Learning from Abroad: The Role of Policy Transfer in Contemporary Policy-Making

In recent years there has been a growing body of literature within political science and international studies that directly and indirectly uses, discusses and analyzes the processes involved in lesson-drawing, policy convergence, policy diffusion and policy transfer. While the terminology and focus often vary, all of these studies are concerned with a similar process in which knowledge about policies, administrative arrangements, institutions and ideas in one political setting (past or present) is used in the development of policies, administrative arrangements, institutions and ideas in another political setting.
Given that this is a growing phenomenon, it is something that anyone studying public policy needs to consider. As such, this article is divided into four major sections. The first section briefly considers the extent of, and reasons for, the growth of policy transfer. The second section then outlines a framework for the analysis of transfer. From here a third section presents a continuum for distinguishing between different types of policy transfer. Finally, the last section addresses the relationship between policy transfer and policy "failure."     

Dilemmas of Policy Innovation in the Public Sector: A Case Study of the National Innovation Summit

Policy innovation is a significant challenge for the public sector. This article illustrates its magnitude through a case study of the National Innovation Summit. The article concludes that the Summit represented an elaborate process of search and engagement that sanctioned an outcome that was, in most respects, largely pre‐determined. Its outreach and deliberations served the political purpose of mobilising industry and media attention and communicating the government's commitment. But there is no evidence that it exercised any substantive influence on policy development. The obstacles confounding any other outcome are considerable. Strategic thinking is inhibited by various organisational factors including lock‐in to a present successful strategy, the constraints on policy choices associated with multiple veto points and the need to maintain medium term fiscal and policy discipline across a wide range of agencies and claimants. The article explores ways these inhibitions might be overcome.     

Causes of Action: First Findings of the LSRC Periodic Survey

In this paper we report some of the first findings of the LSRC periodic survey of justiciable problems. We confirm the prevalence of justiciable problems amongst the general population. We identify important differences in the experiences of discrete socio–demographic populations, not only in terms of the number of problems faced, but also in terms of the perception of problems and reactions to them. We show that cost is not the principal barrier to taking action or obtaining advice across most problem categories. Other concerns, such as fear or uncertainty as to what can be done are generally more prevalent. We illustrate the range of strategies employed by those who take action, and confirm the rarity of court action. Finally we show that the basic form of Felstiner, Abel, and Sarat's aetiology of lawsuits is recognizable within our findings, although we explain that the manner and form of progression through the various stages is complex and irregular.     

Individual learning and building organisational capacity for development

Building capacities and capabilities for international development is an ongoing subject for debate, further fuelled by recent interest in learning and knowledge. This article focuses on how, and the extent to which, individual learners in education and training programmes for development policy and management interact with their organisations to build capacities and capabilities. It demonstrates some of the ways that individual learning and organisational capacity are linked by examining case studies from Uganda, Zimbabwe and South Africa. The article reflects on the complex nature of this interaction and on the broader challenges of linking learning to development. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

FREDERICK GOULBURN: THE MAN AND HIS OFFICE

Major Frederick Goulburn's appointment in 1820 as Colonial Secretary and Registrar of the Records of New South Wales was something more than the appointment of just another colonial official. It was also a recognition by the home government, as had been the appointment of a Commissioner of Inquiry the previous year, of the changing character of the colony. Though still predominantly a penal colony, it was no longer that alone but was developing also into a colony of free British settlement with economic potential. "Considering the Importance which the Colony has attained from its rapid Increase in Wealth and Population", wrote Lord Bathurst, Secretary of State for War and Colonies, "His Majesty has thought it adviseable to take this opportunity of placing these officers [Colonial Secretary and Provost Marshall] on the Footing on which they stand in other Foreign Possessions of the Crown"; their Commissions were to be prepared for the King's signature in the usual form.     

There's Regulatory Crime, and then there's Landlord Crime: from 'Rachmanites' to 'Partners'

This article considers local authority strategies towards the regulation and prosecution of private landlords who commit the criminal offences of unlawful eviction and harassment. Generally, local authorities operate compliance-based strategies, rarely (if ever) resorting to prosecution. In seeking to explain this approach, the article draws upon the literature concerning regulatory crime, but also distinguishes local authority responses to landlord crime from regulatory crime as more typically conceived. Broadly, it is argued that, while there are clear parallels with other areas of regulatory activity, there is much that is different about landlord crime, particularly as a result of central government strategies towards the private rented sector, the legislative background to landlord crime, and the motivations behind local approaches to regulation.     

What does cost-benefit analysis add to decision making? Evidence from the criminal justice literature

This paper asks whether undertaking a cost-benefit analysis provides additional information to policy makers as compared to an analysis solely of the effect of an intervention. A literature review identified 106 evaluations of criminal justice interventions that reported both an effect size and measures of net benefit. Data on net benefit and effect size were extracted from these studies. We found that effect size is only weakly related to net benefits. The rank order of net benefits and effect size are minimally correlated. Furthermore, we found that the two analytic methods would yield opposing policy recommendations for more than one in four interventions. These bi-variate findings are supported by the results of multivariate models. However, further research is needed to verify the accuracy of the standard errors on net benefit estimates, so these models must be interpreted with caution.