Policy Sciences· 2026Q1
Policy capacity, collaborative governance, and the institutional design of implementation arrangements: food security PPPs in Kenya
- 0citations
- Q1SCImago
- 2026year
Short summary
In Kenyan food security PPPs, implementation success hinges on the interaction between institutional design and policy capacity (analytical, managerial, political), with political capacity enabling effectiveness and coordination logic shaping capacity needs.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- Implementation outputs in Kenyan food security PPPs are linked to institutional design and policy capacity configurations.
- Political capacity is an enabling condition for effective collaborative arrangements.
- Hierarchical arrangements benefit from institutionalized analytical/managerial capacities for better outputs.
- Networked arrangements depend on trust, partner mobilization, and negotiated coordination (managerial-political capacities).
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
Abstract This article empirically investigates how different institutional designs of implementation arrangements are associated with specific configurations of policy capacity and, in turn, with variation in implementation outputs. Building on the policy capacity framework developed by Wu et al. (2015) and its extension to collaborative settings, the article analyses three irrigation public–private partnership (PPP) projects in Kenya—Galana Kulalu, Perkerra, and Chakama—through a small-N, case-oriented comparative design. The study suggests that variation in implementation outputs is best understood through the interaction between institutional design and the configuration of analytical, managerial, and political capacities activated across individual, organizational, and systemic levels. The findings indicate that political capacity serves as an important enabling condition for more effective collaborative arrangements, while the relative weight of analytical and managerial capacities varies with the coordination logic embedded in each arrangement. More hierarchical and rule-based arrangements are associated with stronger implementation outputs where analytical and managerial capacities are institutionalized, whereas more networked and adaptive arrangements rely more heavily on managerial-political capacities rooted in trust, partner mobilization, and negotiated coordination. By connecting policy capacity research with implementation research on collaborative arrangements, the article contributes to a more relational, institutionally grounded understanding of why similar policy interventions yield different implementation outputs under broadly comparable conditions.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Policy Sciences, 2026 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Development
DevelopmentSocial Sciences