Masters in International Public Policy
IP603
Comparative Public Policy
Wilfrid Laurier University
Fall 2011
Class Time: Tuesday, 10:00 - 12:50
Class Location: Various
Instructor Office Hours: By Appointment
Contact: [email protected]
Instructor: Terry Levesque
Office: BSIA 2-18
Phone: 226-772-3126
E-mail: [email protected]
Wilfrid Laurier University uses software that can check for plagiarism. Students
may be required to submit their written work in electronic form and have it
checked for plagiarism.
Students with disabilities or special needs are advised to contact Laurier’s
Accessible Learning Office for information regarding its services and resources.
Students are encouraged to review the Calendar for information regarding all
services available on campus.
Course Description:
“This course examines core concepts and theories relating to the definition, design,
implementation and evaluation of public policies and the influence of the global economy for
these processes. A cross-national approach is used to explore how globalization has shaped the
issues and dynamics that confront politicians and administrators in formulating and
implementing domestic policies as well as those policies that play out in the international
context.” (Academic Calendar 2009-10)
1
By the end of the course students should:
• be conversant in the key conceptual and theoretical approaches employed by social
scientists to understand and explain public policy;
• understand the various stages of the public policy process and apply the theoretical and
conceptual approaches to these stages;
• be able to apply these understandings to specific public policies including an in-depth
knowledge of one specific policy area;
• understand the processes and implications of the internationalization of public policy;
• be able to use the comparative method to improve understandings of the public policy
process;
• have improved various academic/professional skills.
Required Texts
Michael Howlett, M. Ramesh, and Anthony Perl, Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles and
Policy Subsystems (Third Edition: Oxford University Press, 2009).
Other readings for the first twelve weeks are provided with hyperlinks to the relevant journal. If
you want to obtain an article from an off-campus network connection (including the BSIA WIFI
or LAN), you must login to a WLU proxy server. The URL for the off-campus login is:
http://remote.libproxy.wlu.ca/login?url=http://library.wlu.ca/
Course Evaluation
A. Seminar Participation
B. Seminar Presentation
C. Case Study Policy Analysis
D. Take-home exam
15 per cent
15 per cent
25 per cent
40 per cent
A. Seminar Participation
A proportion of each class for this course will rely on student participation. You must attend
and make regular contributions to each seminar. The benefit of participation comes from the
chance to rehearse the ideas that you’ve read about. Preparation of the readings in a study group
is another effective rehearsal strategy.
What do I expect of you concerning participation?
1. Attendance at a minimum; consistent attendance earns one third of the participation
mark.
2. Evidence that you’ve worked on the readings. Good questions are always welcome.
Good answers to good questions are as welcome. Think of yourselves as members of a
consulting team charged with deepening your firm’s understanding of and, ultimately,
competence at public policy. In this setting, learning is collaborative.
3. I expect the quality of your communication in the seminar sessions will vary depending
on your experience as well as your preparation. Look after the latter and we can work on
the experience.
2
B. Seminar Presentation
In assessing your performance, I’ll look for the depth of your understanding of the readings. I
will ask two of you to take responsibility for one or two of the readings in a session. Your task
will be to extract the main concepts and the connections among them. I’ll also expect you to
illustrate how what you’ve read informs our understanding of public policy, and contributes to
our potential competence in taking roles in the policy cycle. Additionally, you will be
responsible to the seminar for preparing and distributing notes/slides, taking the lead in
answering questions about the reading, and summarizing the discussion at the end. You will
have 30 minutes to lead the seminar.
What will constitute a good presentation?
1. Again, I’ll look for evidence that you’ve worked on the readings, that you have
developed a more thorough understanding than you might gain from normal preparation
for a session, that you have been able to separate the central ideas from the supporting
material in a paper.
2. A good presentation is organized so that the rest of us can easily identify the flow of
your ideas, how the pieces that you present us fit together, and what we should take
away.
3. An exceptional presentation is one that we can agree scores high on the first two
dimensions and is delivered confidently, and paced so that the 30 minutes is used to the
best learning effect.
C. Case Study Policy Analysis (due on Friday, November 4)
Comparative policy studies emerges out of the recognition that context matters to policy. There
is no “grand unified theory” of public policy, unless we understand that local institutions, actors
and ideas and beliefs matter. My reflection on this (new for me) course over the Summer leads
me to want to examine Fred Carden’s assertion that policy making experience in the global
North is not a very good match for thinking about policy making in the South. To this end, I’ll
use the integrated case study that all four instructors use to illustrate the interdisciplinary
features of policy making.
Over the course of the semester, all MIPP students will participate in a case study exercise, the
theme of which will be food security policy in Ethiopia. You’ll be provided a case statement in
the next two weeks. Concerning our work in IP603, the case provides an opportunity to acquire
knowledge of the policy process in a developing country in the South. To complete the task we
have to prepare are answers to questions like the following:
1. Who are the other actors in the policy subsystem? What is the capacity of the domestic
actors in the subsystem? Who among them might be considered the policy entrepreneurs
for food security and agricultural policy? What international actors connect with the
domestic policy subsystem? How do they influence food security and agricultural policy
within Ethiopia?
2. Who are the Ethiopian decision-makers? Ken Jackson suggests that differences among
the nine states in Ethiopia might figure into the overall policy process. Can we find
evidence that differences among the states might play a role in either the decision-
3
making or implementation phases of the cycle? How stable are the national decisionmaking processes?
3. How high on the agenda does food security seem to be now?
It’s not practical for each of you to attempt to develop a thorough grasp of policy making in
Ethiopia in 13 weeks. Consequently, I will have you work collaboratively on this project. We
will divide the task among groups, each covering an aspect of the policy context. The combined
work of your groups will form an overview of the Ethiopian food policy context. Each group
will be responsible to prepare a descriptive analysis of specific elements of the current policy
cycle in Ethiopia (10-12 double-spaced pages). Further details on this assignment will also be
provided early in the semester.
What will constitute a good report?
1. We are outsiders in the Ethiopian policy context. Our consulting job, to propose a food
security strategy, means we have become an actor in the policy subsystem concerned
with food and agriculture policy. The premise of comparative policy analysis, that “one
size does not fit all,” means that the usefulness of our work hinges on our understanding
the Ethiopian context. A good report will exhibit careful attention to the details, sorting
them into those that are central to our task, from those that support our understanding.
2. A good report will be mechanically perfect. It will be organized so that it is clear to the
reader what you judge to be the key points, and what are the supporting points. Your
writing plan will be evident in the connections among sections, paragraphs, and
sentences. You will have eliminated every grammatical and spelling flaw.
3. An outstanding report will attempt to draw a conclusion about how what you have
learned might affect our approach to recommending a policy.
D. Take-home exam
The take-home exam will cover all course material; it will be distributed electronically at 9am
on Tuesday, December 13 and is due at 5pm on Thursday, December 15. The exam will
consist of three questions; students will be expected to answer all three. Answers should be no
more than 1000 words per question. Exams should be submitted by e-mail (as a Word
attachment) to the instructor, unless alternate arrangements have been made. Late exams will
not be accepted.
ADDITIONAL COURSE POLICIES
Academic Misconduct (cheating): The University has an established policy with respect to
cheating on assignments and examinations, which the student is required to know. Students are
cautioned that in addition to a failure in the course, a student may be suspended or expelled
from the University for cheating and the offence may appear on one’s transcript, in which event
the offence can have serious consequences for one’s professional career. According to the 200910 Graduate Calendar, plagiarism “is the unacknowledged presentation, in whole or in part of
the work of others as one’s own, whether in written, oral or other form in an examination,
report, assignment, thesis or dissertation.” Further information can be found at
www.wlu.ca/academicintegrity or in the Graduate Calendar. If you have questions or concerns,
please bring them up with the course instructor.
4
Collaboration: All work produced by students, with the exception of joint presentations, needs
to be the product of their own individual efforts. Although discussion of topics is to be
expected, all written assignments must reflect original work and be written independently. In
the case of the take-home exam, no collaboration on any part of the assignment is allowed –
however minimal.
Submission: Written work should be presented in a scholarly fashion, double-spaced using
12pt. Times New Roman font or equivalent, and properly cited and footnoted. Written
assignments are, in most cases, expected to be submitted in hard copy to the instructor either
during class time or during office hours. E-mailed papers will not be accepted unless special
arrangements have been made with the instructor. As noted above, however, the take-home
exam should be submitted to the instructor electronically.
Late penalties: Late penalties will be penalized at a rate of one letter grade per day, including
weekends (meaning that a B+ paper that is one day late will receive a grade of B).
Communication: An active e-mail account is required as a means of communication. Please
ensure that your account is active and check it regularly.
Accommodations: Accommodations for emergencies, serious illness or religious observances
will be made for both seminar attendance and written work. Where possible – such as in the
case of religious observances – I expect to be notified in advance. Documentation may be
required. Should you feel uncomfortable discussing the need for accommodation with me
directly please feel free to contact accessible learning to discuss your situation.
Other Useful Public Policy Sources:
Leslie A. Pal, Beyond Policy Analysis: Public Issue Management in Turbulent Times. Third
Edition. (Thomson-Nelson: 2006)
Paul A. Sabatier (ed), Theories of the Public Policy Process (Westview Press,
1999/2007)
Laurent Dobuzinskis, Michael Howlett and David Laycock (eds), Policy Analysis in
Canada: The State of the Art (University of Toronto Press, 2007)
Useful Journals: Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration and
Institutions; International Organisation; Journal of European Public Policy; Millennium:
Journal of International Studies; Canadian Journal of Political Science; Canadian Public
Policy; Journal of Public Policy; Public Policy and Administration; Public Policy Research;
Science and Public Policy; Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice
5
Course Topics and Readings
Week 1: September 13 – Comparative Public Policy: Introduction and Context
Michael Howlett, M. Ramesh, and Anthony Perl, Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles
and Policy Subsystems (Don Mills: Oxford University Press, 2003), 2-16, 50-89
(chapters 1 and 3).
NOTE: September 20 – Extra IP601 Session
Week 2: September 27 – Theoretical Approaches to the Study of Public Policy
Howlett et al, pp. 17-49 (chapter 2).
Peter Hall and Rosemary Taylor, “Political Science and the Three New
Institutionalisms,” Political Studies 44:5 (1996), 936-957.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9248.1996.tb00343.x/pdf
Nikolaos Zahariadis, “Comparing Three Lenses of Policy Choice,” Policy Studies
Journal 26:3 (1998), 434-448.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1541-0072.1998.tb01911.x/pdf
Charles H Levine, “Where Policy Comes from: Ideas, Innovations, and Agenda
Choices.” Public Administration Review, 45:1 (1985), 255-258.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3110156
Week 3: October 4 – Public Policy in a Globalizing World
Diane Stone, “Global Public Policy, Transnational Policy Communities, and Their
Networks,” The Policy Studies Journal 36:1 (2008), 19-38.
http://resolver.scholarsportal.info/resolve/0190292x/v36i0001/19_gpptpcatn
Grace Skogstad, “Globalization and Public Policy: Situating Canadian Analyses,”
Canadian Journal of Political Science 33:4 (December 2000), 805-828.
http://resolver.scholarsportal.info/resolve/00084239/v33i0004/805_gappsca
6
Jim Whitman, “Global Governance as the Friendly Face of Unaccountable Power,”
Security Dialogue 33:1 (2002), 45-57.
http://resolver.scholarsportal.info/resolve/09670106/v33i0001/45_ggatffoup
Fred Carden, Knowledge to Policy. (Ottawa: International Development Research
Centre, 2009), Ch. 1, “The Findings.”
http://idl-bnc.idrc.ca/dspace/bitstream/10625/37706/1/127931.pdf
Week 4: October 10-14 – Program Reading Week
Week 5 October 18 – Problem Definition and Agenda-Setting
Howlett et al, pp. 92-109 (chapter 4).
B. Guy Peters, “The Problem of Policy Problems,” Journal of Comparative Policy
Analysis: Research and Practice 7:4 (2005), 349-370.
http://resolver.scholarsportal.info/resolve/13876988/v07i0004/349_tpopp
Richard Price, “Reversing the Gun Sights: Transnational Civil Society Targets Land
Mines,” International Organization 52:3 (Summer 1998), 613-644.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/2601403
Week 6: October 25 – Policy Formulation: Instruments and Design
Howlett et al, pp. 110-138 (chapter 5).
Christopher Hood and Helen Margetts, The Tools of Government in the Digital Age
(New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2007), 2-11, 144-166.
Anthony Perl and James A. Dunn, “Reframing Automobile Fuel Economy Policy in
North America: The Politics of Punctuating a Policy Equilibrium,” Transport
Reviews 27:1 (2007): 1-35.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01441640600821308
Week 7: November 1 – Case Study: Climate Change Policy in Canada
Mark Winfield, “Climate Change and Canadian Energy Policy: Policy Contradiction and
Policy Failure,” Behind the Headlines 65:1 (2008): 1-19.
http://www.opencanada.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/BTH_vol65_no6.pdf
Steven Bernstein, “International institutions and the framing of domestic policies: The
Kyoto Protocol and Canada’s response to climate change,” Policy Sciences 35
(2002): 203-236.
http://resolver.scholarsportal.info/resolve/00322687/v35i0002/203_iiatfoacrtcc
7
Mark Jaccard and Nic Rivers, “Canadian Policies for Deep Greenhouse Gas
Reductions,” in J. Leonard et al (eds.), A Canadian Priorities Agenda: Policy
Choices to Improve Economic and Social Well-being (Montreal: Institute for
Research on Public Policy, 2007): 77-106.
http://www.irpp.org/books/archive/cpa/jaccard-rivers.pdf
Week 8: November 8 – Decision-Making
Howlett et al, pp. 139-159 (chapter 6).
Geert Teisman, “Models for Research into Decision-Making Processes: On Phases,
Streams, and Decision-Making Rounds,” Public Administration 78:4 (2000):
937-956.
http://resolver.scholarsportal.info/resolve/00333298/v78i0004/937_mfridopsadr
Claudio Radaelli, “The Public Policy of the European Union: Whither Politics of
Expertise?” Journal of European Public Policy 6:5 (1999): 757-74.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/135017699343360
Week 9: November 15 – Decision-making Case Study: Canada and Iraq
Rick Fawn, “No consensus within the Commonwealth, no consensus with itself? Canada
and the Iraq War,” The Round Table 97:397 (2008): 519-533.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00358530802207229
Donald Barry, “Chretien, Bush and the War in Iraq,” The American Review of Canadian
Studies 35:2 (2005): 215-245.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02722010509481371
Peter C. Newman, “What’s going on here?” Maclean’s, 31 March 2003, p. 49.
http://www.lexisnexis.com/lnacui2api/api/version1/getDocCui?lni=4888-6270-0029R4PM&csi=7963&hl=t&hv=t&hnsd=f&hns=t&hgn=t&oc=00240&perma=true
Allan Gotlieb, “The Chretien doctrine,” Maclean’s, March 2003, p. 42-3.
http://www.lexisnexis.com/lnacui2api/api/version1/getDocCui?lni=4888-6270-0029R4PH&csi=7963&hl=t&hv=t&hnsd=f&hns=t&hgn=t&oc=00240&perma=true
Week 10: November 22 – Policy Implementation
Howlett/Ramesh, pp. 160-177 (chapter 7).
Peter de Leon and Linda de Leon, “Whatever happened to policy implementation? An
alternative approach,” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory
12:4 (2002): 467-492.
8
http://jpart.oxfordjournals.org/content/12/4/467.full.pdf+html
Antje Ellerman, “Coercive Capacity and the Politics of Implementation: Deportation in
Germany and the United States,” Comparative Political Studies 38:10
(December 2005): 1219-1244.
http://resolver.scholarsportal.info/resolve/00104140/v38i0010/1219_ccatpoi
Week 11: November 29 – Evaluation and Learning
Howlett/Ramesh, pp. 178-196 (chapter 8).
Peter May, “Policy Learning and Failure,” Journal of Public Policy 12:4 (1992), 331354.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/4007550
Neil Boyd, “Gun Control: Placing Costs in Context,” Canadian Journal of Criminology
and Criminal Justice 45:4 (October 2003): 473-478.
http://resolver.scholarsportal.info.remote.libproxy.wlu.ca/resolve/17077753/v45i0004/4
73_gcpcic
Philip Stenning, “Long Gun Registration: A Poorly-aimed Longshot,” Canadian
Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice 45:4 (October 2003): 479-488.
http://resolver.scholarsportal.info.remote.libproxy.wlu.ca/resolve/17077753/v45i0004/4
80_lgrapal
Thomas Gabor, “The Federal Gun Registry: An Urgent Need for Independent, NonPartisan Research,” Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice 45:4
(October 2003): 489-498.
http://resolver.scholarsportal.info.remote.libproxy.wlu.ca/resolve/17077753/v45i0004/4
89_tfgraunfinr
Week 12: December 6 – Policy Stability and Change
Howlett/Ramesh, pp. 198-211 (chapter 9).
Peter Hall, “Policy Paradigms, Social Learning and the State: The Case of Economic
Policy-Making in Britain,” Comparative Politics 25 (1993), 275-296.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/422246
Fleur Alink, Arjen Boin and Paul t’Hart, “Institutional Crises and Reforms in Policy
Sectors: The Case of Asylum Policy in Europe,” Journal of European Public
Policy 8:2 (2001), 286-306.
http://www.tandfonline.com.remote.libproxy.wlu.ca/doi/abs/10.1080/135017601511464
87
Robert S. Wood, “Tobacco’s Tipping Point: The Master Settlement Agreement as a
Focusing Event,” Policy Studies Journal 34:3 (2006), 419-436.
9
http://resolver.scholarsportal.info.remote.libproxy.wlu.ca/resolve/0190292x/v34i0003/4
19_ttptmsaaafe
10