Search

Over the years, policy learning has emerged as a theoretical lens to provide an alternative understanding of powering-based approaches to the policy process and policy outcomes. This has been a success story, with policy learning gaining presence among theoretical frameworks on the policy process. However, the puzzling-powering dichotomy is reductive. In real-world policy processes, we find both puzzling and powering. Also, we cannot reduce the value of learning to what is not explained by power alone. This Introduction shows how puzzling and powering interact and with what consequences on policy processes, moving beyond the dichotomy. We present how the four contributions of this Special Issue explore this territory and suggest how to approach the design of governance architectures for learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policy agendas are often cast in semantic constructions that portray them as universally desirable outcomes. These semantic constructions protect and reinforce the power of dominant coalitions and make it hard to pursue alternatives. The semantic space is entirely occupied by the dominant concepts. At the same time, within the dominant coalition, ideational conflict is muted by decontesting concepts. Drawing on political theory, I show the presence of this double act of reducing the semantic space and decontesting concepts with the case of 'better regulation'. Then I briefly extend the argument to other terms such as policy coherence, agile governance, smart cities and social value judgements. The critical discussion of the implications of dominant language brings in transparency, allows other coalitions to articulate their vision in a discursive level-playing-field, and offers citizens the possibility to discuss what is really 'better' and 'for whom'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ideational explanations of policy change are popular in the fields of political economy, comparative politics and policy analysis. And yet, to make the case for ideational explanations, we must make further progress on the nature of ideas, where they come from, what they consist of, and how they change over time. We highlight four critical building sites concerning the definitional aspects of ideational explanations, micro-foundations, mechanisms and the difference between ideational and cognitive analysis. We make recommendations on how to carry out work in the building sites and describe the range of suggestions and ways forward found in the articles of this Symposium. We also suggest cross-fertilising political science with the findings of neighbouring disciplines that have developed empirically robust models of ideation and cognition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores how policy learning can improve comparative policy analysis by focusing on causality in learning processes. After summarizing the comparative credentials of the policy learning literature, the article outlines a framework of four learning modes, relating it to three approaches of causality: deterministic, probabilistic, and set-theoretic. It then builds on this to explore different approaches to causation and learning in relation to: policy change, political contexts, and, finally, the temporal and spatial dimensions of comparative policy analysis. The article concludes by showing how these challenges are addressed and suggesting implications for further research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Instead, they approached the theories of the policy process from the vantage point of discussing design, global policy, entrepreneurship and the ideas that shape policies. Here, Stone and Saddiki open our minds even further, with Stone arguing authoritatively about Fact and Fiction in making global policy and introducing us to transnational policy communities, the methodology of transnationalism and the key concept of transnational policy persuasion (where she contrasts evidence-based policy and science diplomacy). I Elements in Public Policy i is a Cambridge series designed to provide concise accounts (approximately 25,000 words) of the state of the art in public policy. [Extracted from the article]

Social scientists often face a fundamental problem: Did I leave something causally important out of my explanation? How do I diagnose this? Where do I look for solutions to this problem? We build bridges between regression models and qualitative comparative analysis by comparing diagnostics and solutions to the problem of omitted variables and conditions. We then discuss various approaches and tackle the theoretical issues around causality which must be addressed before attending to technical fixes. In the conclusions, we reflect on the bridges built between the two traditions and draw more general lessons about the logic of social science research. [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]

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]

In this article, we present some major lessons drawn from a recently completed research project. Our research dealt with ex ante evaluation, mainly impact assessment (IA).We shed new light on research questions about the control of bureaucracy, the role of IA in decision-making, economics and policy learning, and the narrative dimension of appraisal.We identify how our findings stand in relation to conventional arguments about these issues, and reflect on their normative implications. We finally reason on the possible extensions of our arguments to the wider field of policy evaluation, connecting IA and ex post evaluation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Under which conditions does the open method of co-ordination match the standards for demoi-cracy? To answer this question, we need some explicit standards about demoi-cracy. In fact, open co-ordination serves three different but interrelated purposes in European Union policy: to facilitate convergence; to support learning processes; and to encourage exploration of policy innovation. By intersecting standards and purposes, we find open co-ordination is neither inherently ‘good’ nor ‘bad’ for demoi-cracy, as it depends on how it has been put into practice. Therefore, we qualify the answer considering the empirical evidence on how normative principles hit the road of implementation. In the final part of this paper, we look into the demoi-cratic effects of the Eurozone's economic and financial crisis on our findings. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article presents the author's view of the theoretical foundation of cathedral. It reveals the theoretical foundations that informed its design and handle the European Union (EU) comparatively, with coherent political science framework covering other examples of integration and domestic politics. It suggests accepting the accept that other views of the Cathedral exist, are theoretically possible, and may be corroborated by empirical.

Since 2003, the European Commission has produced analytical documents (called Impact Assessments, IAs) to appraise its policy proposals. This appraisal process is the cornerstone of the regulatory reform policy of the European Union. Previous research has been concerned with the quality of the IAs in terms of evidence-based policy, usages of economic analysis and other standards of smart regulation. Instead, we move to a different perspective. We draw on the narrative policy framework to explore IAs as a text and discursive instrument. Conceptually, insights from discursive institutionalism are used to explore narratives as tools of coordination within complex organizations such as the European Commission, and as communicative tools through which policy-makers seek to enhance the plausibility, acceptability and, ultimately, legitimacy for their policy proposals. Empirically, we consider a sample of IAs that differ by originating DGs, legal instrument, and level of saliency. The findings show that both in coordinating and communicating policy, the European bureaucracy projects a certain definition of its identity via the narratives it deploys. The Commission may use IAs to produce evidence-based policy, but it also an active narrator. It engages with IAs to provide a presentation of self, to establish EU norms and values, and to create consensus around policy proposals by using causal plots, doomsday scenarios, and narrative dramatization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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]

In its rational, organisational, historical and discursive varieties, the new institutionalism research agenda is arguably the most successful paradigm in comparative politics and public policy analysis. However, neo-institutional practice applied to comparative policy analysis reveals four pitfalls, that is, 'institutional determinism', 'drop in the box', 'second best residual explanations' and 'theoretical conjectures without foundational mechanisms'. We illustrate and examine the pitfalls and consider the conceptual and methodological implications for the comparative analysis of policies. In the conclusion, we present options for rescuing institutional analysis from bad practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports that Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has yet again given air to the debate on measuring the performance of regulatory instruments and regulatory oversight institutions. It is mentioned that the debate on regulatory indicators and measures of regulatory reform is widely acknowledged.

Impact assessment is the pivotal instrument in the recent wave of regulatory reforms labeled ‘better regulation’. Although the economics of impact assessment has been the subject of a vast literature, less is known about its political properties. Within a comparative framework, this article provides conjectures on four images of impact assessment – that is, rational policy making, political control of the bureaucracy, public management reform, and symbolic action. Looking at six countries with a long experience of impact assessment and the European Union, the article first builds expectations about the diffusion of the images across countries, and then proceeds to measurement by using both objective and interpretative/subjective indicators. The findings seem to support the public management reform image – a conclusion that suggests further specifications about administrative traditions and change. Sweden and Denmark are not using impact assessment to foster instrumental rationality or increase the political control of bureaucracies and, together with the Netherlands, rank high on the symbolic action scale. The United States – and to a lesser extent Canada and the United Kingdom – have a multi-purpose approach to impact assessment. The case of the European Union defies prior expectations, showing much more usage than anticipated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In their attempt to promote “better regulation,” governments have ended up with increasing regulation of rule-making. Regulatory impact assessment (RIA) is a manifestation of this trend. This article draws on the positive political economy hypothesis that RIA is an administrative control device. Rational politicians—positive political economy argues—design administrative requirements to solve problems of political uncertainty. This is a rather abstract hypothesis but with clearly observable implications. Empirical analysis on Canada, Denmark, the Netherlands, Sweden, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the EU shows that the modes and level of control vary, with almost no evidence supporting the positive political economy hypothesis in Denmark and Sweden and more robust evidence in the other cases, especially the United States and the United Kingdom. The EU scores high, but control has both a political component and an infra-organizational dimension. In between the extremes I find modest levels of political control in Canada and the Netherlands. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An important proposition in public policy analysis is that the design and selection of policy instruments is a manifestation of power relations; in other words, 'politics determines instruments'. However, except where it degenerates into tick-the-box routines, instrumentation can also generate its own political effects at the implementation stage - the 'instruments determine politics' argument. Examining the impact assessment (IA) element of the EU's Better Regulation agenda of the European Union, this article argues that procedures and meta-instruments are chosen by policy-makers when there is disagreement on fundamental issues of power. Policy-makers activate meta-instruments that do not address fundamental issues directly, but change procedures of policy formulation. In so doing, however, they create a new structure of opportunity, which produces its own effects on politics. Our findings point to unintended effects of IA, such as administrative coordination and organisational learning, as well as strengthening of the Commission Secretariat General. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article provides some reflective thoughts on current research on regulatory impact assessment (RIA) in Europe. The narrative draws on the author's fieldwork diaries. It starts from the methodological problems of identifying and analysing regulatory impact assessment in the UK, Denmark, the Netherlands and Sweden. This leads to more fundamental theoretical questions about research design, the relationship between supply and demand of research and, ultimately, the aims of academic research in this area. The conclusions draw lessons for the emerging research agenda on better regulation. The main problem is not whether 'real' RIAs exist or not, since this would be equivalent to trying to fit the amoeba-like RIA 'substance' into our abstract 'forms'. The interesting problems are: what are the functions of different approaches to assessment, how are they used and how can they improve governance? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An introduction is presented in which the editor discusses various reports within the issue on topics including an analysis of competition policy and regional aid in the European Union, Europeanization program implementation, and new modes of governance in the European Union.

Can a learning-based mode of governance, specifically the Open Method of Coordination (OMC), facilitate Europeanization? The argument is that, in policy areas where the Treaty base for European Union policy is thin or non-existent or where diverging political views hinder the development of law, modes of governance based on Council's guidelines, the co-ordination of national action plans, peer review of reforms, systematic benchmarking, performance indicators, and governance processes open to the regional-local level and the civil society produce convergence towards the EU goals and ultimately Europeanization without the need to create new EU legislation. By comparing evidence from the most mature OMC processes, this article finds that the relationship between learning, policy change, and Europeanization can break down at several points, and that evidence of learning is limited. This is due to deficiencies in the design of the OMC, the lack of participation, and the political/institutional complexities of learning in the EU context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Drawing on the conceptual framework of Europeanisation, we trace the influence of the European Union (EU) on Italian politics by combining top-down analysis (that is, how Italy has adapted to pressure coming from Brussels) with a bottom-up examination of how Italian policy makers have encountered the EU in their attempts to pursue domestic policy goals. We find that the foreign policy orientation and policy preferences of the governing coalition determine the posture, style and choice of institutional venues. Taken together, bottom-up and top-down assessments of Europeanisation suggest that, during the second Berlusconi government, the influence of the EU in Italian politics was limited - although not trivial. When the Berlusconi government (2001-06) faced high pressure, it tried to reduce it at source rather than adapting to EU policies. By contrast, the centre-left governments (1996-2001) used pressure as a lever for policy change, while the governments of the 1980s responded to pressure by delaying implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents the main results of a research project on regulatory impact analysis (RIA) in comparative perspective. Its main theoretical thrust is to explore the limitations of the conventional analysis of RIA in terms of de-contextualised best practice and provide an alternative framework based on the lesson-drawing literature. After having discussed how demand and supply of best practice emerge in the OECD and the European Union, some analytic (as opposed to normative) lessons are presented. The main lessons revolve around the politics of problem definition, the nesting of RIA into wider reform programmes, the political malleability of RIA, the trade-off between precision and administrative assimilation, the roles of networks and watchdogs, and institutional learning. The conclusions discuss the implications of the findings for future research. [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.

This article examines public policy in the European Union (EU) by drawing upon the framework of policy transfer, which has been recently refined by comparativists, and the concept of isomorphism developed within organizational theory. Three case studies--namely, the single currency, tax policy and media ownership policy--are discussed and compared with the aim of assessing the potential of isomorphism for the analysis of policy diffusion. The author argues that European institutions, which have a serious limitation in terms of legitimacy, stimulate policy transfer by catalyzing isomorphic processes. Policy transfer, however, is constrained when there are no national cases to be imitated. Yet European institutions, most notably the European Commission, can overcome the problem by "inseminating" solutions into national political systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Examines international tax policy coordination and the transfer pricing problem. Overview of the transfer pricing problem; International tax policy in the prisoner's dilemma syndrome; Modeling of transfer pricing policy as a coordination game; Facilitation of the emergence of international policy coordination by institutional entrepreneurs.

The role of expertise in European public policy has become the object of a passionate debate. On the one hand, it has been argued that knowledge, in various guises, can foster learning, enlightenment, problem-solving attitudes, and policy change. On the other, the public policy of the European Union (EU) is in the firing line because of its technocratic bias. However, what is meant by technocracy in the case of the EU? How can political scientists be fascinated by the positive input of knowledge, and, at the same time, horrified by technocratic policy-making? The aim of this article is to tackle this puzzle by suggesting a conceptual framework. Concepts such as technocracy, epistemic communities, and bureaucratic politics refer to different modes of the politics of expertise. Empirically, they should be contrasted with the logic of politicization. Case studies discussed in this article suggest that the power of expertise is being counterbalanced by politicization. The conclusion is that the main challenge is neither to preserve an unattainable depoliticized Union nor to assume that politicization will tame technocracy, but to make expertise more accountable in an increasingly politicized environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Evaluates whether corporate tax policies in Italy and the United Kingdom have been changed by the emergence of an embryonic tax regime at the European Union level. Effects of the Europeanization of domestic policy; Illustration of differences between integration and domestic policy change; Effect of Europeanization neglect in Italy; Impact of Europeanization of policy change in United Kingdom.

We draw on the Institutional Grammar Tool's rule types to empirically analyze the design of four major procedural regulatory instruments in the 27 member states of the European Union and the UK. They are: consultation, regulatory impact assessment, freedom of information, and the Ombudsman. By adopting the Institutional Grammar Tool as conceptual lens we end up with a single measurement template applicable to a variety of action situations. We derive measures that are conceptually robust and suitable for comparative analysis. With original data gathered on the official legal base in the 28 cases, we carry out principal components analysis. We identify design patterns across countries and instruments; the specialization of each instrument in terms of rule type; and the components that best explain cross‐country variation. In the conclusions we argue that to reframe the design features of the four instruments in conceptual, theoretical categories is not simply a taxonomical exercise but it extends to the territory of comparative policy analysis, practice and reform. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Consultation is a policy instrument geared toward stakeholder engagement in the formulation of primary and secondary legislation. It ensures certain categories of actors can access draft proposals, examine the evidence produced by government or regulators, provide comments and receive feedback. Using an original dataset of consultation design across the EU-28, we examine how variations in combinations of consultation design matter for perceptions of corruption. Using Ostrom's Institutional Grammar Tool (IGT), we develop expectations about the causal effects of combinations of formal consultation rules together with the condition of social capital, which captures important attributes of the context in which consultation operates. We test our expectations using set-theoretic techniques. Our findings indicate: formal consultation rules are rarely sufficient for mitigating perceptions of corruption, legally prescribed procedures are often replaced by informal rules, and the limited effect of formal consultation rules on perceptions of corruption is due to an incomplete design of the procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author reflects on better regulation themes formed by non-governmental organizations for European Union (EU) policymaking. Topics discussed include political tone and responsibility being basis of regulation, political tone being consequence of the political context surrounding regulatory policy of the EU, need of EU to change for gaining citizens' and markets' confidence, and amendments in regulation by European Parliament (EP).

It seems paradoxical to suggest that theories of learning might be used to explain policy failure. Yet the Brexit fiasco connects with recent approaches linking varieties of policy learning to policy pathologies. This article sets out to explain the UK government's (mis)management of the Brexit process from June 2016 to May 2019 from a policy learning perspective. Drawing on interviews with UK policy-makers and stakeholders, we ask how did the UK government seek to learn during the Brexit negotiations? We consider four modes of learning: reflexivity, epistemic, hierarchical, and bargaining. By empirically tracing the policy process and scope conditions for each of these, we argue that learning through the first three modes proved highly dysfunctional. This forced the government to rely on bargaining between competing factions, producing a highly political form of learning which stymied the development of a coherent Brexit strategy. We argue that the analysis of Brexit as a policy process – rather than a political event – reveals how policy dynamics play an important role in shaping the political context within which they are located. The article concludes that public policy analysis can, therefore, add significant value to our understanding of Brexit by endogenising accounts of macro political developments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers the author's insights on regulatory reform. The author mentions research trajectory and agenda in the field of political scientists including Alessia Damonte, Claire A. Dunlop, and Claudio M. Radaelli and highlights their impact on social sciences. The author discusses the learning theory and models of the scientists in public policy analysis which connects with regulatory culture and humility.

The political control of the bureaucracy is a major theme in public administration scholarship, particularly in delegation theory. There is a wide range of policy instruments suitable for the purpose of control. In practice, however, there are economic and political limitations to deploying the full arsenal of control tools. We explore the implications of the costs of control by examining cross-country patterns of fire alarms. We identify and categorize a set of control instruments and their rationale using accountability typologies. We then code the presence or absence of different instruments by drawing on an original dataset of 14 instruments in a population of 17 European countries. Using configurational analysis, we analyse cross-country patterns. In the conclusions, we reflect on the patterns identified, their implications for controlling bureaucracy in advanced democracies and the literature on administrative traditions. We finally propose how our empirical findings may be extended to further explanatory analyses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]