Essay Sample on Transfer of Policies

Introduction

Policy transfer is the borrowing of lessons, knowledge, ideas, institutions, administrative arrangements, and policies from other regions especially certain past or present political settings and implementing them in some other regions (Marsh and Sharman, 2009). Policies such as welfare-to-work, zero tolerance policing, Business improvement districts, central bank independence, and smoking ban are some of the results of policy transfers. Since its inception by political scientists in the late 1990s, the issue of policy transfer has been an integral part of academic research. Ideas, institutions and interests are some of the major reasons behind policy transfers, and the effects have been witnessed in various countries across the world including the UK and the US, which are some of the most competitive in this area of policy mobility. Ideas, interests and institutions are all significant root causes of policy transfers and can be instrumental in the international spectrum whereby ideologies cross borders depending on whether or not they have worked in a particular country. As the dynamism in global communications, institutional structures, economic and political structures set in; public policies in nation states also keep changing from one country to another. A myriad of theoretical literature on policy transfers offers a deep insight and the processes of policy mobility as well as the dynamics and challenges that come with it. According to the logic of rapid contemporary globalisation, societal phenomena and social institutions adopt new conditions that inevitably cause instabilities stabilities and permanence. While this paper critically reviews such theoretical literature, it also focuses on the role of ideas in policy transfers citing a particular policy case study to make arguments and explain the similarities and difference of policies across countries.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

According to the journal by on policy transfers by Dolowitz and Marsh (1996), there is an argument that every country has its own problems, and each state is driven by an idea that its underpinnings are unique; different from those of other countries. The truth is that unique problems are considered abnormal, and when faced with problems similar to those of other countries, policymakers, nations and government often look elsewhere, to other states with similar problems and how such states handled those problems. Only after evaluating the level of success in handling such matters can the policy makers draw a leaf and respond to their challenges. The acceleration of this kind of borrowing of ideas, literature claims, has been accelerated by growth in communication. The interest in policy transfers especially by political science and comparative politics has been heightened by the increase in borrowing of ideas in the international arena, leading to policy convergence and developmental changes in different parts of the world. For instance, Germany and France have copied each other in terms of the flow of international capital which later resulted in policy convergence by the European Monetary system. Also, the policy convergence, in this case, led to some instability in the banking sector in which the international economic dynamics caused turbulence in the operations of the policy content, policy goals, style and instruments. In Another article on contemporary policymaking, Dolowitz and Marsh (2000) present reasons behind policy transfers, what is transferred, the framework of policy transfer, the policy distinguishing continuum and the growth of the phenomenon. Ideally, the reasons behind the policy transfers can be voluntary or coercive according to the continuum provided by Dolowitz and March (2000). Voluntary lesson drawing can either be motivated by perfect rationality or bounded rationality. Also, it can be voluntary, yet it comes from perceived necessity in the international spectrum such as economic competition or international acceptance of an idea. Other conditions like treaty obligations, direct imposition like foreign occupation, or conditionality of a given union body like the European Union (EU) can play a part in the coercive adoption of policies from other regions. Important to note is that coercion is one way through which the borrowing nation states can bring forth radical and unpopular policies to and also legitimise particular existing policies that have not been fully accepted. In the transfer itself, administrative techniques, policy instruments, content, structure and policy goals are transferred. Others include ideas, institutions, ideologies as well as possible negative lessons that have formed an essential learning curve.

Policy transfers involve focusing and framing of the lessons learnt from other environments to fit the contexts of the borrowing country, and they might also be subjected to selection. While policy transfers and lesson borrowing is an affair of the states and international organisations, the key players are often the politicians and the bureaucrats. The literature on policy diffusion, according to Stone(2001), assert that the policy diffusion or percolation takes place over an extended period of time, disseminating ideas and practices from one source to another. Colin Bennett (1991) presents the causes of policy convergence as emulation, harmonisation, policy communities and elite networking as well as penetration. In emulation, actions taken by other states are copied by state officials of other countries. Elite networking translates to convergence from transnational policy communities while harmonisation happens via international regimes and finally, penetration is an affair of the external actors and interests. This rich body of literature on policy transfer is so vibrant on the topic of interest that it gives various perspectives that help in understanding policy transfer, convergence and dissemination. In all aspects, ideas play an important role because the adoption of ideas from other regions translates to policies which either converge or disseminate creating considerable developments as well as instabilities.

Beside interests and institutions, ideas play a very significant role in policy transfers. In the European Union, the nature of policymaking has been described as 'messy', and that explains why there has been the application of varied explanatory models in every circumstance. The decision-making process is a complex one, and since it has a transnational nature, the setting of agenda related to policies calls for attention set on ideas, expertise and knowledge as opposed to just interest or institutions. The power of ideas is central to any form of well-organised anarchy such as the US federal system. This realisation is what is embedded in the phrase 'an idea whose time has come' which fuels fires of political movements and the adoption of new ways of doing things (Kingdon, 2014). The aspect of 'time' in that phrase is crucial to whether or not the new ideas that come can be received well depending on the current political temperatures, opportunities that it can bring and the motive behind it. These aspects coerce the decision-makers to find ways through which ideas can be translated into policies. So, whenever the translation process is delayed by some constraints within the transfer chain, then an explanation of new roles played by the ideas can be given at the time that the transfer of the policy occurs.

The adoption of any particular idea and not others in a political process is reliant on competition for attention, transparency and how well it fits the selection process of any particular state of interest (Kingdon, 2014). In a nutshell, adopting simple ideas into policies can be complex irrespective of whether or not the system in which they are applied is an established one. To highlight well the role that ideas play in the transfer of policies, the case of the Smoking ban in the UK, the EU tobacco policy, can act as a proper example. The restrictions on tobacco in the post-war period resulted in decreased tobacco prevalence, and government policy reinforced what was called the 'denormalisation of smoking'(Studlar, 2007). On the other hand, the European Commission responsible for the adoption of that idea experienced constraints and delays in securing a ban for advertisement of tobacco. In addition, it was difficult to adopt other restraining measures on the product in other parts of the European Union proving that even though ideas are simple, their adoption can be difficult especially when other determinacy factors are involved. That means even though tobacco ban was an idea whose time was long overdue, it affected member states in various ways and adopting that idea meant that it was to be done differently in some states with similar circumstances. Scotland, Ireland, Wales and UK, all experienced different problems unique to their contexts and had to go different routes in adopting the ban even though it was a devolved responsibility of each member state to introduce the ban (Cairney, 2009). This explains why adoption of certain ideas into policies exhibit similarities and differences in other countries. There are many factors which determine how each country translates ideas into policies, but countries with similar problems tend to apply transferred policies in a similar way (Lieberman, 2002).

Conclusion

In conclusion, the theoretical literature and interest on the transfer of policies is a rapidly burgeoning area of focus with ideas, interest and institutions propagating the move. However, ideas act as the beginning of everything before they can be translated into policies which can be adopted by others. The adoption process is similar or different across countries depending on the prevailing circumstances such as politics, economics and social structures among other factors.

Reference List

Cairney, P. (2009). The role of ideas in policy transfer: the case of UK smoking bans since devolution. Journal of European Public Policy, 16(3), pp.471-488.

Bennett, C. (1991). What Is Policy Convergence and What Causes It?. British Journal of Political Science, 21(02), p.215.

Dolowitz, D. and Marsh, D. (1996). Who Learns What from Whom: A Review of the Policy Transfer Literature. Political Studies, 44(2), pp.343-357.

Dolowitz, D. and Marsh, D. (2000). Learning from Abroad: The Role of Policy Transfer in Contemporary Policy-Making. Governance, 13(1), pp.5-23.

Kingdon, J. (2014). Agendas, alternatives and public policies. Harlow: Pearson education.

Lieberman, R. (2002). Ideas, Institutions, and Political Order: Explaining Political Change. American Political Science Review, 96(04), pp.697-712.

Marsh, D. and Sharman, J. (2009). Policy diffusion and policy transfer. Policy Studies, 30(3), pp.269-288.

Stone, D., 2001. Learning lessons, policy transfer and the international diffusion of policy ideas. Centre for the Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation working paper, (69/01).

Studlar, D.T., 2007, April. What explains policy change in tobacco control policy in advanced industrial democracies?. In Paper to PSA Conference, Bath, April http://www. psa. ac. uk/2007/pps/Studlar. pdf.