Policy advice utilization in Belgian ministerial cabinets: the contingent importance of internal and external sources of advice
| Published date | 01 December 2023 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/00208523221097540 |
| Author | Pierre Squevin,David Aubin |
| Date | 01 December 2023 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Policy advice utilization in
Belgian ministerial
cabinets: the contingent
importance of internal and
external sources of advice
Pierre Squevin
University of Oslo, Norway
David Aubin
Université catholique de Louvain, Belgium
Abstract
Ministerial cabinets hold a central place in the Belgian politico-administrative system, car-
rying out the bulk of policy formulation. However, they do not operate in isolation and
rely on other actors of the policy advisory system for informatio n supply and advice.
They request, receive and use various advisory inputs. This article investigates how min-
isterial advisers utilize policy advice when they formulate policies. Based on a unique sur-
vey targeting ministerial cabinet members, it shows that policy advice utilization varies
according to the source and its location in the policy advisory system. The sample con-
sists of ministerial advisers from 11 ministerial cabinets in the two Belgian federated
entities’governments of Wallonia and the Wallonia-Brussels Federation. Ministerial advi-
sers still predominantly use advice from the civil service, which points to the continued
importance of advice provision from internal, in-house sources. However, advice from
external actors –such as trade unions, civil society or consul ting firms –have been
observed to have rather high repercussions on policy formulation activities too.
Advisory bodies appear to be very much active in supplying advice, but this same advice
does not yield comparatively higher utilization scores.
Corresponding author:
Pierre Squevin, Institutt for Statsvitenskap (ISV), University of Oslo(UiO), Postboks 1097, Blindern, 0317 Oslo,
Norway.
Email: p.l.d.squevin@stv.uio.no
Article
International
Review of
Administrative
Sciences
International Review of Administrative
Sciences
2023, Vol. 89(4) 1012–1029
© The Author(s) 2022
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/00208523221097540
journals.sagepub.com/home/ras
Points for practitioners
This study focuses on policy advice utilization by members of ministerial cabinets in
Belgium, especially when they formulate policies. It shows that internal, in-house sources
remain important advice-providers and their advisory inputs still abundantly feed into
the policy work carried out at the level of government. However, this article provides
evidence that external sources might also supply advice that directly finds its way to
decision-makers working in ministerial cabinets and that have considerable repercus-
sions at that level too. This is the case for advice from trade unions, (organized) civil
society or consulting firms, among others. Quite importantly for practitioners, our
results suggest that ministerial advisers sometimes prefer controlling advisory exchanges
and running separate consultations with one stakeholder at a time, instead of having to
deal with collective, internal institutions that represent multiple interests, like advisory
bodies. We did not observe striking differences in the degree of utilization between soli-
cited and unsolicited advice, which means that for civil servants or stakeholders, sending
policy advice previously unrequested by ministerial cabinets is not necessarily a fruitless
strategy to follow.
Keywords
Belgian federated entities, locational models, ministerial advisers, ministerial cabinets,
policy advice utilization, policy advisory systems, policy formulation
Introduction
Ministers usuallyhave personal offices for support and assistance, varying in sizeand role.
In Belgium, these offices, called ministerial cabinets, areparticularly dominant in the func-
tioning of government. Within ministerial cabinets, ministerial advisers perform a myriad
of tasks and activitieson behalf of executive officialsand serve as an extension of ministers’
political personality (Eichbaum andShaw, 2017: 471). A sub-group of advisers workmore
specificallyon the formulation and the implementation of policies,while others take care of
political-strategic tasks, communication, secretariator logistics. In policy formulation, min-
isterial advisers take part in substantial and procedural activities (Craft, 2016). Substantial
means that theseactivities are oriented at the definition of policy contents, while procedural
activities are mainlyabout processes, coordination and management of the actors involved
in policy delivery, for example located in ministries.
In Belgium, the bulk of policy formulation is produced in ministerial offices instead of
ministries (Aubin and Brans, 2020; Brans and Aubin, 2017). The policy formulation
phase is particularly information-intensive insofar as it involves preparing and consolidat-
ing proposals prior to final decision-making (Howlett and Mukherjee, 2017). Ministerial
advisers are often in a position of intermediation or brokerage, trying to accommodate the
policy positions and preferences of ministers, public servants, non-state actors and stake-
holders. They gather and integrate the contributions of other actors in policy formulation
Squevin and Aubin 1013
To continue reading
Request your trial