TRANSFORMATIONAL POLICY: WHAT ROLE FOR RESEARCH?
September 1st - 3rd 2015 at the University of Bath
IPR SHORT COURSE: SYNOPSES OF SESSIONS
Session 1
Professor Graham Room: Transformational Policy and the Role of Research
This short course is concerned with research and ‘transformational policy’? Much talk of
policy is concerned with small adjustments and ‘nudges’: but this risks neglecting longer-term
and more profound changes. Here we put this in question: to consider what, if any, guidance
researchers can provide to policy makers who wish to address the deeper social and political
choices of our time. This first session introduces some of the literatures and raises questions
which will recur through the three days.
Advance reading that could be useful:
Graham Room (2014), Evidence for Policy Makers
Kingdon, J W (1984), Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies
Session 2
Professors James Copestake and Professor Hugh Lauder: Personal Case Studies
In this session you will be invited to make a five minute verbal presentation of a possible
policy change that you would like to research in more depth. In preparation for doing so you
are encouraged to prepare a one page background case study note that can be circulated to
others on the course. The following questions may help in preparing this.
How can the possible policy change be summed up in a sentence? What explains your choice
of this particular issue? Who has the authority to determine the policy change, if anyone, and
over what area and time frame? Who else has power to influence the policy change, whether
by driving it forward or by resisting it? What prospects are there for effective implementation
of the policy change, if approved? What kinds of evidence have been used to promote and
resist the policy change? What kind of additional evidence would be useful and why? How
can you influence the policy change, if at all?
Session 3
Dr Emma Carmel: Transnational migration and welfare in the EU
The TRANSWEL research project runs from 2015-2018. It is concerned with the rights of
citizens from the new EU member states who move to live and/or work in an old member
state. Today this is one of the most controversial issues in the EU. It appears regularly in
national and international news headlines. It is sure to remain on the news agenda, as the UK
government seeks to re-negotiates its EU membership around the laws and policies in this
area.
The evidence brought to bear on these public controversies is incomplete and poorly
understood, by the protagonists and their audiences alike. They are keen for more and
different evidence - but often just to bolster their own ideological positions. The topic ranges
across several policy areas. This makes the political process of developing new policies full of
hidden risks, constraints and vetoes. For researchers it is also problematic, when the topic
and its controversies range over areas which do not coincide with the disciplinary boundaries
of their academic expertise and research.
This session will use this research project as a springboard for considering the following
questions:
 How far and in what ways should academic researchers engage in political debate
and policy discussion - what are the advantages and pitfalls of different kinds of
engagement?
 What is the status of research evidence and its role in fast-moving policy and political
controversies?
 What is the status of 'expertise' and how does this relate to the provision of
'evidence' for the policy-engaged researcher and the research-engaged policymaker?
Advance reading that could be useful:
Michael Blauberger, Susanne K Schmidt ‘Welfare migration? Free movement of EU citizens
and access to social benefits’, Research and Politics, Dec 2014: DOI:
10.1177/2053168014563879
C Bruzelius, E Chase and M Seeleib-Kaiser, ‘Semi-Sovereign Welfare States, Social Rights Of EU
Migrant Citizens And The Need For Strong State Capacities’ Social Europe Dec 2014.
Session 4
Professor David Miller: Lobbying and transparency in Scotland, the UK and the EU
This session examines the evolution of policy on transparency in relation to lobbying at three
legislative/policy venues: Scotland, the UK and the EU. The emergence and evolution of the
lobbying industry is sketched including a review of cases of controversy, corruption and
conflict of interest. This has led to pressure from the media, from NGOs and civil society
groups and to some extent from popular opinion. The session examines the role of NGO’s
and civil society groups (with the aid of a small number of academic researchers) in pushing
for greater transparency and specifically for lobbying regulation. It shows that even in the
face of significant reluctance from policy makers that transparency reforms have been
progressively introduced in an ongoing process in Scotland, the UK and EU.
Advance Reading that could be useful:
Dinan, W. and Miller, D., 2012. 'Sledgehammers, Nuts and Rotten Apples: Reassessing the
Case for Lobbying Self-Regulation in the United Kingdom, Interest Groups and Advocacy,
Volume 1 Issue 1, advance online publication, March 27; doi:10.1057/iga.2012.5
Miller, D., 'Corporate Lobbying’s New Frontier: from Influencing Policy-Making to Shaping
Public Debate’, in Dieter Zinnbauer (Ed.) Global Corruption Report, Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press in association with Transparency International, 2009.
http://powerbase.info/index.php/Lobbying_regulation_-_chronology_2010-2019
Session 5
Professor Philip Jones, Dr Andy Weyman and Professor Graham Room: Nudge and
Behavioural Change
In recent years it has become politically fashionable for policy makers to emphasise the value
of ‘nudging’ individuals to change their behaviour, rather than resorting to old-fashioned
regulation and fiscal incentives. ‘Nudge’ was popularised by Thaler and Sunstein’s book
Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness. The Labour government
established a ‘Nudge Unit’ in the Cabinet Office; the Conservatives have turned this into the
Behavioural Insights Team, a free-standing social purpose company working with policy
makers both inside the UK and internationally.
Philip Jones will present the roots of ‘nudge’ in behavioural economics.
Andy Weyman will consider how this is being used within Government departments.
Graham Room will question the intellectual roots of ‘nudge’, as well as its policy uses, and
argue instead for what he calls ‘nuzzle’.
The debate will aim at critical assessment of ‘nudge’ as an approach to policy design.
Advance reading that could be useful:
Thaler, R. H. and C. R. Sunstein (2008), Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and
Happiness
Thaler, R. H. and C. R. Sunstein (May 2003), 'Libertarian Paternalism', AEA Papers and
Proceedings: Behavioral Economics, Public Policy And Paternalism.
Session 6
Professor Ammon Salter: Business innovation and enterprise development
Governments around the world make significant efforts to shape and direct the innovative
efforts of business and individuals to achieve social and economic objectives. Such innovation
policies involve a range of instruments, including direct and indirect support for business R&D
through grants and tax credits, intellectual property rights, public procurement, prize
competitions, and funding for research. In recent years, we have seen a shift to use of more
public-private partnerships or delegated agencies to deliver these innovation policies. This
talk will explore the challenges of developing effective innovation policies and discuss the
potential for government to animate of private sector innovation.
Advance reading that could be useful:
Mazzucato, M. The Entrepreneurial State: debunking public vs. private sector myths, Anthem
2013.
Mazzucato, M. A Mission-Oriented Approach to Building the Entrepreneurial State, 2014
Session 7
Professors James Copestake and Professor Hugh Lauder: Reflections and learning points.
How do we challenge shared mental models and social norms? How do we learn from
positive deviants and make the most of disruptive events? How do we find ways to ensure
critical junctures become tipping points? In this session we will review what general lessons
can be drawn from the material presented in Sessions 3-6 about prospects for
transformational policy. You will be invited to pick out one idea arising from them that you
found relevant to the personal case study you presented in Session 2.
World Bank (2015) World development report: mind, society, and behaviour. Especially
Chapters 1, 10 and 11.
Atul Gawande (2007) Better: a surgeon’s note on performance. Especially the afterword on
how to be a positive deviant.
Session 8
Professor Graham Room: Where do we go from here?
This final session asks ‘where do we go from here?’ in three senses:
How do the various course participants expect to build on the discussions over these three
days, as they go back to their places of work? What help if any can the IPR and its various
communities provide them?
How adequate are the various sorts of policy research that are available? What are their
blind spots?
Is ‘transformational policy’ possible - policy that goes beyond small adjustments and
addresses longer-term and more profound changes? Can research help policy makers to
address the deeper social and political choices of our time?