implementation of an integrated national alcohol policy in Ireland: nannies, Neo-liberals and joined-Up government.

J Soc Policy. Health Promot Pract. Soc Sci Med. Carey G, Crammond B: Help or hindrance? Aust J Soc Issues. In press. Roberts N: Keeping public officials accountable through dialogue: resolving the accountability paradox. Harris PJ, Kemp LA, Sainsbury P: The essential elements of health impact assessment and healthy public policy: a qualitative study of practitioner perspectives.

BMJ Open. Barnes M: Health Action Zones: partnerships for health equity. Download references. You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar. Correspondence to Gemma Carey. GC and BC conducted the searches and review. GC completed the draft of the manuscript. All authors contributing to revising the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. Reprints and Permissions. Carey, G. Creating change in government to address the social determinants of health: how can efforts be improved?. BMC Public Health 14, Download citation. Received : 24 March Accepted : 03 October Published : 20 October Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:. Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative. Skip to main content. Search all BMC articles Search. Download PDF. Research article Open Access Published: 20 October Creating change in government to address the social determinants of health: how can efforts be improved?

Abstract Background The evidence base for the impact of social determinants of health has been strengthened considerably in the last decade. Methods In this paper we provide a meta-synthesis of the empirical public policy research into joined up government, drawing out characteristics associated with successful joined up initiatives. Conclusion Drawing on public policy studies, we recommend a number of strategies to increase the efficacy of current interventions.

Background Over the last forty years a new paradigm has emerged in public health demonstrating that social factors such as housing, employment, education and the urban environment are the strongest influences on population health [ 1 , 2 ]. Through exploring instruments for multi-organisational, or network, management De Bruijn and ten Heuvelhof identify three levels at which change in complex networks are sought [ 22 ]: Instrumental - focuses on how governments seek to exercise legitimate authority by altering dependency relationships.

Institutional — focuses on establishing the rules of engagement as well as organisational frameworks that can set the stage for ongoing interactions and strategy development Interpersonal — the aim is to shape the interactions between a range of actors to generate innovative responses [ 23 , 25 , 26 ].

IPIs for the social determinants of health In this section we provide an overview of the two IPIs examined in this paper. Table 1 IPIs, instruments and objectives Full size table. Figure 1. HIAP and healthy public policy. Full size image. Methods The aim of the study is to identify lessons from the exiting body of evidence JUG, which can help strengthen IPIs currently being implemented, through a meta-analysis of joined-up government initiatives. Figure 2.

Results and discussion A small but important body of empirical research into JUG exists. Creating more effective interventions Public policy research into JUG has found that the instruments used to create integration and collaboration are often inadequate or inappropriate. Table 3 Elements of a supportive architecture Full size table. Endnote a No empirical evaluations for Health in All Policies were found. References 1. Article PubMed Google Scholar 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2 4.

It may take a while, but innovations that begin in the private sector routinely find their way into public usage. Government is quite adept at this type of evolutionary change. Although the rate of adoption may be uneven, over time, governments tend to adopt proven technologies, whatever their origin.

Economic pressures, social shifts, demographic shifts, and external global changes can and do effect change. Indeed, while they are often enabled by technology, these external factors can sometimes generate the most transformational changes to government.

There are many examples of how nontechnological factors drive government change. Aging populations across most industrialized nations can be major drivers of governmental change in areas ranging from workforce policies to health care to the social safety net.

COVID has been a significant driver of accelerated digitization. The current social climate will drive demand for greater equity in the workforce and society at large. The future of government will also be shaped by leaders who are able to protect the importance of public institutions in democratic societies while also helping them adapt to the needs of a modern world. With technology fueling and enabling many of the changes now taking place in government, leaders should understand how technology can create greater value for citizens.

Leaders must be able to grapple with the details of redesigning processes and understanding what those changes mean for the larger organization.

To do so, they should engage and motivate a changing workforce to commit to bringing their organizations into the future. Figure 1 depicts some of the major drivers and building blocks of the future of government.

But the future of government is not merely the sum of each box in the table. Like the Periodic Table of Elements it is modeled after, things get interesting when elements combine and produce unexpected results.

Combine two atoms of hydrogen gas with one atom of oxygen gas and you get water. And just as new elements can be added to the periodic table, more elemental forces of change will come into being in the years to come. Considered on their own, technologies such as the internet, 5G, and the ability to analyze big data are powerful engines of change.

Unlike inert matter, how these forces play out in government will depend on human choices. This could be used as a tool for law enforcement, or it could be limited due to privacy concerns or potential abuse, depending on citizen expectations, social preferences, and political dynamics. Inventions such as the printing press and the automobile made profound impacts but were relatively slow to proliferate.

In contrast, the internet, and later the smartphone, transformed business, society, and government in less than 30 years though that transformation is likely nowhere near complete.

Tech advancements are bringing about social impacts at a rapid pace. As complementary factors are added, the impact is magnified due to the confluence of different elements—some technological, some not.

These examples illustrate the importance of confluence —the coming together of disparate streams to create something new. When synergistic tech innovation is combined with social forces and government actions, the impact can be shaped and amplified.

Technological confluence fosters organizational confluence. In other words, when technologies combine in new ways, the siloed, bureaucratic structures of the past require updating—in business or government.

The synergy between new and newly connected technologies creates a multiplier effect. But it also creates the need to break boundaries, as the digital, connected universe of information forces together previously independent activities and organizational structures. Take a smart city. In the past, any city public works department could operate reasonably effectively in an independent silo, repairing roads, clearing snow, maintaining streetlights, and so on.

But in a hyperconnected city, data is collected and shared to optimize everything from traffic flows to garbage pickup to streetlights. This can, in effect, force various city departments to work more closely together, both from a technical and organizational perspective.

Now take it up a level. In order to maximize mobility, the city would work with the regional transit district, the airport authority, and private companies including ride-share, bike and scooter rentals, and more. To best serve citizens, establishing a unified, multimodal payment system makes sense.

But it also requires breaking down technical and organization boundaries in a grand confluence of information and operations—a meeting of the virtual and physical worlds. In the interplay between technological advancements and evolving social behaviors and trends, truly extraordinary breakthroughs are occurring. These new hybrid technologies and behaviors are heavily interdependent, and this interdependence poses complications in executing and defining regulatory responsibilities.

New innovations also often rely on vast swaths of data, including personal data. Yet governments today must grapple with oversight of these new applications from within mostly siloed organizations. Moreover, from health care to transportation to social services, nearly everything government does is becoming more data-driven—and now carries a greater risk for cyber mischief.

This forces trade-offs between value creation and value protection to the front and center. The incredible complexity of government can be seen in the multiplicity of agencies with myriad missions. How is it possible to contemplate the future of government if each agency is unique?

The next section looks at that challenge and offers a way to look at similar government tasks that serve differing missions. We tend to categorize government by the various missions reflected in its organizational structure. Thus, the U. For example, the Bureau of Arms Control, Verification and Compliance has a core mission suggested by its name. This mission-oriented view is useful in organizing for execution; it helps coordinate the efforts of those dedicated to a particular goal, as well as for exploring the future of a particular agency.

But it is not very helpful when contemplating the broader future of government. There are simply too many missions and too many varied activities in the public sector to paint a comprehensive picture of the future of government through that lens.

These are:. Virtually all government agencies are engaged in each of these domains, albeit in different proportions figure 2. The ubiquity of these domains across government makes them useful units of analysis to explore government futures. Using these domains as a guide, what follows is a vision for how the future of government could be optimally realized.

From Department of Motor Vehicles centers to court hearings, governments are transitioning to new methods of service delivery. Data-fueled services can offer citizens a truly personalized experience. With no-touch government, services are provided digitally and automatically, without the need for citizens to initiate the transaction.

The birth triggers data transfers from the hospital to the central civil registry to the ministry of finance to local tax offices, which disburse the allowance.

Increasingly, governments from Australia to Finland are also tailoring services to particular life events and user needs. Public-sector managers know, too, that the penalties for failure are almost always greater than the rewards for exceptional performance.

Important constituencies include not only the president of the United States, cabinet members, members of Congress, and oversight organizations such as the Office of Management and Budget, but public-interest watchdog groups and the media. The transformation of three federal organizations discussed below demonstrates how deep change and significant performance improvement can be achieved at public agencies.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration, or OSHA, which oversees workplace conditions mostly in the private sector, redefined its mission and goals and envisioned a new way to achieve them. The Government Accountability Office, or GAO, which investigates other federal agencies and issues reports on their performance, adopted many of the talent-management practices found in the private sector. And Special Operations transformed itself from an ad hoc arm of the military into an elite standing force comprising servicemen and servicewomen drawn from several military branches.

Virtually every administration in the past 40 years has launched initiatives to improve government performance, including those of President Bush and President Clinton. On the basis of my experience as a consultant to both public and private sector organizations, I have identified five principles that characterize successful public-sector change efforts and can achieve the desired results.

Effective and efficient execution of their mission is what taxpayers pay for. The reason most OSHA employees get up and go to work in the morning is to protect the safety and health of American workers. But mission can get blurred or lost as political priorities shift and agency leaders come and go.

Even in the best of situations, mission is subject to varying interpretations. Clearly, the agency had become a captive of metrics originally intended to promote workplace safety but that had over time become an end in themselves.

How does drift like that occur? As employees lose sight of the overall mission, they may eventually come to care only about those things they can directly control, like protecting their own turf. That meant helping employees rediscover the reason the agency was created—to reduce the number of injuries, illnesses, and deaths in the workplace—and then reaching beyond it by calling for the elimination of all preventable workplace ills in ten years.

Although literally impossible to achieve, this stretch goal was intended to stimulate innovative thinking. Once a mission has been articulated, agency leaders must put a stake in the ground by establishing improved performance against mission as the fundamental objective of the transformation effort.

Doing so entails choosing clear performance-improvement goals and formulating specific initiatives. In the process, performance or skills gaps in the organization will be exposed. When David Walker became the U. Shortly after assuming his new position, Walker made addressing personnel and skill gaps a priority. In the business world, considerations like ROIC help companies set priorities and evaluate initiatives. Improving performance against mission is a framework for doing the same thing in public-sector organizations.

OSHA used performance improvement goals to determine which initiatives should be undertaken. In the first six months that the agreement was in force, three workers fell from heights of 60 feet or more. Without the equipment they were wearing, all three would have died. Whereas CEOs have to please such constituencies as lenders, securities analysts, and shareholders, the range of stakeholders that agency heads must cultivate is even wider.

Broadly speaking, they fall into two groups—external and internal. The army reduced Special Forces from seven active groups to three, the navy cut the number of SEALs by half, and the air force deactivated all its Special Operations gunships.

As a result, the United States lost most of its ability to launch and sustain demanding, clandestine operations in support of conventional U. The loss was most apparent in the failed attempt to rescue American hostages in Iran. This group launched a campaign to revamp Special Operations to address these dangers, leading to the passage, in , of the Nunn-Cohen Amendment to the Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of , which created the first command responsible for all Special Operations Forces.

One way it did this was by inviting senior military officials and political leaders to Fort Bragg to observe the soldiers as they went through their exercises. On one occasion, he recalls, a soldier spoke about the medical care and education she provided to tribes in the hills of Oman. The SOF leadership also wanted U. During a six-week training course, new ambassadors were invited to fly to Fort Bragg. On the flight was a platoon of SEALs, dressed in combat gear. The SEALs held a briefing and then put on parachutes.

When the ambassadors get off the plane, the SEALs are waiting for them. That grabs their attention. We show them psychological operations, shooting, hostage rescue situations. An assault team gave participants a demonstration at the firing range.