by Johan Christensen, Stine Hesstvedt, Kira Pronin, Cathrine Holst, Peter Munk Christiansen and Anne Maria Holli
In a recent article published in Policy & Politics, Experts in governance: a comparative analysis of the Nordic countries, Johan Christensen, Stine Hesstvedt, Kira Pronin, Cathrine Holst, Peter Munk Christiansen and Anne Maria Holli examine how expert knowledge is channelled into policy making in the Nordic region. They focus on government-appointed advisory commissions as a key institutional pathway for incorporating expertise and explore how the role of academic experts on these commissions has changed over time.
Policy actors often clash during policy processes, especially in contentious areas like climate change, gun control, and healthcare reform. These actors—including government agencies, private companies, and interest groups—frequently vie for influence, and political rivalries can lead to gridlock or policy failure. Understanding the drivers of these conflicts and how to manage them is crucial in order to propose strategies that can mitigate their effects, and enhance network coordination.
In our recent article published in Policy & Politics, we explore the causes of political competition and propose strategies for reducing it, using the case of local fracking policy processes in New York as an example. The fracking debate involves a wide range of actors, such as landowners, media organisations, oil and gas associations, environmental groups, city agencies, local governments, and legal organisations—all competing over whether fracking should be permitted in the state. But what drives these actors to clash so intensely? We explore the underlying reasons for these clashes, investigating whether competition arises from shared struggles for scarce resources, similar structural positions in resource-sharing relationships, differing policy beliefs or all three.
by Eric Montpetit, Antoine Claude Lemor, Maria Alejandra Costa, and Louis-Robert Beaulieu-Guay
Some might say that people can grow accustomed to almost anything—even the worst crises. Indeed, human beings learn to cope with disruptions that initially provoke serious fears, but over time become a “new normal.” This capacity to adapt can be so strong that it undermines the influence of expert knowledge guiding decisions in times of crisis. That is precisely what we observed in Quebec (Canada) during the COVID-19 pandemic, as discussed in our recent article published in Policy & Politics.
Experts often believe that raising alarms about an impending catastrophe is an effective way to heighten awareness among both the public and policymakers regarding the risks of inaction. While fear-based strategies can yield results early in a crisis, they may become counterproductive later on.
In March 2020, many epidemiologists warned decision-makers that, without the swift implementation of strict lockdown measures, COVID-19 would spread exponentially—leading to a horrific number of casualties. In several countries, immediate lockdowns followed, with little consideration for the associated economic costs or unprecedented restrictions on individual freedoms. By highlighting the gravity of the threat, epidemiologists initially exerted considerable influence on both the public and policymakers.
All articles featured in this blog post are free to access until 31 October 2024
It’s that time of year again when course syllabi are updated with fresh research. We hope to make this easier with the essential reading list below, which features some of the most significant research relevant to public policy students that we’ve published over the last year. We feature nine articles and a special issue for teaching topical themes such as health policy, policy learning and advocacy. All articles are ideal for Public Policy, Politics and Social Policy classes alike.
As always, we welcome your feedback on the articles featured, as well as future unit topics you’d like to see covered! Let us know what you’re teaching and how we can help!
Our first theme focuses on a substantive policy area that is increasingly taught in public and social policy courses, especially in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and on-going climate crisis: health policy.
Our first article, “Analysing the ‘follow the science’ rhetoric of government responses to COVID-19” by Margaret Macaulay and colleagues, has been one of the most widely read and cited articles of last year and was the winner of our Best Paper prize for 2023. This is not surprising, as it advances bold and well evidenced claims on a hot topic in public health governance. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic – and in the face of widespread anxiety and uncertainty – governments’ mantra that they were “just following the science” was meant to reassure the public that decisions about pandemic responses were being directed by the best available scientific evidence. However, the authors claim that making policy decisions based only on scientific evidence is impossible (if only because ‘the science’ is always contested) and undemocratic (because governments are elected to balance a range of priorities and interests in their decisions). Claiming to be “just following the science” therefore represents an abdication of responsibility by politicians.
Our second featured article, entitled What types of evidence persuade actors in a complex policy system? by Geoff Bates and colleagues, explores the use of evidence to influence different groups across the urban development system to think more about health outcomes in their decisions. Their three key findings are: (i) evidence-based narratives have wide appeal; (ii) credibility of evidence is critical; and (iii) many stakeholders have priorities other than health, such as economic considerations. The authors conclude that these insights can be used to frame and present evidence that meets the requirements of different urban development stakeholders and persuade them to think more about how the quality of urban environments affects health outcomes.
Oscar Berglund, Claire Dunlop, Elizabeth Koebele, Chris Weible and Sarah Brown
Thank you to all our authors, reviewers, board members, readers and friends of Policy & Politics for another successful year in 2022.
We are delighted to be ending the year on the high note of maintaining our top quartile ranking in Political Science with an impact factor of 3.297, thanks to the huge support of our loyal community. Congratulations to you all!
In the meantime, to celebrate all we have achieved together this year, we have made our top 10 most highly cited articles published in 2022 free to access until 31 January 2023, please see below for the full collection.
Politicians in Great Britain are severely constrained when it comes to influencing the energy system. This is largely because decision making has been delegated – away from elected representatives to technical experts, and, specifically in the case of energy markets, to the regulator, Ofgem (the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets). Although legislation can attempt to shape Ofgem’s work, the impact of attempts to do so have been mixed at best. Continue reading →
Special issue blog series on Transformational Change through Public Policy.
Dr. Meghan Joy & Dr. Ronald K. Vogel
Cities today are facing multiple intersecting policy problems, constituting an urban crisis. These include, but are not limited to, growing poverty and inequality; social polarisation and violence; decaying infrastructure and public transit; climate change emergencies; unaffordable housing and homelessness; and the devastating impacts of COVID-19. In this context, the critical role of cities in solving pressing problems has garnered media attention, academic, and popular enthusiasm. This is the topic we explored in our article just published A future research agenda for transformational urban policy studies in the new Policy & Politics special issue on Transformational Change in Public Policy. Continue reading →
Special issue blog series on Transformational Change through Public Policy.
Guest edited by co-editors Oscar Berglund, Claire Dunlop, Elizabeth Koebele and Chris Weible
The 2020s are turbulent times, from COVID-19 to cost-of-living crises, violent and institutionalised racism, attacks on women’s and LGBTQ+ rights, and beyond – all against the backdrop of rapid climate change. Meanwhile, symbolic action and agenda denial are widespread responses whilst polarisation and authoritarianism increase. The impetus for this Policy & Politics 2022 special issue on “Transformational Change through Public Policy” (see below for table of contents) comes from a sense of unease about the lack of action on these challenges and the role public policy studies may play in addressing them. Continue reading →
In our recent article in Policy & Politics, we explore debates about “digital contact tracing apps” in Norway and Austria, i.e. apps developed to help manage the COVID-19 pandemic. We followed what we dubbed a ‘technology-centred comparison’: following the development of these apps throughout each stage as they were designed, launched, assessed, contested, stabilised, and redesigned. At each of these stages, we explored which actors shaped these developments and how. Continue reading →
Portrait von Mag. Dr. Anna Pospech Durnova in Wien, Okotber 2021 Copyright: Eugenie Sophie
Anna Durnová
Retrieving meanings from texts is not just about reading or counting words; texts are more than words put on a paper or a screen. These two phrases have repeatedly accompanied my responses to a mainstream audience at academic meetings when explaining how interpretive approaches work. The interpretive tradition is significant, going substantially beyond political science and public policy, and encompassing many concepts and tools to retrieve meanings from texts. As structured traces of meanings (both audiovisual and textual), texts reflect the world around us and shape our view and thus can tell us how we look at this world. Continue reading →