186,990 research outputs found
What Do We Mean When We Talk about the 'Political Class'?
No full textThis is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Allen, Peter, and Paul Cairney. "What Do We Mean When We Talk about the ‘Political Class’?." Political Studies Review (2015), which has been published in final form at http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1478-9302.12092. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving
Policy Convergence, Transfer and Learning in the UK under Devolution
No full textThis paper explores the policy transfer and learning process within the UK since 1999, examining the conditions in which transfer takes place among central and devolved governments. We distinguish among concurrent policies, policy competition, coercive transfer and policy learning. Policy transfer can be more or less coercive and constrained, while policy learning is voluntary. Mechanisms for transfer include financial instruments, political parties, the civil service and policy communities. Transfer can take place from centre to periphery, from periphery to centre and across the periphery. There is also transfer at the European and international levels. As it is England that has tended to break with older policies, notably on public service provision, the pressure has been to follow its lead, with the devolved administrations resisting or conforming. The UK government has paid much less attention to possible learning from the devolved territories and sometimes has sought to insulate England from debates there, especially where politically sensitive matters or large resources are at stake. Learning among the devolved territories is only now really beginning
Punctuated Equilibrium
No full textThis chapter examines: -The meaning of punctuated equilibrium, policy community and monopoly. - The literature on agenda setting. - The use of venue shopping to explain issue expansion, shifts of attention and policy change. - The applicability of punctuated equilibrium within US and other political systems. - The value of this theory to the wider concerns of this book, such as: how do we identify power within a political system; and, why does policy change
The UK: A Case Study
No full textFirst paragraph: Tobacco policy in the UK demonstrates a period of rapid legislative change following decades of policy continuity. Tobacco advertising was banned in the UK in 2002 and bans on smoking in public places in the UK and devolved territories were introduced from 2005-6. These measures, combined with others already in place, such as smoking cessation services and health education, make the UK the most active tobacco control member state in the EU. It now ranks number one in the Tobacco Control Scale discussed in Chapter 4. Yet, for most of the post-war period, tobacco policy was marked by a relative lack of regulation. Tobacco control measures were often voluntary rather than legislative, while public health arguments often came second-best to those based on individual choice and the economic benefits of tobacco (Cairney, 2007a). Indeed, it is little over 20 years ago that Baggott's (1988) study of UK and Norwegian policy sought to explain why the former was such a laggard compared to the former. The UK therefore represents one of most fruitful case-studies of tobacco policy change because it seems to have engaged in radical policy change in a relatively short period of time. Our aim is to explain this shift in policy direction. A complementary aim is to consider the issues in relative depth (compared to the broader comparative chapters), identifying the substance and nature of policy (considering, for example, the nature of voluntary agreements), and considering the forces for change, in greater detail
Pressure Politics and the ‘Scottish Policy Style’
No full textChapter 5 suggests that the Scottish Parliament did not foster new and effective forms of deliberative and participatory democracy. It highlights the similarities between the Westminster and Holyrood systems and argues that, in both, most policy is formulated outside the legislative arena following regular consultation between govern¬ments and pressure participants such as interest groups. This chapter examines the extent to which that process of policymaking is distinctive in Scotland following devolution. In other words, is there a ‘Scottish Policy Style'? Policy style refers simply to the ways in which governments make and implement policy (Richardson, 1982). It has two dimensions: the way that governments make policy, in consultation with pressure participants; and, the way that they implement policy in partnership with organizations such as local authorities (chapter 7)
Assessing Scottish Democracy
No full textFirst paragraph: As noted in Chapter 2 the SCC Final Report (1995), the Yes-Yes 1997 Referendum campaign and the Consultative Steering Group Report (1999) all emphasized an aspiration of a new style of democracy and politics in Scotland. ‘New politics' suggests a style of politics which is not only consensual, but also involves the participation of more individuals and groups. A central feature is the inclusion of hitherto excluded sections of society. While the most prominent example of this movement was to ensure that more women were elected to the Scottish Parliament, a broader aim was to ensure greater participation among groups held to be excluded from political participation in the past. Ethnic minorities are mentioned explicitly by the SCC, but there is also an implicit suggestion that this focus extends as broadly as possible to, for example, people with disabilities, young people, and rural populations relatively distant from the capital city
Should action take priority over further research on public health?
No full textWe have evidence on which to act, and inaction costs lives, argue Simon Capewell and Paul Cairney. But Aileen Clarke says our understanding of the human behaviour that leads to unhealthy choices is still lackin
The Scottish Parliament and Scottish Government: Does Minority Government Make a Difference?
No full textFirst paragraph: This chapter explores the difference that minority government makes when compared to coalition government, focusing primarily on the relationship between the Scottish Parliament and Government. Chapter 1 demonstrates that the Parliament does not have the resources to do much more than perform a traditional parliamentary role, monitoring government departments and scrutinising legislation proposed by the Scottish Government. Chapter 2 identifies the continued importance of political parties and the government-versus-opposition culture inherited from Westminster. This chapter builds on these insights to show that the image of a ‘consensus democracy' (Lijphart, 1999) is often misleading in Scotland. The first eight years of devolution were marked by a form of majoritarian (coalition) government that would not seem out of place in the UK. Labour and the Liberal Democrats formed a governing majority able, through a strong party whip, to command a majority in plenary and all committees. They used that power to pursue a demanding legislative programme, demonstrating that the government produces the vast majority of legislation and that the Parliament struggles to do more than scrutinise policy in these circumstances. The only significant ‘brake' to that process was the negotiation required between the coalition parties within government. However, even then, the production of successive ‘partnership agreements' in 1999 and 2003 gave a good idea of the legislative programmes in each four-year term
The politics of COVID-19 experts: comparing winners and losers in Italy and the UK
No full textThis article analyzes the "politics of experts"-or the struggle between scientific advisers to gain visibility and influence-in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy and the UK. Modifying classic studies of policy communities of interest groups and civil servants, we classify relevant policy experts in the two countries into the following categories: "core insiders," "specialist insiders," "peripheral insiders," and "outsiders." Within these categories, we distinguish between "high-profile" and "low-profile" experts, depending on media exposure. The comparison between the UK and Italian cases helps to identify how actors interpret and follow formal and informal "rules of the game." We identify a contest between experts to influence policy with reference to two competing "rules of the game." The first set of rules comes from government, while the second comes from science advice principles. These rules collide, such as when governments require secrecy and nonconfrontation and scientists expect transparency and independent criticism. Therefore, experts face dilemmas regarding which rules to favor: some accept the limits to their behavior to ensure insider access; others are free to criticize the policies that they struggle to influence
Sorry Ed Miliband, but minority government is unlikely to work in Westminster
No full textWith the election looking more and more likely to provide an indecisive result, two of our columnists look at the likelihood of the Labour Party being able to form a minority government. Here, Paul Cairney argues the Scottish experience suggests it won’t work. Read Wyn Grant’s more optimistic view here. Access this article at The Conversation website: https://theconversation.com/sorry-ed-miliband-but-minority-government-is-unlikely-to-work-in-westminster-3900
- …
