In a recent article published in Policy & Politics, authors Andrea Migone and Michael Howlett offer a compelling new framework for understanding the quality of policy advisory systems. Their framework draws on Albert Hirschman’s Exit, Voice, and Loyalty (EVL) model, which suggests three ways individuals respond to perceived decline or dissatisfaction within an organisation/relationship: (i) exit by withdrawing from the situation, (ii) voice by expressing concerns and seeking improvement, and (iii) loyalty by remaining in the situation and hoping for improvement. Building on this model, the authors propose a more dynamic approach to assessing how advisory systems function — and why some produce better advice than others.
Special issue blog series on Policy Expertise in Times of Crisis
Marleen Easton, Jennifer Yarnold, Valerie Vervaenen, Jasper De Paepe & Brian Head
Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the critical role of expert advice in shaping policy responses globally. Beyond health implications, these measures significantly impacted education, economy, law, and various societal aspects. Understanding how expertise was harnessed and adapted during the crisis provides valuable insights for improving policy advisory systems to effectively respond to future challenges. Our research study, just published in Policy & Politics delves into the dynamics of COVID-19 policy advisory systems in Belgium and Australia, drawing on interviews with 34 experts involved during the initial two years of the crisis.
Policy Advisory Systems in Action: In both Belgium and Australia, intergovernmental forums played a key role in aligning national and regional interests within policy advisory systems advising on responses to COVID-19. While Belgium experienced more rapid changes and adjustments in expert advisers, Australia maintained a relatively stable system with occasional additions of non-health sub-groups. The diversity of expert opinions was more pronounced in Belgium, on contrast with Australia where experts tended to be more cautious in expressing critical perspectives publicly.
Policy Learning and Expert Advice: As the pandemic unfolded, policy learning evolved, necessarily drawing on a broader range of expertise beyond the initial health-centric focus. Institutional contexts shaped the provision of expert advice, influencing the actions of policy advisors and decision-makers. Our study sheds light on the evolving priorities within advisory bodies, the relationships between different types of experts and policymakers, and the challenges of communicating scientific knowledge amid uncertainty and stress.
Special issue blog series on Policy Expertise in Times of Crisis.
Peter Aagaard,Marleen Easton, and Brian Head
We are living in turbulent times. Governments have been confronted by multiple interacting crises, like the COVID-19 pandemic, global warming, and economic instability. All over the world, governments face challenges beyond their control, ranging from financial and political disruptions to pandemics, climate change, natural disasters, and threats to national security. These crisis situations are compounded by inevitable gaps in knowledge and uncertainties. This calls for policy advisors. Policy advisors do not just seek to maximise the efficiency of governance during crises. Policy advising also has implications for democratic accountability and legitimacy.
Our article, just published, forms the introduction to a special issue on policy advising during crises. We collect, connect, and provide an overview of the literature in the field, and seek to build on this knowledge, offering new insights.
by Andrew Connell, James Downe, Hannah Durrant, Eleanor MacKillop and Steve Martin
The study of Policy Advisory Systems sheds light on the wider network of actors, beyond government, who are involved in generating evidence that informs policy. Early studies of Policy Advisory Systems focused on national governments in Anglophone countries. More recently the concept has been reinvigorated by research in European countries and the global South. But there is a dearth of studies of Policy Advisory Systems at sub-national level.
Our study revealed significant differences in the ways that this initiative to externalise policy advice in Wales has played out compared to the results reported by previous studies of externalising policy advice in other settings. And we trace the differences we observed to three key features of the historical, institutional and political context in which the Welsh Government operates.
Across the world over the last thirty years, the provision of policy advice to governments has been transformed as a diverse range of actors have been increasingly engaged in the policy-making process. Academic research needs to better understand the changes that have taken place by considering the shape of the new advisory systems, and the influence of different types of policy advice. In my latest research article in Policy & Politics, I seek to address this gap in understanding. The scholars Jonathan Craft and John Halligan developed the concept of a ‘policy advisory system’ to explain how policy advice is formulated by ‘interlocking actors’ beyond the formal bureaucracy of government. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) define policy advisory systems as the autonomous organisations – advisory bodies, think-tanks, policy labs, ‘what works’ centres, political advisers, committees of inquiry – that sustain government’s requirement for knowledge and expertise. Their growth has been observed particularly in the Anglophone countries – New Zealand, Australia, Canada, and the UK. Continue reading →
Patrick Diamond
Policy & Politics Journal Blog 