This study explores Prince Edward Island (PEI) provincial public servants’ perceptions of policy capacity using interviews with deputy ministers, directors, and managers and a survey administered to all public servants at one department. As a practicing public servant in Canada’s smallest province, PEI, with a population of 152,021 and a provincial civil service made up of 2,174 staff members, in this study I bring an emic or inside-government perspective to the study of policy capacity and show the benefits of adopting a single case study approach as opposed to a comparative method. The research questions which drove this study were: (1) What are PEI public servants’ perceptions of the general nature of policy processes and policy work in PEI and why? (2) How have PEI public servants constructed analytical, operational, and political policy capacity at the systemic, organizational, and individual levels? (3) What have PEI public servants observed in practice regarding analytical, operational, and political policy capacity at the systemic, organizational, and individual levels? and (4) What are PEI public servants’ recommendations for improving policy capacity and why?
This study represents the first time that Government of PEI policy capacity has been subject to rigorous, scholarly inquiry as well as the first time that a practicing public administrator has adopted an explicitly emic or insider-approach to study policy capacity. This study therefore provides a blueprint for public administrators in other Canadian jurisdictions to study policy capacity, and fills a gap in knowledge of provincial government policy capacity in PEI. Inductive analysis resulted in the development of the islandness of public policy concept, policy leadership theory, the policy-driven organization concept, and recommendations for sub-national governments to improve policy capacity. Deductive analysis using a nested theoretical model of policy capacity resulted in empirical findings related to the Government of PEI’s analytical, operational, and political capacity at the individual, organizational, and systemic levels.
First, the study’s focus on Government of PEI policy capacity heeds policy scholars who have noted that there are gaps in knowledge about how sub-national provincial governments in Canada view policy work and policy capacity. The literature review showed that similar studies of a provincial government’s policy capacity and policy work have been completed in British Columbia, Saskatchewan, and Quebec but not in PEI. Second, the study found that Government of PEI policy capacity is impacted by the smallness, isolation, reduced physical distance, and reduced anonymity associated with islandness; this has implications in terms of how policy processes and policy work unfolds in government. Third, historical and current austerity practices and discourses have resulted in challenges for the development of effective provincial public policy in this jurisdiction.
Finally, grounded in the practice-based experiences of public servants, this study makes several recommendations for sub-national provincial governments to consider to improve policymaking abilities and policy work. For academics, this study recommends that future research continues to develop theories and empirical typologies of policy work which are applicable to both policy analysts and non-policy staff. Doing so will expand and deepen knowledge on the complex web of bureaucratic policy work which is required to develop public policy.
