Intractable Policy Failure: The Case of Bovine TB and Badgers
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1467-856X.2009.00387.x |
| Author | Wyn Grant |
| Date | 01 November 2009 |
| Published date | 01 November 2009 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
Intractable Policy Failure: The Case of
Bovine TB and Badgersbjpi_387557..573
Wyn Grant
The failure to eliminate bovine TB from the English and Welsh cattle herd represents a long-term
intractable policy failure. Cattle-to-cattle transmission of the disease has been underemphasised in
the debate compared with transmission from badgers despite a contested evidence base. Archival
evidence shows that mythical constructions of the badger have shaped the policy debate. Relevant
evidence was incomplete and contested; alternative framings of the policy problem were polarised
and difficult to reconcile; and this rendered normal techniques of stakeholder management through
co-option and mediation of little assistance.
Keywords: government failure; stakeholder management; symbolism;
politicisation
This article examines an intractable, long-term policy failure: the inability to eradi-
cate bovine tuberculosis from the English and Welsh cattle herd as is required by the
European Union (EU). If success is defined, as it has been by the Department of
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), in terms of slowing down and
preventing the spread of the disease to areas free of it and achieving a sustained
reduction of the disease in high-incidence areas, ‘then it is uncontroversial to claim
that successive badger control policies have failed’ (Macdonald et al. 2006, 131).
Part of the problem arises from a lack of agreement on the relevant evidence and
gaps in that evidence, leading to uncertainty about the appropriate course of action
to deal with the problem, in particular whether culling of badgers should occur.
This article does not focus primarily on the evidential problem (for a discussion, see
Wilkinson 2007). Rather it suggests that the absence of an expert consensus creates
a challenge for evidence-based policy-making given that a situation in which the
evidence is contradictory is worse than one in which there is no evidence. The
resultant policy vacuum allows greater play to arguments that are not evidence-
based but often rely on emotional appeals based on particular values or images. The
emotional sensitivity of the policy area is often referred to by civil servants in
government papers.
‘Intractable policy controversies exist and are fundamental to the policy-making
process ... Frame analysis helps us to account for their origin and stubborn survival’
(Schön and Rein 1994, 56–57). This article considers the ways in which the disputes
about bovine TB policy have been framed and how this affects their resolution. In
summary, the argument advanced is this: relevant evidence was incomplete and
contested; alternative framings of the policy problem were polarised and difficult to
reconcile; and this rendered normal techniques of stakeholder management
through co-option and mediation of little assistance.
The British Journal of
Politics and International Relations
doi: 10.1111/j.1467-856X.2009.00387.x BJPIR: 2009 VOL 11, 557–573
© 2009 The Author.Journal compilation © 2009 Political Studies Association
Depoliticisation narratives would suggest that issues of this kind can be more
expediently handled by transferring them away from ministers and policy civil
servants to agencies that can be the first line of defence against criticism, the
Chemicals Regulation Directorate and pesticides offering a good example within
Defra. However, this has not proved possible in the case of bovine TB. While Defra
has effectively ended its involvement in other endemic cattle diseases such as
Johne’s disease and the bovine diarrhoea virus, both of which have substantial
effects on productivity and animal health, it has had to maintain a substantial team
of civil servants to deal with bovine TB. The expertise that government has sought
to utilise to find solutions to the policy problem has itself become politicised.
Archival evidence from the National Archives extending up to the early 1990s is
used to show that particular constructions of the badger have had a shaping
influence on the debate. The relaxation in practice of the 30-year rule meant that
it was possible to view files up to 1992. The files are extensive and appear to be a
complete sequence. It is never possible to tell whether and how files have been
weeded, but there is material in the files that would be embarrassing from a
government perspective.
The discussion provides a contribution to the debate on government and policy
failure. Some of the existing literature on government failure does not fit particu-
larly well with cases that involve animals. Conventionally, that involves a calcula-
tion of whether a policy outcome is Pareto inefficient in the sense that Pareto
efficiency provides society with a utility possibility frontier where an individual
cannot be made better off without another being made worse off. Human indivi-
duals are able to make assessments about whether they or others are better or
worse off, but in relation to animals this founders on the question of whether
animals as ‘sentient beings’ can be counted as individuals or as members of society.
‘The recognition that animals are sentient is held to mean that we have direct moral
obligations towards them, and not their owners or those seeking to represent their
interests’ (Garner 2008, 111). However, the argument presented here has a more
general applicability beyond this special set of cases and the debate about the legal
status of animals. The literature is replete with examples of where rent-seeking
behaviour by particular interests has produced distorted and suboptimal policy
outcomes. However, another important case is where the politicisation of an issue
by strongly opposed interests of relatively equal weight leads to policy paralysis.
Government resorted to a number of familiar devices to unblock the policy impasse,
such as reviews by advisory committees, and even constituted a special body which
lasted for over 30 years in an attempt to reconcile the opposed interests. Although
policy modifications resulted from these efforts, the underlying problem remains
unresolved.
Government Failure and Policy Failure
Timothy Besley (2007, 45) notes that ‘Government failure is a term that is often
used but rarely defined’. In this discussion, policy failure is treated as a subset of
government failure. Typical government failures such as the suboptimal provision
of public goods necessarily lead to policy failure. However, one needs to be cautious
558 WYN GRANT
© 2009 The Author.Journal compilation © 2009 Political Studies Association
BJPIR, 2009, 11(4)
To continue reading
Request your trial