A statement from Policy & Politics to our community

As colleagues around the world adjust to the personal and professional challenges of COVID-19, the editorial team of Policy & Politics would like to assure all of our readers and contributors that we are committed to ensuring that the journal will continue to be inclusive and accessible for all members of our academic community.  

We will still endeavour to handle papers in a timely manner and in accordance with our editorial review process.  For early career academics especially, the opportunity to publish is a core concern.

However, we also recognise that for many colleagues, deadlines for peer reviewing, revisions and re-submissions may become difficult.  We know that people’s experiences will vary.  Whilst some may find themselves with more time to read and write articles, a great many others will have additional caring responsibilities or may be unwell themselves.

If this is the case, please do let us know so that we can amend deadlines accordingly.  Our intention is to afford all members of our academic community the opportunity to engage with the journal, and we do not wish to create any unnecessary barriers at such an extraordinary and challenging time.

Policy & Politics Editorial Team

Policy & Politics Co-Editors: Sarah Ayres, Steve Martin & Felicity Matthews, Senior Journals Manager, Sarah Brown 

p&p editors Sarah Brown

Claiming and Assigning Credit for Fulfilled Policy Promises – Why Policymakers Fight an Uphill Battle

KonigPascal D. König & Markus B. Siewert

A key promise of representative democracy is that the government strives to generate public policy outputs which are responsive to the preferences of (a majority of) the people. If it delivers on its policy promises, a government can expect to gain or maintain support in the electorate, but if it fails to do so, it is likely to be sanctioned at the next election. This amounts to a central – albeit perhaps somewhat romanticising – rationale behind political competition driving policymakers to do their job.  Continue reading

Efficiency and legitimacy in inter-local agreements: why collaboration has become a default choice among councils

LSERuth Dixon and Thomas Elston

Over 97 per cent of English local authorities cooperate with one another, providing common public services across separate council areas. Ruth Dixon and Thomas Elston consider how and why this occurs. In a follow-up to their previous post, they find that propensity to collaborate is unpredictable, but partner choice can be partly explained by geographical proximity of councils and similarities in organizational and resource characteristics. Contrary to the view that collaboration is a wholly ‘rational’ strategy chosen simply to improve service costs or quality, therefore, this analysis suggests that both efficiency and legitimacy influenced reform choices. Continue reading