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.
Collaborative innovation is gaining recognition as a critical strategy for public organisations, especially when addressing complex “wicked” problems. These challenges demand fresh thinking, and collaboration—particularly in diverse teams—can make all the difference. By bringing together varied perspectives, policymakers can unlock creative solutions that might not emerge in isolated decision-making. Working collaboratively not only expands the range of options but also makes thinking “outside the box” more productive and impactful.
Despite its promise, the concept of “collaborative innovation” is still mostly grounded in theory. Empirical studies are limited, and when they do exist, they often rely on case studies that lump all forms of collaboration together. This approach overlooks the nuances of different collaborative arrangements and makes it difficult to understand how specific types of collaboration contribute to innovation. Some research hints at distinctions among setups, linking them to innovation in theory, but no one has systematically compared their actual impact.
This is where our study steps in. For policymakers to truly harness the potential of collaboration, they need clear evidence about which actors to involve and how. In our recent article published in Policy & Politics entitled “Fostering innovation through collaboration: A comparison of collaborative approaches to policy design”— we examine the innovative potential of different collaborative arrangements. As expected, we find that collaboration—whether within government or with non-public actors—is a game-changer. But there’s a catch: not all contributors bring equal value to the table. Some actors possess greater capacity to innovate than others.
This is an introduction to the Open Access journal article – “The ‘Scottish approach’ to policy and policymaking: what issues are territorial and what are universal?” by Paul Cairney, Siabhainn Russell, and Emily St Denny, in Policy and Politics.
The ‘Scottish approach’ refers to the Scottish Government’s reputation for pursuing a consultative and cooperative style when it makes and implements policy in devolved areas (including health, education, local government and justice). It works with voluntary groups, unions, professional bodies, the private sector and local and health authorities to gather information and foster support for its policy aims. This approach extends to policy delivery, with the Scottish Government willing to produce a broad national strategy and series of priorities – underpinned by the ‘National Performance Framework’ – and trust bodies such as local authorities to meet its aims. In turn, local authorities work with a wide range of bodies in the public, voluntary and private sector – in ‘Community Planning Partnerships’ – to produce shared aims relevant to their local areas. ‘Single Outcome Agreements’ mark a symbolic shift away from ‘topdown’ implementation, in which local authorities and other bodies are punished if they do not meet short-term targets, towards the production of longer-term shared aims and cooperation. Continue reading →
Policy & Politics Journal Blog 