10431 - Comparative Public Policy

Learning outcomes

Comparative Public Policy is concerned with mainly two sets of questions.The first set  is about description and explanation. How do policy differ or converge? Why policies differ of converge? What are the methodological and theoretical  problems in comparing public polocies? Which factors (indipendent or intervenient variables) do matter? For solve this intricate puzzle the most reputed theories and framework will be presented and discussed (advocacy coalition framework; punctuted equilibrium theory, historical and rational institutionalisms).The second set is more concerned with the technical and substantial aspects of policies. What are the problems to be solved? What are the strategies and the instruments at disposal for policy-makers?The focus will be on health policy, environmental policies, administrative reform policy and higher education policies.Students are expected to acquire a critical knowledge of the above-listed policies and the capability of evaluating their cost-benefits trade-offs and the their processual logics.

Course contents

The course is divided in two parts.

The first part  (5WEEKS) will be devoted to the following theoretical-methodological topics:

- methodological problems in comparative public policy;

- the policy approaches;

- the institutional approaches

- the determinants of policy change

 

The second part (5 weeks) will be devoted the analysis of the chose four policy sectors (health, environment, adminitrative policy, higher education).

The attendance is strongly suggested.

Readings/Bibliography

For the first part:

- Capano G., and M. Howlett (eds) (2009), European and North American Policy Change. Drivers and dynamics, London, Routledge.

-  Collier D.  and J.E. Mahon (1993) “Conceptual ‘Stretching' Revisited. Adapting Categories in Comparative Analysis”, American Political Science Review 87:4, 1993, 845- 55.

-  Gerring John (1999), “What makes a concept good? A criterial framework for understanding concept formation in the social sciences”,   Polity 31:3, 357-93.

-  Hall, P. A., and Soskice, D. (Eds.) (2001). The Institutional Foundations of Comparative    Advantage,  Oxford UP.

-  Ragin C.C. (2006), “How to Lure Analytic Social Science Out of the Doldrums”, International Sociology,  21(5): 633–646

- Sartori G. (1970), “Concept Misformation in Comparative Politics”, American Political Science Review 64:4, 1033-53

-    Steinmo,S , Thelen K and Longstreth, F. (Eds) (1992) Structuring Politics:Historical institutionalism in comparative analysis, Cambridge UP.

-  Sabatier, P. (a cura di) 1999, Theories of the policy process, Boulder, Westview Press.

For the second part:

- Adolino, J and Blake, C (2001) Comparing public policies: issues and choices in six industrialised countries,  Washington,  QC Press.

- Amaral A. et al. (2002), Governing Higher Education: National Perspectives on Institutional Governance, Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers.

- Blank, RH and Burau, V (2004), Comparative Health Policy, Macmillan.

- Braun D. and F.X. Merrien (eds) (1999), Towards a New Model of Governance for Universities? A Comparative View, Jessica Kingsley,

- Desai U., (ed.) (2002),  Environmental Politics and Policy in Industrialized Countries, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

-  Dippen P. et al. (eds.) (2004), Contesting Public Sector Reforms, Palgrave.

- Fleury,S, Belmartino,S, Baris,E (Editors) (2002) Reshaping Health Care in Latin America: A Comparative Analysis of Health Care Reform in Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico IDRC.

Gornitzka A., M. Kogan (eds) (2005), Reform and Change in Higher eduation, London, Jessica Kingsley.

 Huisman  J. (ed.) (2009),  International Perspectives on the governance of Higher education, London: Routledge,

- Jordan A. Liefferink D (eds.) (2004), Environmental Policy in Europe, London, Routledge.

- Pollit, C. and G. Bouckaert  (2000),  Public management reform. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Teaching methods

a mix of lectures and students'presentations

Assessment methods

Grades are based on:

- 30%, class participation;

- 30%, final paper

- 40%, final oral examination

Office hours

See the website of Giliberto Capano