摘要 :
Several of the most respected policy scholars, including H. Simon, J. W. Kingdon, G. Peters and M. Howlett, have observed a long time ago that decision makers often form their views on policy solutions irrespectively of concrete p...
展开
Several of the most respected policy scholars, including H. Simon, J. W. Kingdon, G. Peters and M. Howlett, have observed a long time ago that decision makers often form their views on policy solutions irrespectively of concrete policy issues, and that their views on policy means often "chase problems." This proposition labeled in this article as "autonomy of policy instrument attitudes" (APIA) claims that individuals have stable attitudes toward policy instruments that are relatively independent of their perspectives on given policy problems and policy goals. Despite its growing popularity, the APIA literature is fragmented and lacks coherent theoretical framework and review of available empirical evidence. First, APIA is conceptualized in terms of attitudes and differentiated from similar concepts. Second, the core theoretical literature on APIA is summarized with emphasis on its possible explanations. Four distinct individual-level mechanism of APIA is then distinguished: beliefs-based, values-based, heuristics-based and affect-based. The paper concludes with an overview of available empirical evidence and with some recommendations for further research.
收起
摘要 :
The study of research funding arrangements and the production of scientific knowledge has been marked by a lack of understanding about how research funding instruments interact and how these instruments shape policy-making and res...
展开
The study of research funding arrangements and the production of scientific knowledge has been marked by a lack of understanding about how research funding instruments interact and how these instruments shape policy-making and research fields. To fill this research gap, this study is theoretically supported by policy feedback and policy instruments' interaction studies. It investigates the effects of the UK's research assessment exercise in the creation of the most emblematic national thematic research program for the field of educational research in the country - the Teaching and Learning Research Programme (TLRP). Based on qualitative analysis of policy documents and semi-structured interviews with policy-makers and boundary-spanners, this paper shows how the research assessment exercise contributed to the creation of the TLRP and how the interaction between the two policy instruments shaped the field of educational research in England. In particular, the results show a) how the institutionalisation of the research assessment led to frame a "quality problem" in educational research that legitimated several policy initiatives, including the creation of the national thematic research programme (interpretative effects) and a shift in resources allocation (resource/incentive effects); and b) how the interaction between the two policy instruments contributed to methodological and epistemic drifts in the field of educational research.
收起
摘要 :
Renewable electricity (RE) auctions have recently emerged as a dominant instrument in the global RE policy 'toolbox', whereas historically more widespread policy instruments, including feed-in-tariffs and tradable green certificat...
展开
Renewable electricity (RE) auctions have recently emerged as a dominant instrument in the global RE policy 'toolbox', whereas historically more widespread policy instruments, including feed-in-tariffs and tradable green certificates, have lost popularity. This article investigates the contribution of dynamics of policy demand and supply to this development and identifies the relative impact of the instrument's so-called constituency, a concept introduced by Voss and Simons (2014). As an element of policy supply, perceived policy attributes impacting the instrument's diffusibility receive particular attention. The study applies a process tracing approach, based on a set of high-level interviews. The instrument constituency was found to comprise a fairly small group of highly specialized policy experts: three intergovernmental organizations, a group of researchers and two industry service providers.
收起
摘要 :
When regulators are faced with practical challenges, policy instrument choice theories can help them find the best solution. However, not all such theories are equally helpful. This paper aims to offer regulators a better alternat...
展开
When regulators are faced with practical challenges, policy instrument choice theories can help them find the best solution. However, not all such theories are equally helpful. This paper aims to offer regulators a better alternative to the current policy instrument choice theories. We will specifically address the shortcomings of "smart regulation theory" and present an alternative that keeps the best of that theory while remediating its weak points. Some authors (Bocher and Toller 2003; Baldwin and Black 2008) say that smart regulation theory does not address institutional issues, compliance type-specific response, performance-sensitivity and adaptability of regulatory regime. We have resolved these problems by merging the smart regulation theory with the policy arrangement approach and the policy learning concept. We call the resulting approach "regulatory arrangement approach" (RAA). The central idea of the RAA is to constrain the almost infinite "smart" regulatory options by: the national policy style; adverse effects of policy arrangements of adjoining policies; the structure of the policy arrangement of the investigated policy and competence dependencies of other institutions. The reduction can be so drastic that the potential governance capacity falls below the smart regulation threshold. In other words, no smart regulatory arrangement can be developed in that institutional context unless policy learning occurs. In addition, a "smart" regulatory arrangement is no guarantee that the policy will succeed. For this reason, the performance of the regulatory arrangement is measured and evaluated. Performance below a certain threshold indicates that the regulatory arrangement needs to be adapted, which then results in policy learning.
We illustrate the usefulness of this new approach with a secondary analysis of the Flemish sustainable forest management policy.
收起
摘要 :
This paper proposes a framework for thinking about industrial policy based on the maturity of a given industry in a country contrasted to the maturity of the industry in a global sense. Existing models for industrial policy tend t...
展开
This paper proposes a framework for thinking about industrial policy based on the maturity of a given industry in a country contrasted to the maturity of the industry in a global sense. Existing models for industrial policy tend to be based on the issues faced by emerging economies. By providing a coherent framework for rationales for industrial policy that spans both developed and developing economies, we can assess various industries and discuss the merits of providing support on a comparable basis. The paper provides examples of using the framework to discuss how it can be used and how it could be developed as a strategic tool for policy makers in leading economies.
收起
摘要 :
In recent years, the term "policy instrument" has been used frequently with regard to R&D policy and innovation policy. This article examines the development of the term as part of a body of research known as "policy design". Over the last 50 years, there has been substantial progress in setting policy design on a more systematic basis, with the development of established concepts and analytical frameworks, including various taxonomies of policy instruments. However, with just a few exceptions, this body of research seems to have had little impact in the world of R&D policy. The paper reviews the literature on R&D policy instruments, identifies a number of challenges for R&D policy instruments in the light of four transitions and sets out a research agenda for the study of R&D policy instruments, before ending with a number of conclusions....
展开
In recent years, the term "policy instrument" has been used frequently with regard to R&D policy and innovation policy. This article examines the development of the term as part of a body of research known as "policy design". Over the last 50 years, there has been substantial progress in setting policy design on a more systematic basis, with the development of established concepts and analytical frameworks, including various taxonomies of policy instruments. However, with just a few exceptions, this body of research seems to have had little impact in the world of R&D policy. The paper reviews the literature on R&D policy instruments, identifies a number of challenges for R&D policy instruments in the light of four transitions and sets out a research agenda for the study of R&D policy instruments, before ending with a number of conclusions.
收起
摘要 :
In 1998, Evert Vedung posited a typology of policy instruments making governing akin to a conversation with a donkey: regulatory (sticks), economic (carrots) and information-based (sermons) instruments. Kathryn Harrison later appl...
展开
In 1998, Evert Vedung posited a typology of policy instruments making governing akin to a conversation with a donkey: regulatory (sticks), economic (carrots) and information-based (sermons) instruments. Kathryn Harrison later applied this typology to pollution control in her popular 'Talking with the Donkey' piece. Though command-and-control instruments were central up until the late 1990s, growing global interest in 'New Environmental Policy Instruments' (NEPI) led to a disinterest in regulatory mechanisms and an increase in attention to information-based and economic instruments. Are governments using regulation as a policy instrument now more than before or are they choosing policy mixes? In this paper, I examine the state of the art regarding regulation as an environmental policy instrument by exploring whether the apparent shift to NEPI did reduce interest in environmental regulation as a policy instrument. I find that policy experiments with models of policy instruments led to increased interest in policy instrument mixes. Evidence from a systematic review of JEPP scholarship and a broader scholarly review of the literature on environmental policy instruments over the past 20 years focused on drinking water and solid waste governance suggest that policy mixes might work best when faced with conditions of uncertainty and governance complexity.
收起
摘要 :
The present study uses the concept of technological efficacy derived from ecological psychology and design studies to offer an alternative way of analyzing how policy instruments affect change. Reasoning from this, the paper outli...
展开
The present study uses the concept of technological efficacy derived from ecological psychology and design studies to offer an alternative way of analyzing how policy instruments affect change. Reasoning from this, the paper outlines a framework for analyzing policy instruments in terms of their affordances. We define affordances as the means through which an instrument exerts influence on its intended target audience. Using this approach, we contend that policy instruments may be analyzed as interfaces that organize social relations and create structures of opportunity and/or restrict possibilities for action. We argue that explicating the pathways through which instruments afford or constrain action is a central task for policy analysis. Our proposed framework of analysis builds on the idea that instruments yield effects by facilitating action and learning. We further contend that the actions that an instrument can facilitate or inhibit are determined by specific affordance modalities of the instrument in conjunction with contingencies of the actor and the policy environment. Examples from research policy are used to illustrate some of these effects.
收起
摘要 :
The history of economic policymaking has been marked by a succession of "paradigms" defining the goals of economic policy and the instruments used to attain them. OECD Chief Economist Pier Carlo Padoan looks at where we go from here.
摘要 :
The purpose of this study is to analyze individuals’ willingness to pay (WTP) for energy policies. The type of energy policy was divided into facilitating and sanctioning instruments. We studied the factors that influence WTP for...
展开
The purpose of this study is to analyze individuals’ willingness to pay (WTP) for energy policies. The type of energy policy was divided into facilitating and sanctioning instruments. We studied the factors that influence WTP for two types of intrument for energy policy by using four theoretical frameworks: the Economic Model, the Theory of Planned Behavior, Value Theory, and Psychometric Paradigm (so called risk perception model). The results, first, showed that the WTP for the sanctioning instruments was lower than that for the facilitating instruments. Second, the values, trust, and norms were significant predictors of the WTP for both types of policy instruments. Third, the economic factors only influenced the WTP for sanctioning instruments. This study recommends policy mix considering the WTP for different types of instruments for energy policy.
收起
原文获取