Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

What about non-diffusion? The effect of competitiveness in policy-comparative diffusion research

  • Published:
Policy Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Many scholars have convincingly shown that policies diffuse between national and sub-national entities for several different reasons. Although diffusion processes are empirically proven, we witness two shortcomings in the discussion: First, there is a lack of comparative research across policy areas. Second, the question of why diffusion might not occur in a certain domain is under-theorized and lacks an empirical test. By comparing the rationale behind diffusion processes in two policy domains—energy policy and locational policy—this paper shows that two aspects matter for diffusion processes: First is the observability of policy measures, that is, how easily things can be observed by others; second is the competitiveness of the policy domain. If policy measures can be hidden easily and the policy domain is highly competitive, policy diffusion is very unlikely to happen. Therefore, we seek the integration of these two aspects in prospective diffusion research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Several studies also speak about non-diffusion or spurious diffusion, when innovations are introduced because of internal determinants (Braun and Gilardi 2006).

  2. Research was conducted in the Energy Policy Fundamentals Research Programme, funded by the Swiss Federal Office of Energy (SFOE, Project Number: 102670). For details, see Widmer and Strebel (2011).

  3. The conference of directors is the most prominent form of such horizontal cooperation schemes between the cantons. Such conferences exist in 16 policy areas (Bochsler and Sciarini 2006). Their degree of institutionalization varies greatly (Bolleyer 2006).

References

  • Allen, M. D., Pettus, C., & Haider-Markel, D. P. (2004). Making the national local: Specifying the conditions for national government influence on state policymaking. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 4(3), 318–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balla, S. J. (2001). Interstate professional associations and the diffusion of policy innovations. American Politics Research, 29(3), 221–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berry, W. D., & Baybeck, B. (2005). Using geographic information systems to study interstate competition. American Political Science Review, 99(4), 505–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berry, F. S., & Berry, W. D. (1990). State lottery adoptions as policy innovations: An event history analysis. American Political Science Review, 84(2), 395–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blatter, J., Kreutzer, M., Rentl, M., & Thiele, J. (2008). The foreign relations of European regions: Competences and strategies. West European Politics, 31(3), 464–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bochsler, D., & Sciarini, P. (2006). Konkordate und Regierungskonferenzen. Standbeine des horizontalen Föderalismus. LeGes, 1(17), 23–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boehmke, F. J., & Witmer, R. (2004). Disentangling diffusion: The effects of social learning and economic competition on state policy innovation and expansion. Political Research Quarterly, 57(1), 39–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolleyer, N. (2006). Consociationalism and intergovernmental relations—Linking internal and external power-sharing in the Swiss Federal Polity. Swiss Political Science Review, 12(3), 1–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braun, D., & Gilardi, F. (2006). Taking “Galtons problem” seriously. Towards a theory of policy diffusion. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 18(3), 289–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dei Ottati, G. (1994). Cooperation and competition in the industrial district as an organization model. European Planning Studies, 2(4), 463–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dobbin, F., Simmons, B., & Garrett, G. (2007). The global diffusion of public policies: Social construction, coercion, competition, or learning? Annual Review of Sociology, 33, 449–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faganini, H. P. (1991). Föderalistischer Aufgabenverbund in der Schweiz. Bern: Haupt.

    Google Scholar 

  • George, A. L., & Bennett, A. (2005). Case studies and theory development in the social science. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilardi, F. (2010). Who learns from what in policy diffusion processes? American Journal of Political Science, 54(3), 650–666.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilardi, F., & Füglister, K. (2008). Empirical modeling of policy diffusion in federal states. The dyadic approach. Swiss Political Science Review, 14(2), 1–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, V. (1973). Innovation in the states: A diffusion study. The American Political Science Review, 67(4), 1174–1185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grossback, L. J., Nicholson-Crotty, S., & Peterson, D. A. M. (2004). Ideology and learning in policy diffusion. American Politics Research, 32(5), 521–545.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, T., & Hubbart, P. (1996). The entrepreneurial city: New urban politics, new urban geographies? Progress in Human Geography, 20(2), 153–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harding, A. (1997). Urban regimes in a Europe of the cities? European Urban and Regional Studies, 4(4), 291–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karch, A. (2007). Emerging issues and future directions in state policy diffusion research. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 7, 54–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keating, M. (2001). Governing cities and regions: Territorial restructuring in a global age. In A. J. Scott (Ed.), Global city-regions: Trends, theory, policy (pp. 371–390). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keiner, M., & Kim, A. (2007). Transnational city networks for sustainability. European Planning Studies, 15(10), 1369–1395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Makse, T., & Volden, C. (2011). The role of policy attributes in the diffusion of policy innovations. The Journal of Politics, 73(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, D., & Sharman, J. C. (2009). Policy diffusion and policy transfer. Policy Studies, 30(3), 269–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell, J. A. (2004). Using qualitative methods for causal explanation. Field Methods, 16(3), 243–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meseguer, C. (2006). Rational learning and bounded learning in the diffusion of policy innovations. Rationality and Society, 18(1), 35–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mintrom, M. (1997). Policy entrepreneurs and the diffusion of innovation. American Journal of Political Science, 41(3), 738–770.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mintrom, M., & Vergari, S. (1998). Policy networks and innovation diffusion: The case of state education reforms. The Journal of Politics, 60(1), 126–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicholson-Crotty, S. (2009). The politics of diffusion: Public policy in the American states. Journal of Politics, 71(1), 192–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nzeakor, C. U. (2009). How does competition foster diffusion of innovation of economic development programs in the southwest region? Dissertation, University of Texas at Dallas.

  • Onwuegbuzie, A., & Leech, N. (2007). Validity and qualitative research: An oxymoron? Quality & Quantity, 41(2), 233–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parkinson, M., & Harding, A. (1995). European cities toward 2000: Entrepreneurialism, competition and social exclusion. In M. Rhodes (Ed.), The regions and the New Europe. Patterns in core and periphery development (pp. 53–77). Manchester and New York: Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. (1998). Clusters and the new economics of competition. Harvard Business Review, November–December, 77–90.

  • Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sager, F. (2007). Infrastructure policy: Transport, energy and telecommunications. In P. Knoepfel, H. Kriesi, W. Linder, Y. Papadopoulos, & P. Sciarini (Eds.), Handbook of Swiss politics (2nd ed., pp. 677–704). Zürich: Neue Zürcher Zeitung.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scharpf, F. (2000). Interaktionsformen. Akteurszentrierter Institutionalismus in der Politikforschung. Opladen: Leske+Budrich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shipan, C. R., & Volden, C. (2006). Bottom-up federalism: The diffusion of antismoking policies from U.S. cities to states. American Journal of Political Science, 50(4), 825–843.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shipan, C. R., & Volden, C. (2008). The mechanisms of policy diffusion. American Journal of Political Science, 52(4), 840–857.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strebel, F. (2011). Inter-governmental institutions as promoters of energy policy diffusion in a federal setting. Energy Policy, 39(1), 467–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Heiden, N. (2010). Urban foreign policy and domestic dilemmas—Insights from Swiss and EU city-regions. Essex: ECPR Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Heiden, N., Koch, P., & Kübler, D. (2012). Denationalisation from below. Globalisation and its impacts on governance in metropolitan areas. Urban Research and Practice (forthcoming).

  • Vatter, A. (2007). Federalism. In P. Knoepfel, H. Kriesi, W. Linder, Y. Papadopoulos, & P. Sciarini (Eds.), Handbook of Swiss politics (2nd ed., pp. 77–100). Zürich: Neue Zürcher Zeitung.

    Google Scholar 

  • Volden, C. (2006). States as policy laboratories: Emulating success in the children’s health insurance program. American Journal of Political Science, 50(2), 294–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Volden, C., Ting, M. M., & Carpenter, D. P. (2008). A formal model of learning and policy diffusion. American Political Science Review, 102(3), 319–332.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, J. L. (1969). The diffusion of innovations among the American states. American Political Science Review, 63(3), 880–899.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weyland, K. (2005). Theories of policy diffusion. Lessons from Latin American pension reform. World Politics, 57(2), 262–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weyland, K. (2006). Bounded rationality and policy diffusion. Social sector reform in Latin America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Widmer, T., & Strebel, F. (2011). Determinanten des Vollzugs energiepolitischer Massnahmen auf kantonaler Ebene. Bern, Switzerland: Bundesamt für Energie.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Political Science, University of Zurich, Affolternstrasse 56, 8050, Zurich, Switzerland

    Felix Strebel

  2. Centre for Democracy Studies Aarau, Küttigerstrasse 21, 5000, Aarau, Switzerland

    Nico van der Heiden

Authors
  1. Nico van der Heiden
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Felix Strebel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nico van der Heiden.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

van der Heiden, N., Strebel, F. What about non-diffusion? The effect of competitiveness in policy-comparative diffusion research. Policy Sci 45, 345–358 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-012-9149-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-012-9149-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation