Introduction: Is Policy Transfer Rational Policy-making?

2017 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Mark Evans
Keyword(s):  
Policy Making ◽  
Policy Transfer

Conclusion: reform and innovation

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha A. Shave
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Policy Process ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Policy Transfer ◽  
Process Approach ◽  
National Legislation ◽  
Poor Laws ◽  
The Poor ◽  
Reform And Innovation

The first half of this chapter examines the implications of these findings for our understandings of several areas of the poor laws: local ideas and policy transfer, national legislation and policy-making. The second half of the conclusion focuses on the influences upon the development of the poor laws. It examines the role of stakeholders and key actors, each with distinct roles in the policy process across both the old and New Poor Law eras. The chapter finishes by discussing more broadly how the policy process approach can be applied to understand reform and innovation in the broader field of social and public policy.

Policy Learning and Policy Failure

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Policy Making ◽  
Policy Diffusion ◽  
Policy Transfer ◽  
Policy Learning ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Meso Level ◽  
Policy Failure ◽  
Limited Success ◽  
Opportunities For Learning ◽  
Policy Failures

First published as a special issue of Policy & Politics, this updated volume explores policy failures and the valuable opportunities for learning that they offer. The book begins with an overview of policy learning and policy failure. The links between the two appear obvious, yet there are very few studies that address how one can learn from failure, learn to limit failure, and fail to learn. The book attempts to bring the two together. In doing so, it explores how dysfunctional forms of policy learning impact policy failure at the meso-level. The book expands on this by demonstrating how different learning processes generated by actors at the meso-level mediate the extent to which policy transfer is a success or failure. It re-assesses some of the literature on policy transfer and policy diffusion, in light of ideas as to what constitutes failure, partial failure, or limited success. This is followed by an examination of situations in which the incentives of partisanship can encourage a government to actively seek to exacerbate an existing policy failure rather than to repair it. The book studies the connections between repeated assessments of policy failure and subsequent opportunities for system-wide policy learning and reform. Finally, it introduces the idea of ‘policy myopia’ as a pressing source of failure in policy making and explores the possibility of developing policies that learn to help mitigate its impacts.

20. Policy-making

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christoph Knill ◽  
Jale Tosun
Keyword(s):  
Policy Making ◽  
National Policy ◽  
Policy Formulation ◽  
Policy Transfer ◽  
Process Models ◽  
Policy Cycle ◽  
Political Activities ◽  
Policy Choices ◽  
Policy Styles

This chapter examines the process related to policy-making as well as potential determinants of policy choices. It begins with a discussion of conceptual models of policy-making, namely: the institutional, rational, incremental, group, elite, and process models. It then considers the policy cycle, which models the policy process as a series of political activities, consisting of agenda setting, policy formulation, policy adoption, implementation, and evaluation. It also analyses the role of institutions, frames, and policy styles in policy-making and concludes with an assessment of the most crucial domestic and international factors shaping the design of policies, focusing in particular on theories of policy diffusion, policy transfer, and cross-national policy convergence, along with international sources that affect domestic policy-making.

scholarly journals Making policy in the classroom

2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 380-393 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ulrike Hohmann
Keyword(s):  
Education Research ◽  
Comparative Education ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
Policy Transfer ◽  
Local Context ◽  
Daily Work ◽  
Street Level ◽  
Comparative Education Research ◽  
Street Level Bureaucracy

The concept of street-level bureaucracy (Lipsky, 1980, 2010) examines the form and extent discretion takes in teachers’ and other public policy enactors’ work and how they negotiate their way through sometimes contradictory policy imperatives. It provides a framework for straddling top-down and bottom-up perspectives on policy making. In this article, I argue that comparative education research should take advantage of the analytical framework this perspective offers. It requires, first, mapping out policies resulting in the characteristics of teachers’ discretion in a particular national or local context and, second, to observe how teachers make use of this discretionary space in their daily work. Lipsky has shown strategies employed by street-level bureaucrats to alleviate workload pressures and how they make policy in this way. Applying street-level bureaucracy in comparative education research illuminates why straightforward policy transfer is problematic and how it can be employed to explore practices around inclusion and exclusion.

scholarly journals The Limitations of ‘Policy Transfer’ and ‘Lesson Drawing’ for Public Policy Research

2003 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oliver James ◽  
Martin Lodge
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Policy Research ◽  
Policy Transfer ◽  
Policy Success ◽  
Transfer Processes ◽  
Common Framework ◽  
Alternative Approaches ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Lesson Drawing

The concepts of ‘lesson drawing’ and ‘policy transfer’ have become increasingly influential ways of understanding public policy, especially in the UK. However, the main proponents of the concepts, Rose for ‘lesson drawing’ and Dolowitz and Marsh for ‘policy transfer’, have difficulty in providing convincing answers to three questions that are important for them and those engaged in similar studies. First, can they be defined as distinctive forms of policy-making separate from other, more conventional, forms? ‘Lesson drawing’ is very similar to conventional accounts of ‘rational’ policy-making and ‘policy transfer’ is very difficult to define distinctly from many other forms of policy-making. Second, why does ‘lesson drawing’ and ‘policy transfer’ occur rather than some other form of policy-making? The proponents of ‘policy transfer’ put a set of diverse and conflicting theories under a common framework, obscuring differences between them. Third, what are the effects of ‘lesson drawing’ and ‘policy transfer’ on policy-making and how do they compare to other processes? Whilst the effect of more ‘lesson drawing’ seems to be more ‘rational’ policy-making, the effect of ‘policy transfer’ on policy ‘success’ and ‘failure’ is less clear. Dolowitz and Marsh redescribe aspects of ‘failure’ as different forms of ‘transfer’ rather than giving independent reasons for outcomes based on features of transfer processes. Overall, particularly in the case of ‘policy transfer’, researchers may be better off selecting from a range of alternative approaches than limiting themselves to these conceptual frameworks.

A Province under Pressure: Climate Change Policy in Alberta

2018 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 183-199
Author(s):  
Brendan Boyd
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Carbon Tax ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Ghg Emissions ◽  
Policy Transfer ◽  
International Policy ◽  
Economic Competitiveness ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
Reduce Emissions

AbstractAlberta is responsible for over a third of Canada's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Reducing the country's emissions requires policies and initiatives that reduce emissions in the province. Yet the study of provincial climate change policy in Canada has largely focused on lower-emitting provinces like British Columbia, Quebec and Ontario. This article argues that Alberta is best understood as a “reluctant actor” on climate change, whose policies are influenced by decisions and pressures from outside its borders. The literature on Canadian-American environmental policy making and international policy transfer are used to explore provincial GHG targets and carbon pricing policies. The article finds that Alberta's 2002 targets and Specified Gas Emitters Regulation were determined by economic competitiveness and leakage concerns, while the adoption of new GHG targets in 2008 and a carbon tax was the result of policy transfer through political bandwagoning and the desire for reputational benefits.

20. Policy-Making

2020 ◽  
pp. 361-375
Author(s):  
Christoph Knill ◽  
Jale Tosun
Keyword(s):  
Policy Making ◽  
Policy Diffusion ◽  
National Policy ◽  
Policy Formulation ◽  
Policy Transfer ◽  
Process Models ◽  
Policy Cycle ◽  
Political Activities ◽  
Policy Styles

This chapter examines the process related to policy-making as well as potential determinants of policy choices. It begins with a discussion of conceptual models of policy-making, namely the institutional, rational, incremental, group, elite, and process models. It then considers the policy cycle, which models the policy process as a series of political activities, consisting of agenda setting, policy formulation, policy sadoption, implementation, and evaluation. It also analyses the role of institutions, frames, and policy styles in policy-making and concludes with an assessment of the most crucial domestic and international factors shaping the design of policies, focusing in particular on theories of policy diffusion, policy transfer, and cross-national policy convergence, along with international sources that affect domestic policy-making.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document