方法对比

	Whole-of-Government Analysis	Institutional Capacity Assessment
领域	Public Administration	Public Administration
方法族	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
起源年份	2007	2008
提出者	Tom Christensen & Per Lægreid	UNDP / World Bank capacity-development practice
类型	Analytical framework	Diagnostic assessment framework
开创性文献	Christensen, T., & Lægreid, P. (2007). The Whole-of-Government Approach to Public Sector Reform. Public Administration Review, 67(6), 1059–1066.	United Nations Development Programme. Capacity Assessment Methodology and supporting practice notes. UNDP.
别名	Joined-Up Government Analysis, Horizontal Coordination Analysis, WofG Analysis, Cross-Government Integration Analysis	Capacity Assessment Framework, Organisational Capacity Assessment, Institutional Capacity Diagnostic, Public-Sector Capacity Appraisal
相关	4	4
摘要	Whole-of-government analysis examines how public organisations coordinate across portfolio, sectoral and jurisdictional boundaries to tackle problems that no single agency can solve alone. Articulated by Tom Christensen and Per Lægreid in their 2007 study of whole-of-government reform, it is a response to the fragmentation produced by decades of New Public Management — the proliferation of single-purpose agencies, contracting and silos. The analysis identifies cross-cutting or 'wicked' problems, maps the actors and boundaries involved, assesses the coordination mechanisms in play, diagnoses where joined-up working breaks down, and recommends integration strategies.	Institutional capacity assessment is a structured diagnostic that gauges the ability of public-sector organisations and systems to perform their functions, deliver services and sustain results over time. Drawing on frameworks such as the UNDP Capacity Assessment Methodology and World Bank capacity-development practice, it examines capacity at multiple levels — the enabling environment, the organisation, and individuals — across functional dimensions like leadership, accountability, resources and skills. Capacities are rated against defined criteria, gaps between desired and actual capacity are identified, and the findings drive targeted capacity-development responses. It complements outcome-level measures such as the Worldwide Governance Indicators.