SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Marmara Üniversitesi Avrupa Topluluğu Enstitüsü Avrupa Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 34 Sayı: 1

INSTITUTIONAL LEARNING AND STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT IN TURKEY’S EU FUND GOVERNANCE: A REFLEXIVE GOVERNANCE APPROACH

TÜRKİYE’NİN AB FON YÖNETİŞİMİNDE KURUMSAL ÖĞRENME VE STRATEJİK UYUM SORUNU: REFLEKSİF YÖNETİŞİM YAKLAŞIMI

Bekir Uçar(Tarım ve Kırsal Kalkınmayı Destekleme Kurumu)0000-0002-3756-6433
Elif Yesir(KARADENİZ TEKNİK ÜNİVERSİTESİ)
Pages
85–116
Publication Date
2026-06-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

At the level of official documents, the findings indicate that technical activity has increased, yet the mechanisms through which this activity is translated into sustainable strategic outcomes remain only partially visible.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This article examines Turkey’s performance problem in EU fund governance beyond explanations centered on technical capacity deficits.
📊
Key Findings & Data:It conceptualizes this problem through the relationship between reflexive governance, institutional learning, feedback, and multi-actor strategic alignment.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:At the level of official documents, the findings indicate that technical activity has increased, yet the mechanisms through which this activity is translated into sustainable strategic outcomes remain only partially visible.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2020 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Refleksif yönetişim · kurumsal öğrenme · AB fonları

Abstract

This article examines Turkey’s performance problem in EU fund governance beyond explanations centered on technical capacity deficits. It conceptualizes this problem through the relationship between reflexive governance, institutional learning, feedback, and multi-actor strategic alignment. To do so, the study analyzes 52 policy and institutional documents from the 2020-25 period. The documents are classified into macro policy and meso implementation levels for comparative analysis. Coding was conducted in MAXQDA 2022 through learning, adaptation, coordination, reflexivity, and policy alignment categories. At the level of official documents, the findings indicate that technical activity has increased, yet the mechanisms through which this activity is translated into sustainable strategic outcomes remain only partially visible. In the document corpus, this gap is associated with limited traces of institutional memory, feedback channels, and coordination across implementing actors. The article contributes by reframing fund performance not merely as a matter of project success or technical capacity, but as a question of whether technical capacity is transformed into strategic outcomes through institutional learning, feedback, and multi-actor alignment. For Turkey, the central issue is transforming technical capacity into a reflexive governance architecture that produces strategic alignment.

Özet

Bu makale, Türkiye’nin AB fon yönetişimindeki performans sorununu teknik kapasite eksikliği açıklamasının ötesinde incelemektedir. Çalışma, sorunu refleksif yönetişim, kurumsal öğrenme, geri bildirim ve çok aktörlü stratejik uyum ilişkisiyle kavramsallaştırmaktadır. Bu amaçla, 2020-25 dönemine ait 52 politika ve kurum belgesi nitel belge analiziyle incelenmiştir. Belgeler, makro politika düzeyi ve mezo uygulama düzeyi olarak iki grupta değerlendirilmiştir. Kodlama; öğrenme, uyarlanma, koordinasyon, refleksivite ve politika uyumu eksenleri üzerinden MAXQDA 2022 ortamında yürütülmüştür. Bulgular, resmi belge düzeyinde Türkiye’de teknik hareketliliğin arttığını, ancak bu hareketliliğin sürdürülebilir stratejik sonuca dönüşme mekanizmalarının sınırlı biçimde izlenebildiğini göstermektedir. Bu açık, belge analizinde kurumsal hafıza, geri bildirim ve çok aktörlü koordinasyon mekanizmalarının sistematik izlenebilirliğindeki sınırlılıklarla ilişkilendirilmektedir. Makale, fon performansını yalnızca proje başarısı veya teknik kapasite sorunu olarak değil, teknik kapasitenin kurumsal öğrenme, geri bildirim ve stratejik uyum mekanizmaları aracılığıyla stratejik sonuca dönüşüp dönüşmediği üzerinden tartışarak literatüre katkı sunmaktadır. Türkiye açısından temel mesele, teknik kapasitenin kurumsal öğrenme, geri bildirim ve çok aktörlü stratejik uyum mekanizmaları aracılığıyla refleksif bir yönetişim düzenine nasıl dönüştürülebileceğidir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Uçar, B., Yesir, E. (2026). INSTITUTIONAL LEARNING AND STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT IN TURKEY’S EU FUND GOVERNANCE: A REFLEXIVE GOVERNANCE APPROACH. Marmara Üniversitesi Avrupa Topluluğu Enstitüsü Avrupa Araştırmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 34 Sayı: 1, 85–116. https://doi.org/10.29228/mjes.484

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (31)

  1. Argyris, C. (1991) “Teaching Smart People How To Learn”, Harvard Business Review, 69(3): 99-109.
  2. Argyris, C. ve Schön, D.A. (1996) Organizational Learning II: Theory, Method, and Practice, (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley).
  3. Arslan, K. (2005) “Bölgesel Kalkınma Farklılıklarının Giderilmesinde Etkin Bir Araç: Bölgesel Planlama ve Kalkınma Ajansları”, İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 4(7): 275-294.
  4. Avelino, F., Wittmayer, J.M., de Geus, T., Loorbach, D. ve Pel, B. (2022) “Reflexivity In Sustainability Transitions: Power, Politics, and Co-Production”, Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 24(3): 289-307, DOI: 10.1080/1523908X.2021.2003449.
  5. Bateson, G. (1972) Steps To An Ecology Of Mind: Collected Essays In Anthropology, Psychiatry, Evolution, and Epistemology, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).
  6. Beck, U., Giddens, A. ve Lash, S. (1994) Reflexive Modernization: Politics, Tradition and Aesthetics In The Modern Social Order, (Cambridge: Polity Press).
  7. Borrás, S. ve Edler, J. (2020) “The Roles Of The State In The Governance Of Socio-Technical Systems’ Transformation”, Research Policy, 49(5): 103971, DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2020.103971.
  8. Bowen, G.A. (2009) “Document Analysis As A Qualitative Research Method”, Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2): 27-40, DOI: 10.3316/QRJ0902027.
  9. Christensen, T. ve Lægreid, P. (2018) Organization Theory and The Public Sector: Instrument, Culture and Myth, 2nd edn, (London: Routledge).
  10. Cunliffe, A.L. (2005) “The Need For Reflexivity In Public Administration”, Administration & Society, 37(2): 225-242, DOI: 10.1177/0095399704273209. Dunlop, C.A. (der.) (2020) Policy Learning and Policy Failure, (Bristol: Policy Press), DOI: 10.1332/policypress/9781447352006.001.0001.
  11. Dunlop, C.A., Radaelli, C.M. ve Trein, P. (der.) (2018) Learning In Public Policy: Analysis, Modes and Outcomes, (Cham: Palgrave Macmillan), DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-76210-4.
  12. Egeberg, M. (der.) (2006) Multilevel Union Administration: The Transformation Of Executive Politics In Europe, (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan).
  13. European Commission (2022) “European Innovation Scoreboard 2022”, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/50188.
  14. European Commission (2023b) “Horizon Europe: Performance Report 2021-23”, COM(2024) 231 final, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.
  15. Gagliardi, L. ve Percoco, M. (2017) “The Impact Of European Cohesion Policy In Urban and Rural Regions”, Regional Studies, 51(6): 857-868, DOI: 10.1080/00343404.2016.1179384.
  16. Havas, A. ve Weber, K.M. (2017) “The Role Of Foresight In Shaping The Next Production Revolution”, içinde OECD, The Next Production Revolution: Implications For Governments and Business, (Paris: OECD Publishing): 299-324, DOI: 10.1787/9789264271036-13-en.
  17. Ivanytska, O. ve Ivanytskyi, O. (2025) “Reflexive Management In The System Of Cognition, Communication, and Public Administration”, Philosophy and Governance, 4(8): 45-55, DOI: 10.70651/3041-248X/2025.4.05.
  18. Knassmüller, M. ve Meyer, R. (2016) “What Kind Of Reflection Do We Need In Public Management?”, Teaching Public Administration, 31(1): 81-95, DOI: 10.1177/0144739413479199.
  19. Krippendorff, K. (2018) Content Analysis: An Introduction To Its Methodology, 4th edn, (Thousand Oaks: SAGE). OECD (2023) Science, Technology and Innovation Outlook 2023: Enabling Anticipatory Governance, (Paris: OECD Publishing), DOI: 10.1787/0b55736e-en.
  20. Peschl, M.F. (2007) “Triple-Loop Learning As Foundation For Profound Change, Individual Cultivation, and Radical Innovation”, Constructivist Foundations, 2(2-3): 136-145, https://constructivist.info/2/2-3/136.peschl.
  21. Sabel, C.F. ve Zeitlin, J. (der.) (2010) Experimentalist Governance In The European Union: Towards A New Architecture, (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
  22. Senge, P.M. (1990) The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice Of The Learning Organization, (New York: Doubleday).
  23. Sørensen, E. ve Torfing, J. (2011) “Enhancing Collaborative Innovation In The Public Sector”, Public Administration Review, 71(6): 842-856, DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02432.x.
  24. Strateji ve Bütçe Başkanlığı (2024) “12. Kalkınma Planı (2024-28)”, Cumhurbaşkanlığı Strateji ve Bütçe Başkanlığı, Ankara.
  25. Tosey, P., Visser, M. ve Saunders, M.N.K. (2012) “The Origins and Conceptualizations Of ‘Triple-Loop’ Learning: A Critical Review”, Management Learning, 43(3): 291-307, DOI: 10.1177/1350507611426239.
  26. TÜBİTAK (2023) “Horizon Europe Performance Report 2021-23”, TÜBİTAK, Ankara.
  27. Van Assche, K., Beunen, R., Verweij, S., Evans, J. ve Gruezmacher, M. (2022) “Policy Learning and Adaptation In Governance: A Co-Evolutionary Perspective”, Administration & Society, 54(7): 1226-1254, DOI: 10.1177/00953997211059165.
  28. Veugelers, R. (2021) “Research and Innovation Policies and Productivity Growth”, Working Paper No. 08/2021, Bruegel, Brussels.
  29. Voß, J.P., Bauknecht, D. ve Kemp, R. (der.) (2006) Reflexive Governance For Sustainable Development, (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar), DOI: 10.4337/9781847200266.
  30. Voß, J.P. ve Bornemann, B. (2011) “The Politics Of Reflexive Governance: Challenges For Designing Adaptive Management and Transition Management”, Ecology and Society, 16(2): Article 9, DOI: 10.5751/ES-04051-160209.
  31. Walsh, J.P. ve Ungson, G.R. (1991) “Organizational Memory”, Academy of Management Review, 16(1): 57-91, DOI: 10.2307/258607.