Abstract
The analysis of policy failures is, by definition, not a neutral endeavour,
since policy fiascos are not neutral events. Moreover, they are often, usually
implicitly, but sometimes explicitly, permeated with prosecutorial narratives,
blame games and a search for culprits. Fiascos do not just ‘happen’. They are constructed, declared, and argued over in labelling processes that are not necessarily ‘evidence– based’. This presents a challenge for any academic endeavour to identify,
analyse and explain policy fiascos. Against this backdrop, we assess the study of
policy failure as it stands today, and offer some reflections for its further development.
since policy fiascos are not neutral events. Moreover, they are often, usually
implicitly, but sometimes explicitly, permeated with prosecutorial narratives,
blame games and a search for culprits. Fiascos do not just ‘happen’. They are constructed, declared, and argued over in labelling processes that are not necessarily ‘evidence– based’. This presents a challenge for any academic endeavour to identify,
analyse and explain policy fiascos. Against this backdrop, we assess the study of
policy failure as it stands today, and offer some reflections for its further development.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 653-666 |
| Number of pages | 14 |
| Journal | Journal of European Public Policy |
| Volume | 23 |
| Issue number | 5 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2016 |
Keywords
- Policy evaluation
- policy failure
- policy fiasco
- policy success