Search

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has produced four waves of regulatory management indicators. By contrast, the European Union has never adopted a common system of indicators, although it is much more integrated and less heterogeneous than the OECD. This cannot be explained by the different propensity for performance measurement: the European Union has agreed on policy metrics in economic and social policy areas, and regulation is a fundamental tool for this organization. Although structural variables matter, to answer questions about adoption (Yes/No), timing (when) and content of indicators (what type of indicators) we need the additional aid of policy learning and empirical observations on organizational processes. We find that the OECD process was one of self-directed learning fuelled by high socialization, internal validation of knowledge, favorable attitudes and posture of the secretariat, and mutually constitutive roles of delegates and staff. For the European Union we find the reverse. These findings contribute to the literature on policy learning, regulation, and global performance measurement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reference to policy learning is commonplace in the public policy literature but the question of whether it qualifies as an analytical framework applicable to the policy process has yet to be systematically addressed. We therefore appraise learning as analytical framework in relation to four standards: assumptions and micro‐foundations, conceptual apparatus, observable implications, normative applications. We find that policy learning meets the four standards, although its theoretical leverage varies across them. Since we are not aware of theories of the policy process that meet all of these standards all the time, we conclude that policy learning fares reasonably well and it's worth investing intellectual resources in this field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policy learning is an attractive proposition, but who learns and for what purposes? Can we learn the wrong lesson? And why do so many attempts to learn what works often fail? In this article, we provide three lessons. First, there are four different modes in which constellations of actors learn. Hence our propositions about learning are conditional on which of the four contexts we refer to. Second, policy learning does not just happen; there are specific hindrances and triggers. Thus, learning can be facilitated by knowing the mechanisms to activate and the likely obstacles. Third, learning itself is a conditional final aim: although the official aspiration of public organisations and politicians is to improve on public policy, policy learning can also be dysfunctional - for an organisation, a policy, a constellation of actors or even democracy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Whilst the literature classifies policy learning in terms of types or ontological approaches (reflexive and social constructivist learning versus rational up-dating of priors), we offer a three-dimensional approach to explore the relationships between individual learning, learning in groups and the macro-dimension. Our contribution maps most (although not all) lively debates in the field on a multi-dimensional space and explores the logic of causality from micro to macro. To achieve these two aims, we draw on Coleman's 'bath-tub'. We map learning in the bath-tub by considering prominent studies on learning but also, in some cases, by exploring and drawing lessons from political science and behavioural sciences. By integrating findings in an eclectic way, we explain the logic of learning using a single template and suggest methods for empirical analysis. This is not a literature review but an original attempt to capture the causal architecture of the field, contributing to learning theory with findings from mainstream political and behavioural sciences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What is the causal relationship between crisis, learning and change? How did causality unfold in the key years of 2009–2010 when the European Union had to face the most formidable attacks to the single currency and responded with substantial reforms of the euro area? We question the conventional identification of the cause-and-effect relationship provided by theories of crisis management, integration and policy learning. Drawing on models of contingent learning developed within psychology and behavioural economics, we theorize that surprise produces behavioural change via a fast-paced associative mechanism and that policy learning follows change. We then run our exercise in causal identification through a plausibility probe. We show that our argument passes the plausibility probe. Our conclusions on cognition and situational effects on learning during crises suggest a new research agenda, more sensitive to how individuals behave in the real world and more robust in its micro-foundations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Donald Schön's assertion that becoming an effective professional requires more than technical rationality underpins the pedagogy of Masters in Public Administration (MPA) programmes. This article explores how public administrators can be taught to think reflectively and reflexively about the limits of control in the context of decision making and regulatory policy appraisal. It reports on an in-class pedagogical experiment on illusions of control used to generate a real-life experience of the cognitive and emotional dimensions of control. By doing so, the article introduces the concept of 'regulatory humility' and contributes to the literature on experiments as pedagogical tools, and to debates on teaching methods in public administration and political science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Regulators face an array of initiatives designed to boost the effectiveness of policy delivery and cut administrative burdens. A good deal of analytical attention is given to these governance tools, but we know much less about how regulators themselves understand and learn about them. We use a quasi-experiment to assess the effects of training on local government inspectors’ understandings of the Primary Authority (PA) initiative. Established in 2009 by the UK's Better Regulation Delivery Organisation (BRDO), PA partnerships are legally binding agreements that provide businesses with a single point of regulatory contact and inspectors provide advice and reduce duplication of inspections and paperwork. The initiative is complex, and marks a significant departure from the existing inspection framework. Our findings suggest that, regardless of training, the regulatory innovation is well understood among local authority inspectors. Training may make a difference, however, in aspects of regulatory reform which are contentious or could be taken as counterintuitive to professional norms. The article also highlights the value of the quasi-experimental approach for policy-relevant public management research. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The field of policy learning is characterised by concept stretching and a lack of systematic findings. To systematise them, we combine the classic Sartorian approach to classification with the more recent insights on explanatory typologies, distinguishing between the genus and the different species within it. By drawing on the technique of explanatory typologies to introduce a basic model of policy learning, we identify four major genera in the literature. We then generate variation within each cell by using rigorous concepts drawn from adult education research. By looking at learning through the lenses of knowledge utilisation, we show that the basic model can be expanded to reveal sixteen different species. These types are all conceptually possible, but are not all empirically established in the literature. Our reconstruction of the field sheds light on mechanisms and relations associated with alternative operationalisations of learning and the role of actors in the process of knowledge construction and utilisation. By providing a comprehensive typology, we mitigate concept-stretching problems and lay the foundations for the systematic comparison across and within cases of policy learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Examines policy change and the role of discourse in Europe. Relationship between the power of ideas and interests as seen through discussions of arguing versus bargaining; Europeanization; Transformative power and limitations of discourse; Scope of learning in policy change.

Examines conceptual and methodological issues in policy change and discourse in Europe. Factors in policy change; Role of discourse in institutional learning; Ontological and epistemological foundations of discourse.