Skip to main content

Political-Cultural Propinquity in the Anglosphere

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Architecture of Policy Transfer

Part of the book series: Studies in the Political Economy of Public Policy ((PEPP))

Abstract

The Anglosphere represents an unusually apt lens through which to explore the structural dimensions of policy transfer. Shared foreign policy initiatives between the Anglosphere states are numerous and stem largely from their shared history. Prominently, they share ideological and administrative traditions such as a commitment to a mixed economy, legal systems based on common law tradition, an open society, the values of liberal democracy and so on. This chapter unpacks these dynamics. Drawing on assemblage, constructivist and transgovernmental perspectives, the chapter holds culture, values and norms as critical to the coalescence of cross-border policy relations and an important additional explanation of how transnational collaborative environments emerge. These, it is suggested, facilitate (i) the transfer of policy ideas to resolve domestic policy problems and (ii) establish collaborative mechanisms to resolve transnational challenges. Consideration of these novel public sector ‘assemblages’ deepens our empirical and theoretical knowledge of the new spaces of transnational administration.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Anderson, B. (2006). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. New York and London: Verso books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, D. (2016). Reordering the world: Essays on liberalism and empire. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benson, D., & Jordan, A. (2011). What have we learned from policy transfer research? Dolowitz and marsh revisited. Political Studies Review, 9(3), 366–378. Retrieved from (Go to ISI)://WOS:000293794900007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bevir, M. (2008). Key concepts in governance. Wiltshire: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bevir, M., & Richards, D. (2009). Decentring policy networks: A theoretical agenda. Public Administration, 87(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2008.01736.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bjørnholt, B., & Larsen, F. (2014). The politics of performance measurement: Evaluation use as mediator for politics. Evaluation, 20(4), 400–411.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blyth, M. (2010). On setting and upsetting agendas. In A. Gofas & C. Hay (Eds.), The role of ideas in political analysis: A portrait of contemporary debates (pp. 167–186). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, T. (2006). Smart policy? In R. E. Goodin, Moran, M., & Rein, M. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of public policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Common, R. K. (1998). Convergence and transfer: A review of the globalisation of new public management. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 11(6), 440–450.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daguerre, A., & Taylor-Gooby, P. (2004). Neglecting Europe: Explaining the predominance of American ideas in New Labour’s welfare policies since 1997. Journal of European Social Policy, 14(1), 25–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928704039786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dollery, B., Garcea, J., & LeSage, E. C. (2008). Introduction. In B. Dollery, J. Garcea, & E. C. LeSage (Eds.), Local government reform: A comparative analysis of advanced Anglo-American countries. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duffy, D. (2017). Evaluation and governing in the 21st century. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-54513-8.

  • Fichtner, J. (2017). Perpetual decline or persistent dominance? Uncovering Anglo-America’s true structural power in global finance. Review of International Studies, 43(1), 3–28. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210516000206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finkelstein, N. D. (2000). Transparency in Public Policy: Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flynn, N., & Strehl, F. (1996). Public sector management in Europe. London: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halligan, J. (2007). Anglo-American systems: Easy diffusion. In J. C. N. Raadschelders, T. A. J. Toonen, & F. M. Van der Meer (Eds.), The civil service in the 21st century. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halligan, J. (2015). Anglophone systems: Diffusion and policy transfer within an administrative tradition. In Comparative civil service systems in the 21st century (pp. 57–76). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, L. (2003). Introduction. In L. Hansen & O. Waever (Eds.), European Integration and National Identity. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, L., & Wæver, O. (2003). European integration and national identity: The challenge of the Nordic states. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hebel, K., & Lenz, T. (2013). The identity/policy nexus in European foreign policy. Journal of European Public Policy, 23(4), 473–491. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2015.1047398.

  • Holland, J. (2020). Selling war and peace: Syria and the Anglosphere: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons? Public Administration, 69(1), 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hood, C. (1995). The “new public management” in the 1980s: Variations on a theme. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 20(2–3), 93–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, T., & Newburn, T. (2002). Policy convergence and crime control in the USA and the UK Streams of influence and levels of impact. Criminology and Criminal Justice, 2(2), 173–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krahmann, E. (2003). Conceptualizing security governance. Cooperation and Conflict, 38(1), 5–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenny, M., & Pearce, N. (2016). After Brexit: The Eurosceptic dream of an Anglosphere. Juncture, 22(4), 304–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keohane, R. O., & Nye, J. S. (1974). Transgovernmental relations and international organizations. World Politics, 27(1), 39–62. https://doi.org/10.2307/2009925.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larmour, P. (2002). Westminster constitutions in the South Pacific: A “policy transfer” approach. Asian Journal of Political Science, 10(1), 39–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, C., & Strang, D. (2006). The international diffusion of public-sector downsizing: Network emulation and theory-driven learning. International Organization, 60(4), 883–909.

    Google Scholar 

  • Legrand, T. (2012). Overseas and over here: Policy transfer and evidence-based policy-making. Policy Studies, 33(4), 329–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2012.695945.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Legrand, T. (2018). Structure, agency and policy learning: Australia’s multinational corporations dilemma. In C. A. Dunlop, C. M. Radaelli, & P. Trein (Eds.), Learning in Public Policy (pp. 215–241). Basingstoke: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Legrand, T. (2019). Sovereignty renewed. In D. A. M. Stone & K. Moloney (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of global policy and transnational administration (p. 200). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGuire, L. (2001). Service charters-global convergence or national divergence? A comparison of initiatives in Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States. Public Management Review, 3(4), 493–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mead, L. M. (2005). Why anglos lead. The National Interest, 82, 124–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mesquita, R. (2016). The hegemonic hermano: South American collective identity and Brazilian regional strategy. Canadian Journal American and Caribbean Studies, 41(2), 215–238. https://doi.org/10.1080/08263663.2016.1182691.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. (2016). Citizenship and national identity. In R. Blaug (Ed.), Democracy: A reader (Vol. 447). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, B. G., & Pierre, J. (2004). Politicization of the civil service: Concepts, causes, consequences. In The Politicization of the civil service in comparative perspective (pp. 13–25). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierre, J. (2013). Globalization and governance. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2000). Public management reform: A comparative analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollitt, C. (2015). Towards a new world: Some inconvenient truths for Anglosphere public administration. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 81(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852314544069.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2011). Public management reform: A comparative analysis-new public management, governance, and the Neo-Weberian state. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, R. A. W. (1994). The hollowing out of the state—The Changing nature of the public-service in Britain. Political Quarterly, 65(2), 138–151. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-923X.1994.tb00441.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, R. A. W. (2006). Policy network analysis. In M. Moran, M. Rein, & R. E. Goodin (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of public policy (pp. 423–445). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, R. A. W. (2007). Understanding governance: Ten years on. Organization Studies, 28(8), 1243–1264. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840607076586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, R. A. W., & Marsh, D. (1992). New directions in the study of policy networks. European Journal of Political Research, 21(1–2), 181–205. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.1992.tb00294.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Risse‐Kappen, T. (1996). Exploring the nature of the beast: International relations theory and comparative policy analysis meet the European union. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 34(1), 53–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Risse‐Kappen, T. (2016). Collective identity in a democratic community. Domestic Politics and Norm Diffusion in International Relations: Ideas Do Not Float Freely, 78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, R. (1991). What is lesson-drawing? Journal of Public Policy, 11(01), 3–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, R. (1993). Lesson-drawing in public policy: A guide to learning across time and space. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosta, M. (2011). What makes a new public management reform successful? An institutional analysis (pp. 1–41). Corvinus University of Budapest.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rumelili, B., & Cebeci, M. (2015). Theorizing European identity: Contributions to constructivist international relations debates on collective identity. In V. Kaina, I. P. Karolewski., & S. Kuhn (Eds.), European Identity Revisited. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santos, S. C. (2015). Identity in Mercosur: Regionalism and nationalism. Global Governance, 21(1), 43–59. https://doi.org/10.1163/19426720-02101005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simmons, B. A., & Elkins, Z. (2004). The globalization of liberalization: Policy diffusion in the international political economy. American Political Science Review, 98(1), 171–189. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055404001078.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veenendaal, W. P., & Corbett, J. (2015). Why small States offer important answers to large questions. Comparative Political Studies, 48(4), 527–549. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414014554687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vucetic, S. (2011). Bound to follow? The Anglosphere and US-led coalitions of the willing, 1950–2001. European Journal of International Relations, 17(1), 27–49. Retrieved from (Go to ISI)://WOS:000287648100002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wellings, B. (2020). English nationalism, Brexit and the Anglosphere: Wider still and wider. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wendt, A. (1994). Collective identity formation and the international state. American Political Science Review, 88(2), 384–397. https://doi.org/10.2307/2944711.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willetts, D. (2007). England and Britain, Europe and the anglosphere. The Political Quarterly, 78, 54–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wodak, R. (2009). Discursive construction of national identity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yates, L., Woelert, P., Millar, V., & O’Connor, K. (2017). New public management and the changing governance of universities. In Knowledge at the Crossroads? (pp. 59–75). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tim Legrand .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Legrand, T. (2021). Political-Cultural Propinquity in the Anglosphere. In: The Architecture of Policy Transfer. Studies in the Political Economy of Public Policy. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55821-5_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics