Masters of International Public Policy
IP603
Comparative Public Policy
Wilfrid Laurier University
Fall 2013
Class Time: Tuesdays 9 am-11:50 am
Class Location: Rm 132 BSIA
Instructor: Lucie Edwards
Office: BSIA 303
Instructor Office Hours: W 9:00 – 11 am or by
appointment
E-mail: Lucie.Edwards@bell.net
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 will approach the study of Comparative Public Policy from two
perspectives: that of the practitioner within the state who must master a variety of tools
and work within political, constitutional, economic and social constraints; and that of
the external agent, such as a political activist, academic analyst, professional advocate
or journalist seeking to influence the policy process. We will also explore the
1
globalization of the public policy process: how ideas and practices are diffused from
one political constituency to another.
The instructor will take students through the “toolkit” available to policy practitioners
and review the various stages of the public policy process from the definition of the
problem through negotiations and project design to service delivery and lessons
learned.
The course will introduce students to the challenges facing public policy practitioners
as they engage in policy design. We will explore the different historical traditions that
have led to the modern discipline of public administration and compare and contrast
public policy making and policy capacity across a wide array of countries. This will give
the students the opportunity to explore issues of political, economic and “soft” power,
leadership and political culture.
The course will discuss contemporary governance challenges associated with
overlapping jurisdictions, including the particular challenges of policy making within
political unions, federations, intergovernmental agencies, cross-cultural collaboration,
and public-private partnerships.
The course will be offered in a seminar format, and students will explore a number of
case studies as well as participate in simulations of international policy negotiations.
Course Objectives:
By the end of this course, students should have explored future roles as policy
practitioners, whether as policy makers, project designers and directors and as policy
advocates, from the perspective of service inside and outside of government. The
seminar assignments will give them the opportunity to develop policy memo writing
skills, work in teams, and engage in negotiations on complex international issues. They
will learn to identify and engage with stakeholders, define their own and their partners’
essential interests, develop coalitions and engage in bargaining strategies to obtain
their objectives.
Required Readings
All the assigned readings should be available through the E-reserves at the Library,
which can be accessed through the course website on MyLearningSpace.
There is no textbook for this course, but if students prefer a more structured analysis of
the public policy process, we recommend:
Xun Wu, M. Ramesh, Michael Howlett and Scott A. Fritzen, The Public Policy Primer:
Managing the policy process. (London and New York: Routledge, 2010)
2
Course Evaluation
Seminar Participation
Take home exam
due: Oct 8
First Policy Memo due: October 29
Stakeholder Consultations Nov. 19, 26.
Stakeholder Position Papers Dec. 3
Second Policy Memo due: Dec. 17
15 %
10%
20 %
15%
10%
30 %
Seminar Participation
At the Masters’ level, students’ participation is expected to demonstrate a rigorous
standard of critical engagement with the readings as well as high quality
communication skills. Two students will be assigned to introduce readings for class
discussion. The student will be expected to identify the major theme of the article and
link it to the broad theme of the week’s discussion. Students who are interested in
leading discussion on a given theme or reading should advise me by email in advance.
The first to volunteer gets the assignments. I will assign the readings in a rota if
students have not volunteered. Warning: I reserve the right to ask individuals to
answer questions or participate in discussions regardless of whether their hands are
up.
Students are particularly encouraged to bring to class and share with their classmates
interesting and timely articles or other material that could enrich the discussion.
Students should advise the instructor in advance should circumstances (sickness,
family crisis or other emergency) force the student to miss class.
Collaborative Work
Students will be exploring case studies, at first collectively, and later as advocates for
specific stakeholders on a given issue. As in any debate, students will be expected to do
their best for their assigned clients, whether or not they fully sympathize with their own
clients’ or other stakeholders’ positions. This includes acting at all times with civility
and respect for others. Success of the stakeholder debates depends on full participation
by every student assigned as stakeholders’ counsel. If a student can not participate on
the day of the debate, due to illness or a serious emergency, we will attempt to
reassign the student to another role and appoint an understudy to that role. But the
written stakeholder position will still be required on December 3 .
Policy on Late Submissions.
In most cases, assignments are due at the beginning of class on Tuesdays. Late
assignments will be accepted for up to six days after the due date, with a penalty
docked of 5% for each day of delay. As the exercise will be discussed in the following
week, no submissions will be accepted beyond the Monday of the following
week. (Example: policy memo is due October 29. Submissions will not be accepted
3
and marked beyond midnight on November 4.) The second policy memo is due on
December 17. A late submission will be docked 50%. No submissions will be accepted
beyond 9 a.m. on December 19.
The only exceptions to this policy which may be considered will be in the event of
sickness, supported by a signed medical note. Similarly the take home exam on
October 7 may be rescheduled, in the event of documented illness, but must still be
submitted within a 24 hour period.
Take-home Exam
The take-home exam will cover the initial introductory material on the policy process.
It is intended to confirm that the student understands and has mastered the essential
elements of the policy process. It will be distributed electronically on October 7 at 9
a.m. and is due at the start of class on October 8. Exams can be submitted by e-mail
(as a Word attachment) or handed to the instructor, at the beginning of class, unless
alternate arrangements have been made. These are individual assignments; students
should not collaborate with their classmates in submitting their responses.
Policy Memorandum 1 (distributed October 22 and due: October 29. ) A policy memo
is a short paper addressed to a policy-maker, containing a concise analysis of a specific
problem and a proposed strategic response. Policy-Makers value concise and
crisp recommendations. You will propose a series of responsive measures from a
post within government in order to consult the various stakeholders, balance the
various interests at play, develop a concrete plan of action. and communicate the
government’s position to the public at large.
Policy Memorandum 2 (distributed December 14 and due December 17 .) This policy
memorandum will be drafted from the perspective of an outside policy advocate,
seeking to influence the policy process within government. This is an exercise in
persuasion : Arguments will need to be marshalled why the issue matters and therefore
should take a prominent place within public discourse, and eventually the policy
agenda. You will identify a supportive coalition which can be mobilized in favour of the
initiative and propose an operational plan of action, including costs and human
resource requirements, to take the issue from the policy consultation stage through
program execution.
Stakeholder Brief . Each student will be assigned as Counsel to represent a key
stakeholder group vitally interested in a given international problem, within a case
study in international public policy. The student will identify the core issues, risks and
opportunities affecting their stakeholders and propose a strategy to advance these
interests, through public advocacy, coalition building, and direct negotiations with
other stakeholders. One class will be dedicated to formal negotiations involving
presentations by the stakeholders’ representatives, followed by negotiations to identify
and hopefully develop a plan of action to address the issue. Students will be evaluated
both on their written contribution, in the form of a short position paper, and on their
oral advocacy on behalf of their stakeholder group.
Course Topics and Readings
4
September 10 Our Iceberg is Melting
Themes: Who’s on First? The Cast of Characters in Public Policy Making; Different
perspectives on the policy process. The policy cycle.
Readings:
Kotter, John Our Iceberg is Melting, St. Martin’s Press, 2006.
Allison, Graham, Essence of Decision Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis Little, Brown
1971. PP 1-9.
Howlett, Ramesh and Perl, Studying Public Policy, Oxford University Press, 3rd
edition, 2009, pp 2-14.
Case Study: Ratifying the Kyoto Treaty
September 17 The Policy Maker’s Tool Kit
Themes: A history of Public Administration in various cultural traditions: the court,
the mandarinate, the imperial civil service, the Merit Principle and barefoot civil
servants. The three “houses” of policy: the executive, the legislature and the judiciary.
The principal instruments of public policy making within the state. Crisis
Management.
Readings:
James Scott, Seeing Like a State, Yale ISPS Studies 1998. Chapter 3: Authoritarian
High Modernism.
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 Press Toronto 2009. pp 46-63
Liptak, Adam To Have and Uphold: the Supreme Court and the Battle for Same Sex
Marriage (New York Times e-book)
Case Study: Legalization of Same-Sex Marriage
September 24 Where do you get your ideas?
Themes: The policy advocate’s tool kit. Networks, Epistemic communities, think tanks
and Commissions of Enquiry. The diffusion of innovations.
Peter M. Haas, “Do regimes matter? Epistemic Communities and Mediterranean
Pollution Control” , International Organization, 1989, Vol. 43 (3) pp. 377-403.
5
Fran Pavley, "California's Battle for Clean Cars," pp. 364-371 in Schneider,
Rosencranz, Mastrandrea and Kuntz-Durisetti (eds), Climate Change Science and
Policy, Island Press 2009.
Abelson, Donald E., “Any Ideas? Think Tanks and Policy Analysis in Canada” in
Dobuzinskis, Howlett and Laycock, Policy Analysis in Canada The State of the Art,
University of Toronto Press, Toronto, 2007. PP 551-573.
Case Study: The Global Regulation of Tobacco
October 1: Policy Execution: Where the Rubber Hits the Road
Themes: Policy making as a dynamic process of managing change.
Abhijit Banerjee and Esther Duflo, Poor Economics, a Radical Rethinking of the Way
to Fight Global Poverty, Public Affairs, New York, 2010. Chapter 1,2.
Everett P. Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations, Fifth Edition, Free Press, New York, 2003.
Chapter 6, the Attributes of Innovations and their Rates of Adoption.
Atul Gawande, “ Annals of Medecine Slow Ideas”, New Yorker, July 29 2013.
Case Study: Scaling up Agricultural Technology in East Africa.
October 8: Making a Difference in the World: the Role of Policy
Entrepreneurs
Themes: Leadership and entrepreneurship in the policy process.
Readings:
Margaret E. Keck and Kathryn Sikkink, Activists Beyond Borders, Cornell University
Press 1998, pp 1-38.
Everett P. Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations, Fifth Edition, Free Press, New York,
2003.Chapter 9: the Change Agent.
Elon, Amos. “The Peacemakers,” Annals of Diplomacy, The New Yorker, (December
20, 1993)
Case Study: Insectofu.
6
Note: Take Home Exam is due to be turned in at the beginning of class.
October 15 Reading Week
October 22 The international policy process
Theme: the diffusion of innovations across cultures and sovereignties: the role of
international clubs like the G-8, intergovernmental agencies, and coalitions of the
willing.
Readings:
Jacqui True, “Mainstreaming Gender in Global Public Policy”, International Feminist
Journal of Politics Vol 5:3 1 November 2003 pp 368-396
Finnemore, M. “International Organizations as Teachers of Norms—UNESCO and
Science Policy”, International Organization 47 (4) 1993: 565-597.
Carden, Fred, Knowledge to Policy: Making the Most of Development Research, IDRC
2009. Pp19-26, 42-49.
Dolowitz, David and David March, “Learning from Abroad: the Role of Policy Transfer
in Contemporary Policy-Making, Governance 13:1 (2000) pp5-24.
Case Study: Public Administration Reform in a newly democratic South Africa.
Note: the background to the first policy memo will be distributed in class.
October 29 Scientists are from Venus: Technical Expertise in the Policy
Process
Theme: the role of the Sciences, scientists and other technical specialists in making
Public Policy.
Readings:
7
Banks, Gary, “Evidence-based policy making: what is it? How do we get it? “ Australian
Government Productivity Commission, ANU public Lecture Series, presented by
ANZSOG, Canberra, February 2009.
Elizabeth Kolbert , “The Catastrophist” New Yorker, June 29, 2009.
Edwards, Lucie, Global Problems, African Solutions: Perspectives of African Climate
Scientists on Global Climate Change. Africa Portal Policy Memorandum.
Moses, Steven, Plummer, Ngugi et al, “Controlling AIDS in Africa: Effectiveness and
Cost of an Intervention in a High Frequency STD Transmitter Core Group”, AIDS 5:
407-411.
Case study: Introducing Pediatric AIDS programs in Kenya in the nineties: clinics,
hospice services and pre-natal treatment.
Note: First policy memo is due at beginning of class.
November 5 Yes Prime Minister: Getting Things Done in Big
Bureaucracies
Theme: Overcoming bureaucratic obstacles and cutting through red tape. Technical
expertise in the form of budgeting, human resource planning, project design,
monitoring, evaluation and feedback systems.
Readings:
Timothy Beene, Paul F. Nunes, Walter E. Shil, “The Chief Strategy Officer”, Harvard
Business Review, October 2007. hbr.org 2007.1
Annual Report Canada’s Network Abroad 2009-2010, Department of Foreign Affairs
and International Trade.
Case Study: the Transformation Initiative in Foreign Affairs and International Trade.
November 12 Getting to Yes: Public Policy and Negotiations
Theme: Policy as the Outcome of transactional negotiations: identifying stakeholders,
distinguishing between principles, positions and interests
Readings:
Ola Tjornbo, Frances Westley, Darcy Riddell, “The Great Bear Rainforest Story”,
Social Innovation Generation Working Paper 2010-01.
8
Murray, Catherine, “The Media” in Dobuzinskis, Howlett and Laycock, Policy Analysis
in Canada The State of the Art, University of Toronto Press, Toronto, 2007. PP 525550.
Case Study: the Boreal Forest Negotiations
November 19 Stakeholders’ Consultations—Refugee Relief Coordination in
the Middle East.
November 22 Integrated Case for MIPP program.
November 26 Stakeholders’ Consultations— Regulating Sea Shipping in the
Northwest Passage
December 3 Wicked Problems
Theme: The challenges of policy making when the facts are uncertain, values are in
dispute, the stakes are high and decisions are urgent. Lessons learned from
Stakeholders’ consultations.
Readings:
Steven Rayner, “Wicked Problems, Clumsy Solutions—diagnosis and prescriptions for
environmental ills, Jack Beale Memorial Lecture, ANSW, Sydney, Australia July 2006.
Savoie, Donald J., Power: Where is it? McGill-Queen’s University Press, Montreal and
Kingston, 2010, Chapter 7 pp 152-169.
Steven van de Walle, “The State of the World’s Bureaucracies”, Journal of
Comparative Policy analysis, Vol. 8 no. 4 (December 2006) pp 437-448.
Note: Written stakeholder’s position papers are due at the beginning of class. The
background for the second policy memo will be distributed during class.
9
10
11