Jarle Trondal

Jarle Trondal is a Professor of Political Science at the University of Oslo, ARENA Centre for European Studies, and at the University of Agder, Department of Political Science and Management, Norway. Trondal was previously Honorary Professor at University of Copenhagen and is currently affiliated to the European University Institute (EUI). He holds a PhD in Political Science from University of Oslo, Department of Political Science (2001). Trondal research interests and research projects is focused on public policy and administration, organizational theory, international organizations, European integration and multilevel governance, and studies of crisis and turbulence. Recent publications include The Politics of Legitimation in the European Union (Routledge 2022, co-edited with Chris Lord, Peter Bursens, Dirk De Biévre and Ramses A. Wessels), Governing Complexity in Times of Turbulence (Edward Elgar 2022, coedited with Robyn Keast, David Noble and Rómulo Pinheiro), The Routledge Handbook of Differentiation in the European Union (Routledge 2022, co-edited with Ben Leruth and Stefan Bänzle), The Palgrave Handbook of EU Crises (Palgrave 2021, co-edited with Marianne Riddervold and Akasemi Newsome), An Organizational Approach to Public Governance (Oxford University Press 2018, co-authored with Morten Egeberg), and Governance in Turbulent Times (Oxford University Press 2016, co-edited with Chris Ansell and Morten Ogard). Trondal has published his work in journals such as Public Administration Review, Governance, Public Administration, Journal of European Public Policy, European Political Science Review, European Journal of Political Research, Review of International Political Economy, West European Politics, International Review of Administrative Sciences.

Trondal is involved in several research projects, and these are some:

This project focuses on the challenges that turbulence poses to contemporary governance, and particularly the ability of governance institutions to maintain basic goals, functions, and values in the face of crisis and turmoil. The project is conducted together with Chris Ansell, UC Berkeley, Jacob Torfing, University of Roskilde, and Eva Sørensen, University of Roskilde. (Funded by the Norwegian Research Council). This project theorizes how turbulence can be managed through the provision of more robust governance strategies that combine flexible adaptation with proactive innovation in order to change what needs to be changed in order to maintain what should be maintained (‘dynamic conservatism’). Recent scholarship has suggested that turbulence is addressed by building a resilient society capable of ‘bouncing back’ and restoring the status quo ante. However, robustness suggests a more dynamic approach to turbulence that requires adaptive and innovative strategies aiming to ‘bounce forward’ and ‘build back better.’

This is a career-long project that have several scholarly spin-offs. Two ongoing spin-offs are worth mentioning: First, a book length project that incorporates a coherent theoretical and empirical study of the role of public administration in contemporary democracies. This project is single-authored by Trondal and contracted as a forthcoming monography with Palgrave Macmillan (see below). Secondly, a survey of American state administrators across time allowing for longitudinal studies of bureaucrats in the US administration. This project is conducted together with Mathew Stenberg at UC Berkeley and will run through 2022-2024. It uses the ASAP 1964-2008 dataset.  

This is a career-long project that has involved several colleagues over the years. Currently, I am working on a Research Handbook on International Bureaucracies (Jarle Trondal, ed.), which is contracted with Edward Elgar. The following outlines the thrust of the volume: The rise of political order after World War (WW) II by the rise of democratic nation-states and Weberian bureaucracies has been a key ingredient of contemporary state formation. This period has also seen the rise of political order beyond and above nation-states, reflected in the surge of international organizations (IOs) with authority and capacity for global and regional policy-making and -implementation. Moreover, the rise of executive capacity international bureaucracies has increased the capacity of IOs for global problem-solving but also challenged the administrative sovereignty of nation-states. There has been a corresponding scholarly interest in understanding the complex interface between international bureaucracy and democratic policy-making in several social science (sub)disciplines, including political sociology, public administration, psychology, comparative politics, and international relations (IR) (Benz and Goetz 2021). From most perspectives of political science, it is paramount to grasp the roles, powers, and impact of international bureacracies, and with what consequences for domestic and international politics. This Handbook is one effort to fill this void. 

This project offers a first-of-its-kind comparison of political attitudes about internal-market governance in the EU and the United States. Remarkably little research compares the contemporary politics of the world’s two largest single markets. This neglect relates to an ill-explored presumption—widespread in scholarship and political discourse—that they rest on similar principles, depicting the EU’s 'Single Market project' (SMP) as an ´incomplete´ imitation of a barrier-free US market. The project is done together with Craig Parsons at Oregon State University and many colleagues (funded by the Norwegian Research Council). The primary objective is to understand support and opposition among citizens, business, and public officials for central rules regarding internal-market openness in Europe and the United States. It seeks to generate the first comparable data on European and American single-market attitudes; test competing theories to explain observed attitudes and; relate attitudes to normative debates in political-economic, democratic, and federal theory, drawing out implications of these attitudes for political and policy debates on both continents. As both polities return to openness and mobility after the pandemic, these steps will foster new knowledge-based debate and policymaking.