Reviews : Policy Transfer and British Social Policy: Learning from the USA? David P. Dolowitz with Rob Hulme, Mike Nellis and Fiona O'Neill Open University Press, 2000; pp146; £19.99, pbk ISBN 0-335-19991-7
| Author | Mark Drakeford |
| Published date | 01 December 2000 |
| Date | 01 December 2000 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/026455050004700424 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
293
Policy
Transfer
and
British
Social
Policy:
Learning
from
the
USA?
David
P.
Dolowitz
with
Rob
Hulme,
Mike
Nellis
and
Fiona
O’Neill
Open
University
Press,
2000;
pp146;
£19.99,
pbk
ISBN
0-335-19991-7
To
this
reviewer,
at
least,
the
mesmeric
effect
which
criminal
justice
policy
making
in
the
USA
has
cast
over
successive
bands
of
politicians
has
been
one
of
the
more
unfathomable
features
of
the
British
scene.
Now,
in
this
unfailingly
interesting
book,
five
leading
commentators
attempt
to
trace,
assess
and
draw
conclusions
concerning
US
policy
transfer
to
Britain,
across
four
key
policy
areas.
The
general
conclusions
will
be
of
interest
to
many
Journal
readers,
while
the
specifics
of
Mike
Nellis’
chapter
on
electronic
monitoring
ought
to
be
read
by
any
member
of
probation
staff
interested
in
the
future
of
the
profession.
The
text
reminds
us,
usefully,
that
not
all
policy
transfer
is
voluntary.
Imperialism
may
not,
so
often,
take
its
old
military
form,
but
from
World
Bank
programmes
to
the
export
of
Thatcherite
privatisation
techniques,
the
West
continues
to
impose
its
own
policy
agenda.
Changes
in
technology
and
a
globalising
economy
make
all
this
easier
to
achieve.
Even
where
relationships
are
less
unequal,
the
authors
suggest,
some
countries
emerge
as
policy
lenders,
rather
than
borrowers,
and
vice
versa.
The
relationship
between
Britain
and
America
follows
this
pattern
closely,
helped,
the
book
suggests,
by
the
essentially
liberal -
rather
than
social
democratic -
character
which
shapes
the
welfare
settlement
in
both
places.
Mike
Nellis’
chapter
traces
the
&dquo;conservative
humanitarianism&dquo;
which
had
motivated
original
British
interest
in
electronic
tagging,
contrasting
that
with
the
spirit
of
&dquo;scientific
optimism&dquo;
which
had
provided
the
primary
impetus
in
the
American
setting.
He
cites
the
occupation
of
the
Home
Office
by
Michael
Howard,
a
man
&dquo;well
know
for
his
love
of
all
things
American&dquo;
(p.
106)
as
the
turning
point
around
which
tagging
ceased
to
be
a
minority
interest
and
became
transferred
into
a
catch-all
solution
for
a
very
wide
range
of
problems.
It
is
at
this
point,
he
suggests,
that
policy
developments
came
to
share
the
pattern
of
high-pitched
claims
and
far
more
problematic
results
which
emerge
in
the
book’s
other
chapters.
These
deal
with
the
introduction
of
the
Child
Support
Agency,
the
internal
market
reforms
in
the
National
Health
Service
and
post-compulsory
education
in
England
and
Wales.
Against
the
background
of
apparently
propitious
conditions
for
policy
transfer,
and
the
undoubted
interest
which
exists
in
it
at
a
political
level,
the
most
challenging
question,
which
emerges
in
the
book,
lies
in
trying
to
explain
the
repeated
failure
of
policies
transferred
to
Britain
from
America
to
achieve
the
benefits
claimed
for
them.
While
a
series
of
contributory
factors
are
identified,
the
strongest
and
most
common
theme
lies
in
the
failure
to
recognise
the
specific
cultural
contexts
in
which
policies
are
originally
formed
and
implemented.
The
obviousness
of
this
message
does
not
appear
to
have
assisted
its
comprehension
and
Nellis’
conclusions
make
bleak
reading.
For
those
engaged
in
both
policy
implementation
and
practice
in
the
contemporary
Criminal
Justice
To continue reading
Request your trial