IP603: Comparative Public Policy
Wilfrid Laurier University
Fall 2015
Instructor: Dr. J.A. Sandy Irvine
Lecture: Tues 9-11:50am
Email: sirvine@wlu.ca
Classroom: BSIA 132
Office Hours: Wednesdays 2-4pm (or by appointment)
Office: DAWB 4-103D
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.
The Political Science Department’s policy on deferred midterm and final examinations can be found at http://www.wlu.ca/arts/politicalscience
COURSE DESCRIPTION
This course focuses on public policy development and analysis in a comparative, applied and
internationalized context. In the beginning of the course we consider the theoretical and conceptual
tools used in the academic literature to better understand public policy. The course then turns to
examine specific processes within the cycle of a public policy (such as problem definition, agenda
setting, policy design, implementation and evaluation) and the actors involved in the process. While
using contemporary cases throughout, the final part of the course will apply the ideas developed in the
first half of the course to specific cases. This course examines the public policy process with the insights
provided by a comparative perspective and considers the internationalized aspects of domestic public
policy as well as approaches to global public policy.
Course Objectives
By the end of the course students should:









Be conversant in the key conceptual and competing theoretical approaches employed by social
scientists to understand, explain and critique 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 this knowledge to specific public policies.
Understand the processes and implications of the internationalization of public policy and global
public policy
Be able to use the comparative method to improve understandings of the public policy process
in different jurisdictions.
Have strengthened their foundation for further study of comparative public policy.
Have developed practical skills in preparation for a variety of roles students might have in the
public policy process.
Have further developed core academic skills, including academic reading, writing, critical
analysis and the ability to work in an interdisciplinary context.
Have been challenged to think critically about comparative public policy
REQUIRED TEXTS
1. Leslie Pal, Beyond Policy Analysis, Public Issue Management in Turbulent Times 5thEdition
(Nelson, 2013)
2. All other readings are available online. Most are available through the WLU library webpage.
Other useful sources:
Eugene Bardach, A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The Eightfold Path to More Effective Problem
Solving, 4thEdition (Sage, 2012)
Xun Wu, M. Ramesh, Michael Howlett, Scott A. Fritzen, The Public Policy Primer (Routledge, 2010)
Eduardo Araral Jr., Scott Fritzen, Michael Howlett, M Ramesh and Xun Wu, Routledge
Handbook of Public Policy (Routledge, 2015)
COURSE EVALUATION
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
Participation
Policy Memo 1 (October 20th)
Policy Memo 2 (November 17th)
Group Presentation (December 1st)
Take home exam (Dec 17st-18th)
20%
20%
20%
10%
30%
A. Seminar Participation
A significant proportion of each class for this course will rely on student participation. Students are
required to attend and make regular contributions to each seminar. Students’ participation is expected
to demonstrate a high standard of critical engagement with the readings as well as high quality
communication skills. Communication skills include, but are not limited to, the ability to convey
complicated ideas in an organized manner; the use of appropriate professional language; the ability to
listen and respond to other participants effectively. Attendance in all seminars is required and a
significant amount of absences may result in a severe penalty.
B. Policy Memo I (October 20th)
In this assignment students will write a policy memo for a decision-maker that provides the background
to a particular policy issue. Amongst other things, the memo will identify the stakeholders and their
(possibly competing) definitions of the problem as well as their policy goals / objectives. We will set the
policy issue as a group. Further details will be given in class.
Memos must be 1000 words (+/-10%). Please include a word count on your cover page. Memos must be
submitted electronically through the drop box at the mylearning space course webpage (which will use
Turnitin) by midnight on October 20th. Memos submitted after this will incur late penalties.
C. Policy Memo II (November 17th)
This memo will focus on the decision-making / implementation / evaluation stages of the policy process.
The memo should provide Canadian decision-makers with a comparative analysis of a specific policy
from another jurisdiction that might be used in the Canadian context. The memo should identify the
potential value and problems with transferring the policy into the Canadian context and make a strong
argument for or against adopting that policy, with any proposed amendments. We will set the policy
issue as a group. In consultation with the instructor, students should pick their own jurisdiction for
comparison. A maximum of three students may use the same jurisdiction for comparison.
Memos must be 1000 words (+/-10%). Please include a word count on your cover page. Memos must be
submitted electronically through the drop box at the mylearning space course webpage (which will use
Turnitin) by midnight on November 17th. Memos submitted after this will incur late penalties.
D. Collaborative Policy Presentation (December 1st)
This presentation will build on the work you undertook for your second policy memo. Working with 2
other students, drawing on your assessment of the potential for policy transfer, and integrating the
work of all three students who have considered policy transfer from 3 different jurisdictions, you will
make a specific policy recommendation for adoption / change of a Canadian policy. Using a Powerpoint
(or equivalent) presentation students will make a 15 minute presentation and then respond to 20
minutes of questions. Further details will be provided in class.
E. Take home
The take-home exam will cover all material from the course. It will consist of 3 questions of which you
are required to answer 2. The take-home exam will be e-mailed to students at 9am, Thursday,
December 17, 2015 and must be submitted, in the designated drop box on the course webpage by 5pm
Friday December 18, 2015. Late papers will be penalized 5% (of the total 100% of the exam) per hour
after the due date and time. Your answers should not exceed 1000 words per question. The exam
should be the work of individual students with absolutely no collaboration. As a guide, once the exam
has been circulated students should discuss no aspect of the course with one another.
COURSE POLICIES
Academic Misconduct and the Need for Academic Integrity: Academic integrity is greatly valued in this
course. Academic misconduct occurs in a variety of forms. Students are required to familiarise
themselves with the University policies on Plagiarism and Academic Dishonesty as well as the associated
penalties which can be severe. Plagiarism: According to the student calendar (2006-2007) 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. Should you have any questions about these
issues please feel free to discuss them with me. Collaboration: Excluding the group presentation, all of
the work produced by students needs to be the product of their own individual efforts. Although
discussion of topics is to be expected this work needs to reflect original and individual ideas and be
written independently.
Submission: Written work should be presented in a scholarly fashion, double spaced with one inch
margins using a 12pt. Times New Roman font or equivalent. Work must be submitted as an electronic
copy. Late penalties will be based on the date and time of electronic submission through the correct
drop box on the course webpage in my-learning space. Please keep a copy of all work submitted for the
course.
Succinct and lucid writing is a skill. Papers that substantially exceed the word count will be subject to
penalty.
Late penalties: Late penalties for written work (excluding the final take-home exam) will be assigned at
2% (of the 100% value of the paper) per day, including weekend days, with a midnight cut-off for each
day. To stop late penalties on the weekends you must submit work through the appropriate drop box on
the course webpage in mylearning space. Late submission of your take-exam will be penalized 5% (of
the total 100% of the exam) per hour after the due date and time.
Communication: An active WLU e-mail account is required as a means of communication. Please ensure
that your account is active and check it regularly. I encourage students to come and see me in office
hours with specific questions or more general issues. If you require clarification on any aspect of the
course please arrange to see me. Please also feel free to set up a meeting outside of regular office
hours.
Accommodations: Accommodations for emergencies, serious illness or religious observances will be
made for both class attendance and written work. Documentation may be required. Where possible –
such as in the case of religious observances - it is expected that I be notified in advance. Should you feel
uncomfortable discussing the need for accommodation with me directly please feel free to contact
accessible learning to discuss your situation.
University Resources: The University provides a large selection of professional, academic and personal
support services to assist students to succeed in their academic careers. Please consult the University
website for available resources.
LECTURE OUTLINE AND REQUIRED READINGS
Required Readings: It is important that students read and think critically about the course readings.
These readings have been selected to provide the basis for the discussion held in class. They also assist
in meeting a number of the key objectives of the course. These include providing: an overview of each
topic; discussion of relevant approaches and critiques of those approaches; an introduction to key
readings and authors in a particular field; and examples of the application of these approaches to key
issues raised in the course. In addition to these readings students are encouraged to explore other
material on the topics covered in the course (see additional readings) and to keep up-to-date on
relevant current affairs.
Week 1: Introduction (Sept. 15th)
◙ Richard Simeon, “Studying Public Policy” Canadian Journal of Political Science 9:4 (1976)
◙ Pal, Chapter 1 “Policy Analysis: Concepts and Practice”
◙ Pal, Chapter 2, “Modern Governance: The Challenges for Policy Analyses”
Week 2: Theoretical and Conceptual Foundations: Part I (Sept. 22nd)
◙ Peter A. Hall & Rosemary C.R. Taylor, "Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms,”
Political Studies, 44:5 (1996)
◙ Theofore R. Marmor et al., “National Values, Institutions and Health Policies: What do they
Imply for Medicare Reform?” Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis 12:1&2
(February, 2010)
◙ Richard Jackson, “Language, policy and the construction of a torture culture in the war on
terrorism” Review of International Studies 33 (2007)
◙ Pal, Chapter 9, “Policy Communication”
Additional Reading:
Judith Goldstein and Robert Keohane “Ideas and Foreign Policy: An Analytical Framework.”
Judith Goldstein and Robert Keohane, (eds.) Ideas and Foreign Policy: Beliefs,
Institutions, and Political Change (Cornell University Press, 1993).
Week 3: Theoretical and Conceptual Foundations: Part II and Guest Speaker (Sept. 29th)
◙ Pal, Chapter 6, “Policy Communities and Networks”
◙ Kuhika Gupta, Comparative Public Policy: Using Comparative Method to Advance Our
Understanding of the Policy Process,” Policy Studies Journal 40: S1 (2012)
◙ Donald J. Savoie, “Chapter 7: The New Bureaucrats: Short-Order Cooks” in Power: Where is it?
(Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2010)
◙ Please explore the following webpages in order to familiarize yourself with the work of the
Commission for Environmental Cooperation: www.cec.org; www.cec.org/guidelines
(look through pages 1-14 in particular); www.cec.org/SEMregistry;
www.cec.org/submissions.
Week 4: Framing, Agenda Setting and Problem Definition (Oct 6th)
◙ Pal, Chapter 3 “Problem Definition in Policy Analysis”
◙ Dorf, M. C., & Tarrow, S. (2014). Strange bedfellows: How an anticipatory countermovement
brought same‐sex marriage into the public arena. Law & Social Inquiry, 39:2.
◙ Christopher R. Cook, “A Question of Intervention: American Policymaking in Sierra Leone and
the Power of Institutional Agenda Setting,” African Studies Quarterly 10:1 (Spring, 2008)
◙ Nicole Fifer and Shannon K. Orr, “The Influence of Problem Definition on Environmental Policy
Change: A Comparative Study of the Yellowstone Wildfires,” Policy Studies Journal 41:4
(2013)
Additional Reading:
Katherine Booth and Katheryn Harrison, “The Influence of institutions on Issue Definition:
Children’s Environmental Health Policy in the United States and Canada,” Journal of
Policy Analysis: Research and Practice 11:3 (2009)
B. Guy Peters, “The Problem of Policy Problems,” Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis:
Research and Practice, 7:4 (2005).
David Dery, “Agenda Setting and Problem Definition,” Policy Studies, 21:1 (2000).
W. D. Kay, “Problem Definitions and Policy Contradictions: John F. Kennedy and the
‘Space Race’,” The Policy Studies Journal, 31:1 (2003)
----------- Thanksgiving & READING WEEK Oct. 12-16th ---------Week 5: Policy Design & Decision-Making (Oct 20th)
◙ Pal, Chapter 4 “Policy Instruments and Design”
◙ Pal, Chapter 8, “Policymaking under Pressure”
Case Study: Designing Gun Control Policy in the United States
◙ Irshad Altheimer and Matthew Boswell, “Reassessing the Association between Gun Availability
and Homicide Rates at the Cross-National Level,” American Journal of Criminal Justice
37:4 (Dec. 2012)
◙ A series of resources and media articles to read will be posted on the course webpage.
Week 6 Policy Implementation (Oct. 27th)
◙ Pal, Chapter 5 “Policy Implementation”
◙ Mark Winfield, “Policy Instruments in Canadian Environmental Policy”, in Van Nijnatten and
Boardman eds. Canadian Environmental Policy and Politics Prospects for Leadership and
Innovation (Oxford University Pres, 2009)
◙ Joshua Newman and Anthony Perl, “Partners in Clime: Public-private partnership and British
Columbia’s capacity to pursue climate policy objectives,” Canadian Public Administration
57:2 (June, 2014)
◙ Simona Milio, “Can Administrative Capacity Explain Differences in Regional Performances?
Evidence from Structural Funds Implementation in Southern Italy,” Regional Studies
41:4 (June 2007)
Additional Reading:
Alexiadou, N. and Lange B. “Deflecting European Union influence on national education
policy-making: The case of the United Kingdom” Journal of European Integration, 35:1
(2013)
Lascoumes, P. and Le Gales, P. “Introduction: Understanding public policy through its
instruments from the nature of instruments to the sociology of public policy
instrumentation,” Governance, 20:1 (2007)
Desmond King, “The American State and Social Engineering: Policy Instruments in Affirmative
Action” Governance 20:1 (January 2007)
R. Kent Weaver, “But Will it Work? Implementation Analysis to Improve Government
Performance” Issues in in Governance Studies 32 (February, 2010)
Week 7: Policy Evaluation, Learning and Change (Nov. 3rd)
◙ Pal, Chapter 7, “Policy Evaluation”
◙ Micheal Howlett, “The lesson of failure: learning and blame avoidance in public policy
making,” International Political Science Review 33:5 (2012)
◙ Schmid, A., Cacace, M., Götze, R., & Rothgang, H. “Explaining health care system change:
Problem pressure and the emergence of “hybrid” health care systems.” Journal of
Health Politics, Policy and Law 35:4 (2010)
◙ Robert H. Blank, “Transformation of the US Healthcare System: Why is Change so Difficult?”
Current Sociology 60:4 (2012)
Additional Reading:
Evert Vedung, “Six models of evaluation,” Eduardo Araral Jr., Scott Fritzen, Michael Howlett, M.
Ramesh and Xun Wu (eds) Routledge Handbook of Public Policy (2013)
Frank R. Baumgartner, Bryan D. Jones and John Wilkerson, “Comparative Studies of Policy
Dynamics” Comparative Political Studies 44:8 (2011)
Richard Rose, Learning from Comparative Public Policy: A Guide, (Routledge, 2005)
Peter A. Hall, "Policy Paradigms, Social Learning and the State: The Case of Economic Policy
Making in Britain,” Comparative Politics, 25 (1993).
Emma Michelle Taylor, Rachel Hayman, Fay Crawford, Patricia Jeffery and James Smith, “The
Impact of Official Development Aid on Maternal and Reproductive Health Outcomes: A
Systematic Review (2013). H ttp://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/
journal.pone.0056271
Week 8: Internationalization and Global Public Policy (Nov.10th)
◙ Diane Stone, “Global Public Policy, Transnational Policy Communities and their Networks” The
Policy Studies Journal 36:1 (2008)
◙ Brian Hocking, “Patrolling the ‘Frontier’: Globalization, Localization and the ‘Actorness’ of
Non-Central Governments,” Regional and Federal Studies 9:1 (1999)
◙ David P. Dolowitz and David Marsh, “Learning from Abroad: The role of Policy Transfer in
Contemporary Policy-Making,” Governances: An International Journal of Policy and
Administration, 13:1 (2000).
◙ Franklin Oduro and Rosemary Nagy, “What’s in an Idea?: Truth Commission Policy Transfer in
Ghana and Canada,” Journal of Human Rights 13:1 (2014)
Additional Reading:
Michele M. Betsill and Harriet Bulkeley, “Cities and the Multilevel Governance of Global Climate
Change,” Global Governance 12 (2006)
Debora VanNijnatten, Analyzing the Canada-US environmental relationship: a multi-faceted
approach, The American Review of Canadian Studies 33:1 (Spring, 2003)
Kurt Weyland. “Theories of Policy Diffusion: Lessons from Latin American Pension Reform,”
World Politics, 57 (January 2005)
Week 9: Comparative Public Policy – Outside the Global North (Nov. 17th)
◙ Anthony Hodges, Geranda Notten & Clare O’Brien, “Are cash transfers a realistic policy tool
for poverty reduction in Sub-Sahara Africa? Evidence from Congo-Brazzaville and Côte
d’Ivoire, Global Social Policy 13:2 (2013)
◙ Mark Robinson and Steven Friedman, “Civil Society, Democratization, and Foreign Aid: Civic
Engagement and Public Policy in South Africa and Uganda” Democratization 14:4
(August 2007)
◙ Xufeng Zhu, “Strategies of Chinese Policy Entrepreneurs in the Third Sector: challenges of
“Technical Infeasibility” Policy Sciences 41:4 (December, 2008)
Additional Reading:
Eckl, J. “The power of private foundations: Rockefeller and Gates in the struggle against
Malaria,” Global Social Policy 14:1 (2014)
Week 10: Case 1 - Comparative Immigration Policies and Guest Speaker (Nov. 24th)
◙ Antje Ellerman, “Coercive Capacity and the Politics of Implementation: Deportation in
Germany and the United States,” Comparative Political Studies 38:10 (December 2005)
◙ Frederking L.C. “A comparative study of framing immigration policy after 11 September 2001”
Policy Studies, 33:4(2012)
◙ Dagmar Soennecken, “Shifting Up and Back: The European Turn in Canadian Refugee Policy”
Comparative Migration Studies 2:1 (2014) http://imiscoe.org/journal-cms-2/2014-1/23
soennecken-dagmar-shifting-up-and-back-the-european-turn-in-canadian-refugeepolicy-pp-101-122/file
◙ Christopher G. Anderson. Affidavit – Citizenship Revocation (Draft, October 2015)
Additional Reading:
Triadafilopoulos, T. “Global norms, domestic institutions and the transformation of immigration
policy in Canada and the US” Review of International Studies, 36:1 (2010).
Week 11: Group presentation (Dec. 1st)
Week 12: Case 2 – Foreign Policies: Comparative perspectives (Dec. 8th)
◙ S. Fabbrini and S. Sicurelli, ‘‘Bringing Policy-Making Structure Back In: Why Are the
US and the EU Pursuing Different Foreign Policies,’’ International Politics 45:3
(2008).
◙ Laura Neack, “Pathways to Power: A Comparative Study of the Foreign Policy Ambitions of
Turkey, Brazil, Canada and Australia,” Seton Hall Journal of Diplomacy and International
Relations 14:2 (Summer, 2013)
◙ OECD “Aid in developing countries rebounded in 2013 to reach and all-time high.”
http://www.oecd.org/newsroom/aid-to-developing-countries-rebounds-in-2013-toreach-an-all-time-high.htm
◙ Nancy Birdsall and Homi Kharas, “The Quality of Official Development Assistance (QuODA)
Third Edition Center for Global Development and Global Economic Development at
Brookings (2014). http://www.cgdev.org/userfiles/quoda/Quality%20of%20Official%
20Development%20Assistance%20-%20Third%20Edition.pdf
Week 13: Conclusions (Dec. 15th)
◙ Review course material / notes