Transcript Working Group 2 - Aarhus Universitet

Conceptual Grammar for Analysing Policy
Movement
Work Group 2:
Miguel Lim, Chris Muellerleile, Jana Bajevic,
Tatyana Bajenova, Sina Westa, Janja Komljenovic
WG 2 - Asssigned Texts
• Dryzek, J. (2006). Policy Analysis as Critique.
• Hajer, M. and D. Laws. (2006). Ordering
Through Discourse.
– In Moran, M., Rein, M. and R. Goodin (eds). 2006.
The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy.
Asssigned Texts
• Dryzek, J. (2006). Policy Analysis as Critique
– “Critical theory is directed at an audience of
sufferers in order to make plain to them the
causes of their suffering” (p.192)
– Attention to the linguistic turn and review of
techniques to deal with ‘text’
– There are ‘tasks’ for the critical policy analyst
Asssigned Texts
• Hajer, M. and D. Laws. (2006). Ordering
Through Discourse
– The central role of the concept of ambivalence
– ”Governing is in large a part a matter of defining
the situation” (p.252)
– Analysis’ goal: to ‘illuminate the mechanisms that
are used to manage ambivalence’ (p.263)
– Analysts’ ordering devices: beliefs, frames and
discourses
Speaking to Peck et al.
• Mobility (Peck 2011) vs. Coining of policy in
situ (Dryzek 2008, Hajer and Laws 2008)
• Both chapters not directly connected to policy
travel
– evolution of policy analysis as a field and tend to
lean on constructivist side
– Commonalities include:
• attention to both structure and agency
• Attention to ‘social’ reality around policy transfer
Speaking to Peck et al.
• Rational-instrumental towards embeddedrelational
• A. Dryzek (2008): Technocratic > accommodative
> critical analysis > linguistic turn
• B. Hajer and Laws (2008): Advocacy coalition
framework > framing > narrative and discourse
• C. Peck (2011): focus on the mobility of policy:
distinguishing between diffusion models, theories
of transition, and neo-diffusionist approaches.
Speaking to Peck et al.
• Big picture issues:
• Critical policy analysis and/vs orthodox
approaches to policy transfer
• Commitments of critical analysis (to
‘democracy’, other institutions)
• Emerging network society and networked
problem solving
Speaking to Peck et al.
• Big picture issues:
• Peck and Peck and Theodore: rethink the
notion of policy altogether in the context of
policies, politics, and policy based
"knowledge" that are highly mobile.
• Need for new methodologies to examine
hybrid "policies"
Further questions
• What should we care about? Sufferers? Is
critical policy analysis of policy transfer always
about identifying a sufferer? If so, then: who
what when where why…?
Further questions
• A consideration on the ontologies of policy
and epistemologies/methodologies for
understanding policy.
– Do we need a new ontology of policy?
– Does the conventional definition of policy help or
hinder our research?