Political Entrepreneurship: The Analysis of Its Implications Area to Policy Making

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 P.H.D, public Management, Faculty of Economics and Management, University of Lorestan, Khorramabad, Iran.

2 Associate Prof, Department of Management, Faculty of Economics and Management, University of Lorestan, Khorramabad, Iran.

3 P.H.D, Candidate, Public Management, Faculty of Economics and Management, University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan, Iran.

Abstract

Objective: Political entrepreneur stimulates fundamental changes in society, which through creative and transformative actions has a tremendous impact on policies and political institutions.
Methods: The aim of the present study the implications of political entrepreneurship in policy-making were analyzed using the fuzzy Delphi approach. This research is among the researches mixed with a qualitative and a quantitative approach which is descriptive-survey in terms of purpose, application and nature and method. the statistical population of the study consists of managers of government organizations in Lorestan province. Using the principle of theoretical adequacy and purposeful sampling method, 18 of them were selected as sample members. In the qualitative part of the research, semi-structured (in-depth) interviews were used to collect data, the validity and reliability of which were confirmed using the CVR coefficient and Kappa-Cohen test, respectively, and the data obtained from the interview using the software. Atlas. ti and the coding method were analyzed and the consequences of political entrepreneurship were identified. on the other hand, in the quantitative part, a pairwise comparison questionnaire was used to collect information, the validity and reliability of which were confirmed using content validity and incompatibility rate.
Results: The results of the research indicate that based on judgments and surveys of experts, nineteen factors were introduced as the consequences of political entrepreneurship. The results also show that attracting public opinion, developing political life and forming coalitions and groups, accurate internal and external monitoring, policy direction, injecting new and innovative policies and regulating relations in the network are the most important consequences of political entrepreneurship in the field of policymaking.
Conclusion: To increase the ability of individuals, groups and parties to continue lawful participation in the political arena, as well as to improve the accountability of the political system, policymakers are advised to pay special attention to entrepreneurs in the field of politics to transform the policy. And policies to solve the problems of the organization and society

Keywords

References

Alwani, S.M (2016). Political Entrepreneur: transformative actor In the field policy making, Public Policy Quarterly, 2(1), 81-91.(in Persian).
Brouwer, S., Huitema, D & Biermann, F (2009). Towards Adaptive Management: The Strategies of Policy Entrepreneurs to Direct Policy Change, Conference on the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change, 1-24.
Christopoulos, D., & Ingold, K. (2011). Distinguishing between political brokerage & political entrepreneurship. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 10, 36–42.
Demir Uslu, Y & Kedikli, E. (2019). The Importance of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management in Terms of Modern Businesses, International Journal of Academic Value ,5(1), 1-11.  
 Devetag, M., Zazzerini, G., Tuan, N & ‌Hung, D (2020). Developing Entrepreneurial Competencies in Vietnam: Evidence from the Bac Ninh Province, Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Emergnig Economies, 10, 329-362.
Egboga, I., Zubairu, U. (2020). How Effective Has Global Entrepreneurship Been As  A Tool For Economic Growth?. Journal of Business and Behavioural Entrepreneurship, 4(1), 112-121.
Hogan, J & Feeney, Sh (2012). Crisis and Policy Change: The Role of the Political Entrepreneur, Primary Sources in Historical Anthropology, 3(2), 1-24.
Kalil, T. (2017). Policy Entrepreneurship at the White House: Getting Things Done in Large Organizations, Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization 11 (3–4): 4–21.
Karlsson, Ch (2015). Political Entrepreneurship, Cluster Policies and Regional Growth. Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies, 1-17.
Kraav, M & Mets, T (2019). ICT Infrastructure Development as Political Entrepreneurship: The Case of the Estonian Education and Research Network (EENet), International Conference on Emerging eLearning Technologies and Applications (ICETA), 1-7.
Martin, A & Thomas, D (2013). Two-tiered political entrepreneurship and the congressional committee system, Public Choice, 154, 21-37.
McCaffrey, M & Salerno, J (2011). A Theory of Political Entrepreneurship, Modern Economy, 2, 552-560.
Mets, T (2017  ). Entrepreneurship in Estonia: combination of political and entrepreneurial agenda, in Entrepreneurship in Transition Economies: Diversity, Trends and Perspectives, A. Sauka and A. Chepurenko, Eds. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International, 115-133. 
Mintrom, M (2019). So you want to be a policy entrepreneur? Policy Design and Practice, 2(4), 1- 25.
Mintrom, M. (2015) Political entrepreneurs and Morality Politics: Learning from Failure and
Success, Entrepreneurship in the Polis: Understanding Political Entrepreneurship, 103-118.
Ncanywa, Th (2019). Entrepreneurship and Development Agenda: A Case of Higher Education in South Africa, Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 22(1), 1-11.
Neck, R. (2016). The Political Entrepreneur: Deus ex Machina of Public Choice Theory?’, Contemporary Entrepreneurship, 201-210.
O’Brien, T (2018). Political entrepreneurship in the feld of Maori sovereignty in Aotearoa New Zealand, The British Journal of Sociology, 70(4), 1-19.
Olausson, A & Svensson, P (2019). Understanding Political Entrepreneurship in Local Government Administration – a Contextual Framework, Lex Localis- Journal Of Local Self –Government, 17(3), 643-658.
Salter, A.W & ‌Wagner, R (2018). Political entrepreneurship, emergent dynamics, and constitutional politics, Review of Social Economy, 76(3), 281-301.
Sarabia, M., Romero,  F.C & del Val Nunez, T (2020). Political entrepreneurship and leadership succession, Int. J. Intellectual Property Management, 10(1), 17-34.
Schirm, S (2020). Refining domestic politics theories of IPE: A societal approach to governmental preferences, Politics, 40(4), 396-412.
Sobari, W (2019). The Practice of Political Entrepreneurship in a Rural Javanese Village, Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Ilmu Politik, 23(1), 30-44.
Surak, S.M & Kirsch, R.E (2020). New Political Science and Black Lives Matter Statement, New Political Science, 42(3), 417. 
Svensson, P. (2019) Formalized policy entrepreneurship as a governance tool for policy
integration, International Journal of Public Administration,
ttps://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2019.1590401.
Teixeira, A & Silva, C (2012). A new perspective on local political entrepreneurship: Evidence from Portugal, Local Economy, 27(4), 332–354.
Wiklund, J., Nikolaev, B., ShirMaw-Der, N & Bradley, S (2019). Entrepreneurship and well-being: Past, present, and future, Journal of Business Venturing, 34, 579-588.
Journal of Public Administration
Volume 12, Issue 4
2020
Pages 674-694

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics