Learning Stories as cross-national policy borrowing: The interplay of globalization and localization in preprimary education in Contemporary China

2018 ◽  
Vol 50 (12) ◽  
pp. 1124-1132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Minyi Li ◽  
Sue Grieshaber
2014 ◽  
Vol 296 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-13
Author(s):  
Ida Musialkowska ◽  
Marcin Dąbrowski ◽  
Laura Polverari

2019 ◽  
pp. 174889581986462 ◽  
Author(s):  
Trevor Jones ◽  
Jarrett Blaustein ◽  
Tim Newburn

The empirical study of ‘policy transfer’ and related topics remains a relatively rare enterprise in criminology. Comparative studies of crime control policy tend to focus on broader structural explanations on the one hand, or more specific socio-cultural analyses on the other. By contrast, scholars from other disciplinary traditions – including political science, public administration, comparative social policy and human geography – have developed a vibrant body of empirical research into the dynamics and impacts of cross-jurisdictional flows of policy ideas, programmes and practices. This research provides helpful methodological pointers to criminologists interested in carrying out such work within the field of crime control. This article argues that the relative lack of empirical research on cross-national crime policy movement arises from two main factors: first, a generalised sense that the topic is of rather minor importance and second, a lack of methodological clarity about how such research might proceed. Such methodological barriers have arguably been further strengthened by major critiques of the political science frameworks of ‘policy transfer’ that have been influential in the field. We view cross-national policy movement as an important subject for empirical criminological inquiry, and consider extant methodological approaches and potential future directions, drawing in particular on wider work within political science and human geography. There is significant potential for criminologists to learn from, and contribute to, the methodological approaches deployed by researchers from other disciplines and thus enhance knowledge about the concept of policy mobilities.


2005 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 775-796 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katharina Holzinger ◽  
Christoph Knill

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (9) ◽  
pp. e003695
Author(s):  
Matthew M Kavanagh ◽  
Ellie Graeden ◽  
Mara Pillinger ◽  
Renu Singh ◽  
Stephanie Eaneff ◽  
...  

Law and policy differences help explain why, as HIV-related science has advanced swiftly, some countries have realised remarkable progress on AIDS while others see expanding epidemics. We describe the structure and findings of a new dataset and research platform, the HIV Policy Lab, which fills an important knowledge gap by measuring the HIV-related policy environment across 33 indicators and 194 countries over time, with online access and visualisation. Cross-national indicators can be critical tools in international governance—building social power to monitor state behaviour with the potential to change policy and improve domestic accountability. This new and evolving effort collects data about policy through review of legal documents, official government reports and systematic review of secondary sources. Alignment between national policy environments and global norms is demonstrated through comparison with international public health guidance and agreements. We demonstrate substantial variation in the content of law and policies between countries, regions and policy areas. Given progress in basic and implementation science, it would be tempting to believe most countries have adopted policies aligned with global norms, with a few outliers. Data show this is not the case. Globally, alignment is higher on clinical and treatment policies than on prevention, testing and structural policies. Policy-makers, researchers, civil society, finance agencies and others can use these data to better understand the policy environment within and across countries and support reform. Longitudinal analysis enables evaluation of the impact of laws and policies on HIV outcomes and research about the political drivers of policy choice.


Author(s):  
John L. Campbell ◽  
Ove K. Pedersen

This postscript offers some suggestions for a research agenda for the future, including questions and propositions for scholars to consider regarding globalization and neoliberal diffusion, comparative political economy, and convergence theory. It asks whether the same conclusions can be obtained if different countries and different policy areas were examined. This curiosity about other countries might translate into efforts to change knowledge regimes, such as by doing more cross-national policy analysis. The chapter also asks whether knowledge regimes are a source of legitimation or a source of inspiration. Ultimately, more effort is required to determine whether the overall structure and practices of a knowledge regime influences the type of ideas it tends to produce.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document