In today's volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) world, governments grapple with increasingly complex problems—wicked problems—that are difficult to define and solve definitively. These problems often transcend traditional government department boundaries and necessitate multifaceted knowledge input and coordinated decision-making. New Public Management (NPM) reforms, while promoting efficiency, led to fragmentation and specialization. Recent trends advocate for more holistic approaches that prioritize coordination and collaboration between public sector organizations to counter these effects. This paper investigates two intertwined areas: policy coordination and coherence (PCC) and knowledge governance (KG). PCC focuses on institutional architecture and agency in policymaking, ensuring consistent government action. KG examines knowledge-sharing processes crucial for informed decision-making. The study uses the case of PlanAPP, a newly created public administration competence center in Portugal, to evaluate the potential of boundary organizations (BOs) to facilitate PCC and KG in addressing wicked problems. The research question is whether PlanAPP effectively employs strategies to enhance policymaking for complex challenges, leveraging the principles of PCC and KG.

The paper reviews literature on PCC and KG. PCC literature emphasizes integrated decision-making and consistent government action, highlighting horizontal and vertical coordination mechanisms. Effective PCC requires engagement from various government sectors and levels, including citizen participation. KG literature highlights the need for actionable knowledge through co-creation processes. KG extends beyond knowledge sharing to actively engaging actors in solving societal issues, connecting various epistemic perspectives. A key element is the creation of robust, accountable, and usable knowledge. The literature also examines different approaches to knowledge use in decision-making: a linear approach (information produced for specific questions) and a dynamic approach (interactive knowledge production). Shared knowledge arising from joint question formulation, research, and interpretation increases the impact on decision-making. The review combines insights from PCC and KG into three propositions for improved policymaking: internal cross-sectoral networking, external networking and participation, and knowledge sharing.

The study employs a qualitative methodology focused on PlanAPP, a newly created public administration competence center in Portugal. PlanAPP aims to improve public policymaking and is designed to operate as a boundary organization, bridging the gap between science, policy, and society. The authors use a two-dimensional analytical framework to analyze PlanAPP's activities (Figure 2). The first dimension considers three key features identified from the literature review on PCC and KG: internal cross-sectoral networking, external networking and participation, and knowledge sharing. The second dimension examines PlanAPP's activities through the lens of Boundary Organizations (BOs), focusing on three key functions: boundary object production, boundary management, and knowledge brokerage. Data collection included analysis of PlanAPP's project database, official webpage, activity program for 2023, and the decree-law creating PlanAPP. This content analysis allowed the assessment of how effectively PlanAPP’s activities address PCC and KG characteristics, reflecting its potential as a BO. PlanAPP's 19 projects were categorized according to these three BO functions. The analysis considers internal networking within PlanAPP and RePLAN (a related initiative), external networking through PlanAPP's partnerships, and knowledge sharing mechanisms across various projects.

The analysis reveals that PlanAPP engages in activities related to all three key functions of a BO. PlanAPP is involved in producing boundary objects (e.g., analysis tools, AI prototypes); boundary management (facilitation, mediation); and knowledge brokerage (aligning policy needs with evidence). The study identifies several specific examples illustrating these functions. PlanAPP's projects show evidence of internal cross-sectoral networking through RePLAN, bringing together representatives from different ministries. External networking and participation are evident in PlanAPP's partnerships with academia, civil society, and stakeholders, including citizen engagement initiatives like the Lab2050 foresight project. Knowledge sharing mechanisms include partnerships with academia, multidisciplinary teams within PlanAPP, and multisectoral teams within RePLAN. Table 2 summarizes the PCC and KG potential of PlanAPP and RePLAN. The authors note that while PlanAPP demonstrates characteristics of a BO and actively engages in PCC and KG strategies, there's room for improvement, particularly in enhancing citizen participation in boundary activities and strengthening boundary management.

The findings suggest that PlanAPP, as a boundary organization, holds significant potential for improving policymaking for wicked problems in Portugal. The center effectively employs internal and external networking strategies and facilitates knowledge sharing. The analysis confirms the importance of the three identified key ingredients (internal and external networking, knowledge sharing) for enhancing PCC and KG. PlanAPP's structure and activities align with the literature on BOs, indicating a successful approach to institutional innovation in public administration. However, the study also highlights the need to enhance citizen engagement and boundary management to fully realize PlanAPP's potential for improving policy coherence, responsiveness, and legitimacy. This emphasis on inclusive knowledge co-creation is essential to address the challenges posed by wicked problems. The study contributes to the literature on BOs, PCC, and KG by providing empirical evidence of their effectiveness and identifying opportunities for improvement.

This paper demonstrates the potential of PlanAPP as a boundary organization to improve policymaking for wicked problems. The study shows how a well-structured BO can contribute to policy coordination, coherence, and knowledge governance. The analysis highlights the need to foster stronger citizen participation and boundary management within PlanAPP to fully realize its potential. Future research could focus on the long-term impact of PlanAPP's activities on policy outcomes and explore the transferability of its model to other contexts. Further investigation into the specific mechanisms of knowledge co-creation and the effectiveness of different boundary-spanning strategies would also be valuable.

The study focuses solely on PlanAPP, limiting the generalizability of the findings. The analysis relies on publicly available data and documentation, which might not capture the full complexity of PlanAPP's operations. The timeframe of the analysis is limited, providing a snapshot rather than a longitudinal assessment of PlanAPP's impact. Further research incorporating more in-depth data collection methods, like interviews and surveys, would provide a more nuanced understanding of PlanAPP's effectiveness. Finally, the study focuses primarily on one specific national context, preventing a direct comparison across various policy contexts or political systems.