This article analyzes the emergence of the Swedish “national system for knowledge-driven management.” We argue that the system is best understood as a meta-instrument that is underpinned by an “instrument constituency,” a coalition held together by a joint interest in a particular policy solution. Based on interviews and documentary analyses, we show the conflicting interests that are included in the constituency and how the functional effectiveness of the meta-instrument is exposed to a number of risks that follow from its specific implementation and from the heterogeneity among its constituency. In particular, we point to the threats against professional learning, responsibility, and integrity.

Related Articles: Selling, Niels, and Stefan Svallfors. 2019. “The Lure of Power: Career Paths and Considerations among Policy Professionals in Sweden.” Politics & Policy 47(5): 984–1012. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12325. Shen, Yongdong, Meng U. Ieong, and Zihang Zhu. 2022. “The Function of Expert Involvement in China's Local Policy Making.” Politics & Policy 50(1): 59–76. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12450. Svallfors, Stefan, Erica Falkenström, Corrie Hammar, and Anna T. Höglund. 2022. “Networked Reports: Commissioning and Production of Expert Reports on Swedish Health Care Governance.” Politics & Policy 50(3): 580–97. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12462.