Core Executive

A core executive is a network of institutions and informal practices that endeavors to coordinate government policy. Theories of governance often draw our attention to the diverse organizations that are involved in the formulation and implementation of public policy. These organizations often have divergent motivations, visions, resources, and time horizons. The core executive consists of those institutions that seek to integrate government policies by negotiating with, and arbitrating between, such organizations. It is, however, understood as a fragmented network rather than a unitary agent.

The Anglo school of governance developed the idea of a core executive within its general account of a differentiated polity. The big contrast here is that between the differentiated polity and the Westminster model of British politics. The Westminster model includes a strong executive composed of the prime minister and cabinet. In contrast, the concept of a core executive points to a more fragmented view of the executive, which is also seen as being characterized by weakness as much as strength. The concept thereby contributes to a general account of a differentiated [Page 163]polity that is composed of various interdependent departments and agencies.

Core executive studies have developed in two main ways. First, the concept has been used to describe states other than Great Britain, especially states that have a cabinet government. Public-sector reforms, such as contracting out, typically result in multiple governments, departments, and agencies being involved in service delivery. As a result, the executive has often become fragmented and also increasingly focused on issues of coordination. The key features of the core executive thus appear to have wide applicability. Second, the concept has been theorized in terms of meanings rather than functions. Originally, the core executive was defined functionally in terms of the need to secure coordination. The process of fragmentation was understood, likewise, as one of differentiation into more and more institutions, each of which performed a discrete function. More recently, the core executive has been conceived as being composed of a number of practices with fuzzy boundaries. These practices are contingent and contested. Actors within them interpret them and try to mold them in different ways in large part because they attach different meanings to them.