Policy Learning and How It Always Occurs - Literature review Example

Policy learning and How it Always Occurs Name: Lecturer: Course: Date: Introduction This essay will argue that that policy learning should describe the conscious change in reasoning or thought process in regards to a particular policy issue that may later be adopted or terminated. It will further contend that, since change in societal thinking and experiences will always happen policy learning will always occur. Policy learning is integral for public sector innovation and as a prerequisite for public sector innovation and the likely outcome of innovation espoused, which in turn creates a cause-effect chain. Broadly, policy describes the program of actions embraced by individual or the government. Kemp and Weehuizen (2005), defines policy as a combination of principles and programmes based on such principles rather than the actions. Learning, in this case, consists of reconsideration, rethink or afterthought, which must however be within an existing frame. An example includes gaining a better understanding of the consequences of a conscious change in personal or group philosophy and thinking. On the other hand, innovation describes the change in actions or doing something. It is usually an implication of the conscious change in thinking, although not often. Defining policy learning Policy learning simply means lesson-drawing to enable policy change, While Rose (1993) pointed out that the lessons for policy learning can be originated over a certain duration (such as the historic experiences of a nation) some scholars such as Yebra (2009) have suggested that the learning occurs across space, (such as from other regions). Within the context of Rose (1993), the degree of learning ranges from total duplication or copying of policies to mere adaptation of the essential sections of a model country’s policy. It can however be assumed that the degree of drawing lessons negatively, where by the lessons acquired about a particular regions A discourages policymakers in region B to adopt the same course of action. For instance, Lovinfosse (2008) illustrates that because of shared ideologies on sustainable renewable energy after studying each country’s innovative trends, the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, and Germany share almost similar Renewable Electricity Policies. Despite this, the concept of learning has been subjected to a range of interpretations. According to Rose (1993), policy learning happens through transnational epistemic communities. A different perspective was proposed by Stone (2001) who suggested that policy learning happens within advocacy coalitions, which function in policy sub systems directed by key actors or players, such as the decision-makers and the policy brokers. The coalition may comprise policy analysts, researchers, journalists and appointed officials who share some fundamental values, perception of problems or ideologies and who exude significant level of coordinated efforts over time. Since the different actors generally share similar interests, ideologies or beliefs, they share the goal of realising a policy change that accommodates their interests. Hence, the advocacy coalitions are bound by deeply rooted ideologies that form an individual’s fundamental personal philosophy, as well as, tend to be rather resistant to change (Lovinfosse 2008). To this end, since emphasis is on the core policy learning and beliefs that characterise the coalitions, the interest of the individual actors are neglected in preference for the commonly dominant interests in which they share a consensus. Social learning also sets to define what policy learning should entail. Basing on Hall’s (1990; 1993) policy paradigm shift, the concept of social learning can be applied to explain how the societal developments that are external to the state and which influence the policy direction and change. The new policy direction and change denotes policy learning. Social learning can further be applied to explain ways in which ideologies can connect the state, international organisations and the general society. In terms of policy learning, Hall (1990) explains that policy players or actors are concerned with influencing the direction of knowledge on the policies. In which case, the extent of policy interaction makes up the process of social learning that is then expressed in the policy (Blyth 2013). At this stage, it can be argued that learning occurs when the policymakers alter their understanding and knowledge of the policy development, as well as, adjusts the policy in reflection of the knowledge they acquire from past or historical experiences. Smith (2002) opined that within the social learning context, policy learning idea relies on the understanding of the past policy failures to get an insight into how to position or express new ideas in a policy. The science of policy learning depicts the process of drawing official policy lessons from international comparison. The learning process has implications on the degree or type of transfer (Raffe 2011). It can cause a more coherent transfer of policies, ideas and practices while the action of copying may, as well be unplanned (Dolowitz & Marsh 2000). At the same time, some actors may possess a greater capability for learning while others may merely possess as a ploy to garner political support instead of a consequence of improves understanding. Indeed, this marks the distinction between instrumental learning and tactical learning (Smith 2002). Policy learning denotes policy transfer. Despite this, the two terms may be distinct analytically depending on interpretation (Smith 2002). Their similarity is however likely to occur in cross-national policy communities. In addition, they make lesson-drawing more likely to occur in transnational policy communities (Knill & Holzinger 2005). In which case, policy learning tends to centre on redefinition and knowledge of certain interests, based on new knowledge that impact the fundamental ideologies that make up policy approaches. As a result, policy learning potentially leads to policy transfer and policy innovation. This is since the transfer of the ideologies on the policy is supported by the initial processes of learning. Hence, it should be reasoned that policy transfer is a collective process that, in addition to being social, is based on the exchange between two regions (Smith 2002). Policy learning always occurs Different scholars have interpreted the reason why policy learning occurs in different ways. Stone (2001) explained that since learning is by nature partial or uneven in a policy community, policy learning will always occur. While in some case the adoption of the policy may be for practical or a range of reasons, in other cases the policy is adopted for purely principled reasons by players who have consensual knowledge. Basing on this perspective, it can be argued that proponents of the perspective often underestimate the implications of bureaucratic and economic interests, as well as, the significance of taking advantage of policy change for political gains. Further, policy learning by bureaucratic can be considered to have the potential to respond to the external influences or pressures. In addition, there is always a likelihood that international consensus fails to exist at the local level. For instance, the political leaders of a developing nation, such as India, has sometimes failed to comply with the “best global practices” since the conditions on loam, as well as, related structural adjustments packages needed rather than just because they understand the significance of pursuing change a change. This trend of using adopting policies from another region denotes what (Smith 2001) called policy transfer. According to Smith (2001), policy transfer depicts the process through which knowledge on a policy in an existing or past political system is applied to develop policies in a separate political system. The trend also denotes what Knill (2005) describes as policy diffusion. Policy diffusion refers to the internal process of policy transfer. For instance, it can be used to depict the ongoing policy convergence processes among the states within the United States. According to Knill (2005) policy diffusions may also reflect the assimilated adoption of policies without evidence of duplication. To this end, it can be argued that existence of policy transfer evidences the occurrence of policy learning. As stated by Rose (1993), lesson-drawing begins by learning from the past experiences of a region. In which case, lessons from other varied regions are more likely to be adopted or transferred when two regions share similar geographical borders, conditions of policy, such as affordability and ideology. For instance, since the states within the United States may share almost similar borders, policy conditions and political ideology, policy learning is likely. Another example is the ideological similarities in ideology between the US and the UK government during the reign of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, where the UK became inclined to acquire policy ideas to adjust its internal policies (Smith 2001). Existence of desirable expertise in particular model regions also enable policy learning to occur. When a country has exemplary comprehensible expertise that attracts the interest of other countries, the possibilities of less-drawing becomes real. For instance, since Sweden has for long time been a symbol of inspiration for having a social democratic state, several countries have drawn lessons from Sweden and changed their political arrangement to march that of Sweden. At the same time, Germany has historically gained a reputation for having policies that effectively control inflation, the countries with the worst ever inflation rates in history, such as Uganda, have adopted policies that reflect that of Germany. Despite this, it can still be argued that ideological commitment may however influence the pursuit for ideas. In which case, a country that is declared a commitment to roll back the state rather than seek social democracy would not copy from Sweden. Additionally, the influence of indirect coercive transfers plays a role. For instance, less dominant or influential countries within a region may be compelled to rely on their more dominant and influential neighbours, since they are aware that substance divergence from a particular policy may inflict unfavourable implications. Despite these, the border conditions and other related factors may be less influential, since globalisation and economic forces in addition to technological growth may influence some regions to move towards integrating more transfers (Drezner 2001). Conclusion Overall, it is clear that despite the many scholarly interpretations, policy learning refers to the deliberated change in reasoning or thinking in regards to a certain policy issues. The issues may be adopted or terminated depending on the interest of the policy making actors. Since change in societal thinking and experiences often happens, depending on lesson-drawn from other regions, policy learning always occurs. Reference List Blyth, M 2013, "Paradigms and Paradox: The Politics of Economic Ideas in Two Moments of Crisis," Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, vol. 1 no. 1, pp1-17 Dolowitz, D & Marsh, D 2000, “Learning from Abroad: The Role of Policy Transfer in Contemporary Policy-Making”, Governance, vol. 13 no. 1, 5-24 Drezner, D 2001, Globalisation and Policy Convergence, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford Hall, 1990) "Policy Paradigms, Experts and the State: The Case of Macro-economic Policy Making in Britain", in S. Brooks & A-G Gagnon (eds.) Social Scientists, Policy and the State, New York, Praeger, viewed 2 May 2014, http://www.march.es/ceacs/publicaciones/working/archivos/1990_4_en.pdf Hall, P 1993,"Policy Paradigms, Experts and the State: The Case of Macro-economic Policy Making in Britain", Comparative Politics vol. 25 no. 3, pp.275-296 Kemp, R & Weehuizen, R 2005, Policy learning, what does it mean and how can we study it? NIFU STEP, Oslo Knill, C 2005, "Introduction: Cross-national policy convergence: concepts, approaches and explanatory factors," Journal of European Public Policy vol. 12 no. 5, pp.1-7 Knill, C & Holzinger, K 2005, "Causes and conditions of cross-national policy convergence," Journal of European Public Policy," Journal of European Public Policy vol. 12 no. 5, pp.775-796 Lovinfosse, I 2008, How and why Do Policies Change?: A Comparison of Renewable Electricity Policies in Belgium, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, and the UK, Peter Lang, Brussels Raffe, D 2011, Policy borrowing or policy learning? How (not) to improve education systems Rose, R 1993, Lesson-Drawing in Public Policy, Chatham House, New Jersey Smith, D 2002, Policy transfer in the development of UK climate policy for business, University of Sussex Falmer, Brighton Stone, D 2001, Learning Lessons, Policy Transfer and the International Diffusion of Policy Ideas, CSGR Working Paper No. 69/01 Yebra, C 2009, Learning, Policy Making, and Market Reforms, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Read More