Policy learning to reduce inequalities: the search for a coherent Scottish gender mainstreaming policy in a multilevel UK
Policy learning to reduce inequalities: the search for a coherent Scottish gender mainstreaming policy in a multilevel UK
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/21622671.2020.1837661
复制
发表时间：
2020-11-10
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
Kippin, Sean
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Cairney, Paul;St Denny, Emily;Kippin, Sean
政策“不连贯”指的是缺乏联合的政府，导致政策工具的混杂令人困惑。这是多层次政策制定的一个不可避免的特点，其中许多行为体竞相制定议程，而“不平等政策”，如性别主流化，包含多个且往往相互矛盾的目标。这种见解可能促使政策制定者了解其他政府是如何务实应对的，而不是寻求设计具有不切实际的一致性的抽象主流化政策。然而，政策学习是一个以争论为特征的政治过程。许多政策制定者竞相界定政策问题，设定学习的参数，并确定哪个政府应该带头。因此，我们要问：在这种情况下，我们如何利用政策理论来促进基于研究的政策学习？我们描述了我们为地平线2020项目IMAJINE开发的框架，以鼓励多层次决策系统中的政策学习。然后，我们在为苏格兰政府全国妇女和女童咨询委员会（NACWG）工作的案例研究中说明了它的价值，该委员会要求我们从其他国家的性别主流化政策中吸取教训。这个框架和案例研究有助于解释研究对政策学习的有限影响。
Policy 'incoherence' describes a lack of joined-up government that contributes to a confusing mix of policy instruments. It is an inevitable feature of multilevel policy-making, in which many actors compete to set the agenda, and 'inequalities policies', such as gender mainstreaming, which contain multiple and often-contradictory aims. This insight may prompt policy-makers to learn how other governments have responded pragmatically, rather than seeking to design abstract mainstreaming policies with unrealistic levels of coherence. Yet, policy learning is a political process characterized by contestation. Many policy-makers compete to define the policy problem, set the parameters for learning and determine which governments should take the lead. Therefore, we ask: How can we use policy theories to facilitate research-informed policy learning under these circumstances? We describe the framework that we developed for the Horizon 2020 project IMAJINE to encourage policy learning in multilevel policy-making systems. We then illustrate its value in a case study of our work for the Scottish Government's National Advisory Council on Women and Girls (NACWG), which asked us to identify lessons from gender mainstreaming policies in other nations. This framework and case study help explain the limited impact of research on policy learning.