by Christopher K. Ansell, Kevin Orr and Philipp Trein
In their recent article, Between win–win and the manufacturing of consent: collaborative governance as a lightning rod in cannabis policy, authors Christopher Ansell, Kevin Orr and Philipp Trein explore how power operates in collaborative governance processes by analysing the case of cannabis policy in the San Francisco Bay Area. Drawing on interviews, field observations and document analysis, the authors examine how collaborative arenas shaped policy implementation following California’s legalisation of recreational cannabis in 2018. They argue that, while collaboration was formally inclusive and participatory, the dynamics of power often led not to a balanced, negotiated consensus, but to the emergence of a dominant agenda advanced by activist policy entrepreneurs.
In her recent article, How do populist discourses influence policy termination?, author Vandna Bhatia explores the relationship between populist political discourse and policy termination. Through a lens of ideational politics, the article offers a rare and timely contribution to the underdeveloped field of policy termination. Drawing on two high-profile cases from Ontario, Canada—the termination of the province’s carbon cap-and-trade programme and the repeal of its sexual health education curriculum—Bhatia shows how populist leaders use discourse to construct compelling narratives, mobilise coalitions, and legitimise disruptive strategies for dismantling existing policies.
In a recent article published in Policy & Politics, entitled A systematic review of conflict within collaborative governance, authors Jacob Torfing, Reza Payandeh, Seyed Mostafa Jalili and Masoud Banafi provide a comprehensive overview of how conflict emerges and is managed within collaborative governance processes. Their systematic review draws on 62 peer-reviewed studies with the aim of identifying where, when, and how disagreements surface in collaborative governance initiatives—and what strategies are employed to deal with them.
As you plan reading lists for the coming academic year, this collection of recent articles offers fresh insights for units on emotions in public policy, the politics of environmental policy, and governance networks. Each article draws on cutting-edge empirical research combined with conceptual innovation, making them ideal for both undergraduate and postgraduate modules exploring the politics of policymaking.
We hope these suggestions save you time and effort in mining recent articles while ensuring your course materials reflect the latest research from the frontiers of the discipline.
In a recent article published in Policy & Politics, author Katharina T. Paul argues for a shift in how we analyse public health controversies by introducing a new methodology—policy valuography—that explores how different social actors assign value to vaccination. The article, entitled Towards a new policy analytical methodology in the study of vaccination governance, moves beyond familiar binary framings of vaccine hesitancy and proposes a deeper investigation of the “valuation practices” that shape vaccination governance.
In a recent article published in Policy & Politics, Martin B. Carstensen and Eva Sørensen explore how collaborative governance can be understood as a series of fluid, adaptive interactions—rather than as a stable, coherent and linear process. Drawing on bricolage theory and theories of robust governance, they propose a new way of thinking about how partnerships form, evolve, and sustain themselves in dynamic, unpredictable settings.
by Sam Warner, David Richards, Diane Coyle and Martin J. Smith
In our recent article published in Policy & Politics, we examine how centralised financial control and short-term political pressures have undermined the performance of the Prison Service in England and Wales. As successive governments grapple with the problem of overcrowded, poorly performing prisons, the effectiveness of prison governance and resource management is a live issue with significant political and policy implications. Drawing on extensive interviews and documentary analysis, our article highlights how governance structures intended to deliver efficiency have instead constrained local autonomy and eroded service outcomes.
A paradox of New Public Management
Despite New Public Management’s (NPM) long made promises of greater efficiency through devolved managerial discretion, we argue that, in practice, the UK’s central government frequently reasserts input controls—particularly through the Treasury’s dominance of budgeting frameworks. Existing literature explores this paradox through elite incentives structures, but we focus on the implications for public financial management beyond the centre. We argue that this paradox creates tensions for public managers who are held accountable for delivering outputs and outcomes but lack the financial flexibility to do so effectively.
Case study evidence from the Prison Service
Using the Prison Service as a detailed case study, the article shows how governance arrangements evolved from the 1990s onward. While initial reforms introduced managerial autonomy, a shift toward hyper-centralised control—especially post-2010—saw the Treasury and the Ministry of Justice exert increasing influence over financial management and other operational and commercial practices. As a result, prison governors are left with reduced authority in key areas of decision-making. Their job is made harder, and resource allocation is less efficient, as a result.
Short-termism and degraded outcomes
Our article illustrates how a focus on short-term fiscal targets led to cost-cutting measures that undermined service quality. This included staffing reductions, deteriorating prison conditions, and rising incidents of violence and self-harm. Interviewees repeatedly emphasised that innovation and local responsiveness were being crowded out by rigid, top-down control. We argue that these dynamics not only degrade service performance but also represent a long-term false economy.
A call for more strategic governance
Our article points to the importance of rebalancing the system—restoring autonomy at agency and local levels and embedding longer-term thinking into resource allocation and financial management. The UK’s current approach to performance budgeting continues to prioritise centralised control over outcomes. Addressing this imbalance is vital if public services are to meet complex, long-term challenges effectively.
The authors would like to thank the Nuffield Foundation for funding this research.
…
You can read the original research in Policy & Politics at
Warner, S., Richards, D., Coyle, D., and Smith, M. J. (2024). The inefficiency of centralised control and political short-termism: the case of the Prison Service in England and Wales. Policy & Politics (published online ahead of print 2024), available from: < https://doi.org/10.1332/03055736Y2024D000000053>
If you enjoyed this blog post, you may also be interested in reading
Wenzelburger, G. (2025). Policy windows and criminal justice reforms: a Multiple Streams Framework analysis. Policy & Politics 53, 2, 296-314, available from: < https://doi.org/10.1332/03055736Y2024D000000060>
Sloam, J., and Henn, M. (2025). How young people can shape environmental policy in urban spaces. Policy & Politics 53, 1, 65-86, available from: < https://doi.org/10.1332/03055736Y2024D000000039>
Bianchi, I. (2025). The democratising capacity of new municipalism: beyond direct democracy in public–common partnerships. Policy & Politics 53, 2, 403-422, available from: < https://doi.org/10.1332/03055736Y2024D000000033>
Asticher, L. (2025). How institutional legacies constrain reform during a favourable policy window: COVID-19 and the healthcare workforce shortage. Policy & Politics (published online ahead of print 2025), available from: < https://doi.org/10.1332/03055736Y2025D000000067>
In a recent article published in Policy & Politics, Georg Wenzelburger explores how a landmark criminal justice reform in Virginia during the 1990s combined apparently contradictory approaches to sentencing—and why that matters today.
The reform in question abolished parole and sharply increased sentences for violent offenders—hallmarks of a “tough on crime” agenda. But, surprisingly, it also introduced data-driven risk assessments to help divert non-violent offenders away from prison. This mix of punitive and preventative measures was unusual for the time and has since played a key role in the rise of more measured, evidence-informed criminal justice reforms in the United States.
COVID-19 opened the door to major healthcare reform—but old systems and social norms still held much of the power.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare systems around the world were pushed to the limit. In Switzerland, this sparked strong public support for nursing staff and even led to a popular vote backing major improvements to nursing care. With political will, public awareness, and a clear workforce crisis, it looked like the perfect moment for real change. But did that happen?
In a recent article published in Policy & Politics, Lisa Asticher investigates how institutional legacies—particularly those tied to economic liberalisation and gender inequality—shaped the reforms that followed. The findings are both fascinating and sobering.
New research highlights the subtle but persistent role of stigma in shaping public support for welfare benefits.
Public support for welfare benefits often hinges on perceptions of who is “deserving.” Are recipients viewed as victims of circumstance—or as somehow responsible for their own misfortune? A new Policy & Politics article by Kaila Witkowski and Stephen R. Neely asks how HIV stigma may influence these judgements, with important implications for social policy.
Policy & Politics Journal Blog 