Obstacles to Evidence-based Policy-making in the EU Enlargement Countries: The Case of Skills Policies

an article by Will Bartlett (European Institute, London School of Economics and Political Science, UK) published in Social Policy & Administration Volume 47 Issue 4 (August 2013)

Abstract

The global economic crisis has had a significant impact on the EU enlargement region by reducing inflows of external finance. Unemployment has increased in a context of already high long-term and youth unemployment. As governments seek to restrict their budget deficits there will be little scope for much increase in government expenditure in the near future.

These effects of the crisis highlight the need for better policy-making in the region, drawing on better understanding of the causes of economic and social problems, better appreciation of the range of policy options and their relative chances of success or failure.

However, there is a substantial knowledge gap that can only be filled by well-designed research studies based on research questions that are relevant to the needs of policymakers. In this context, evidence-based policy-making techniques have a valuable role to play in improving the policy process.

This article points out the specific nature of the policy process in transition countries and the difficulties of formulating rational policy during periods of rapid structural change in which the administrations have become politicised and state capture by big business interests is common. In addition, pervasive policy transfer, often of a coercive nature, is an additional constraint on rational policy-making. The conflicting advice received from multiple donors and external advisers provides an incentive for playing the system and producing inconsistent policy formulas.

The article concludes that there is significant scope for improvement in policy-making through the use of evidence-based policy-making techniques. Governments should, therefore, encourage the use of systematic review and ex-post evaluation of policy programmes and analysis of natural experiments where possible, while at the same time maintain a realistic awareness of the dangers and distorting effects of the influence of advocacy coalitions, state capture and partyisation of economies.

---

Policy Diffusion and Policy Transfer in Comparative Welfare State Research

an article by Herbert Obinger (University of Bremen, Germany and University of Southern Denmark) and Carina Schmitt and Peter Starke (University of Bremen, Germany) published in Social Policy & Administration Volume 47 Issue 1 (February 2013)

Abstract

For many years, comparative welfare state research has followed a ‘methodological nationalism’ in the sense that countries were treated as independent units. Yet the recent ‘spatial turn’ in comparative politics has also influenced welfare state research.

For some years now, the field has been witnessing a growing interest in questions about interdependencies and policy diffusion between countries.

In this article, we provide a structured overview of the state of the art in the policy diffusion and transfer literature that deals specifically with social policy. We present and critically evaluate existing theoretical concepts and quantitative and qualitative methodological approaches that enable the analysis of interdependencies between countries.

Moreover, we summarise the empirical findings of quantitative and qualitative studies on the diffusion and transfer of social policy, from some pioneering studies to the latest findings. Against this background we point out what we believe to be promising avenues for future research.

We focus on five areas:

• theoretical work on the mechanisms underlying diffusion and transfer;
• methodological approaches;
• the impact of domestic institutions and policy characteristics on social policy diffusion and transfer;
• programme-specific dynamics; and
• the systematic combination of horizontal and vertical interdependencies.

---