Search

This article argues that Simeon's insistence on the value of explicit comparison within individual studies of public policy needs to remain central even in historical institutionalist approaches which “take time seriously” and focus on causal mechanisms—a methodological injunction sometimes seen to augur in favour of single-case and single-outcome studies. However, if Simeon's suggested approach is to reflect the major advances that have occurred since he wrote, it will require more fully and more explicitly combining the power of the comparative method with the powerful insights generated by a logic of intertemporal causal mechanisms unfolding over time. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This article examines the development of the global Social Protection Floor proposal inside the International Labour Organization (ILO) from 2009 (when the ILO was designated as a lead agency in the process) through to the adoption of Recommendation 202 in 2012. While there was a considerably more high-profile external process under the auspices of the Advisory Group chaired by former Chilean President Michelle Bachelet, the article argues that it was in the internal ILO process that debates regarding the most important substantive elements of the Recommendation were resolved. The United States was vigorously involved in this process and had a crucial influence on the substantive development of Recommendation 202. First, US involvement played a key role in limiting the degree to which – and manner in which – the recommendation would apply to medium- and high-income countries with established social protection systems. Second, the United States contributed to successfully blocking the definition of social protection as comprising sets of legally enforceable entitlements enshrined in national legislation. This marked a significant shift in the substantive meaning of the recognition of a human right to social protection. US efforts in this regard can be understood as the result of its concern regarding the uneasy fit between a potential recommendation and its own domestic social protection provision. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article focuses on the social policy and the U.S.-Canada bilateral relationship. The relationship between social policy and bilateral relations is reciprocal with social policy having important implications for bilateral relations and vice versa, asymmetrical with a much closer relationship between social policy and bilateral relations existing in Canada than in the U.S. and, in the Canadian case, paradoxical. Policy similarities between the two countries generate public concern in Canada that Canadian social policy is becoming Americanized and, in turn, generate resistance to deepening the bilateral relationship.

While there are broad differences between the health-care systems in Canada and the United States, sub-national variation is significant in both countries (though more notably among American states), both in terms of the role of government in the provision of health-care as well as outputs of the health-care system such as access and cost-control. Although this variation is rarely considered in comparisons of health-care policy in the two countries, the value of using the United States as a comparative reference in contemporary policy debates in Canada would be considerably greater if such variations were utilized to augment the analytical leverage resulting from such comparisons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Provides information about public policies in provinces of Western Canada. Patterns of public policy; Debates on conception of Western regionalism; Examination of public policy indicators.

Discusses patterns that emerge when the provision of North American higher education in the Canadian provinces is compared to that in the United States. Variation in the role and level of public provision of higher education in terms of funding and enrollment; Greater rates of participation and higher levels of accessibility to university-level education in the U.S.

Examines the role of bureaucratic politics in the conduct of intergovernmental relations through an analysis of the interaction between Social Services and Alberta's Department of Federal and Intergovernmental Affairs (FIGA) in the 1970s. Shaping of Alberta's position on federal proposals for the reform of funding arrangements for welfare and social services.

An introduction is presented in which the editors discuss various reports within the issue on topics including the change in its editorship, the development of the global social policy theories, and the commitment to advance transnational social policy discussions.

People whom the journal would like to thank for their assistance in the creation of the "Global Social Policy" are mentioned.