LIST OF PANELS

Policy termination or dismantling has received little attention in the policy literature, conceptually and empirically. Eugene Bardach (1974) identified policy termination as an important phenomenon that had been “wholly neglected by political scientists and scholars” because it is both rare and difficult to study. Work on policy termination since then has been sporadic and remains disconnected from the broader policy literature. There are several reasons for this, beginning with the apparent infrequency of actual cases – if we use a binary classification of termination or non-termination. Moreover, because termination usually imposes losses, it is inherently unpopular, and most attempts to abolish policies fail. Policymakers are more likely to bend to the pressure of mobilized opponents or obfuscate to deflect blame than countenance political reprisal for such decisions. However, although outright termination may be rare, policies are jettisoned in many other ways. Governments worldwide have engaged in the politics of austerity for decades, starting in the 1990s with social policy retrenchment (Pierson, 1994). States have also pursued deregulation in a wide range of sectors, from taxation to environment, in the service of smaller government and the ostensible exigencies of globalization. Finally, Jacob Hacker’s (2004) concept of policy drift captures the many instances of gradual but inexorable policy decay that have occurred through political gridlock, partisan maneuvering, and deliberate inaction.

Bauer and Knill (2014) suggest that a focus on policy dismantling or downsizing as a particular form and direction of policy change may be a more fruitful approach than the study of termination as a distinct phenomenon. Dismantling as a form of policy change opens a broader range of termination-type processes for analysis, ranging from retrenchment and deregulation to drift and abandonment, as well as outright abolishment, that lead to policy outputs similar to termination. It also enables meaningful engagement with other strands of the policy literature to revive the moribund study of termination both conceptually and empirically. For example, the welfare state retrenchment literature offers useful insights into how, when, and under what conditions policy dismantling is likely to succeed. It maps the institutional and path dependent dynamics that make policy change difficult and explores policy feedback effects on the motivations and resources of groups to organize and resist change. More recent work on austerity following the 2008 recession highlights the importance of political discourse in justifying cutbacks (“we’re in this together”) and softening resistance by appealing to emotions such as fear and hope. Finally, the coronavirus pandemic brings to the fore questions about the role of punctuation and crisis events in shifting some policy trajectories toward termination.

Policy termination is an essential feature of policy change, and likely to become even more important going forward. A global recession following the coronavirus pandemic, an energy crisis resulting from Russia’s war in Ukraine, and the multiple facets of global warming are just some of the reasons that pressure to rationalize and redirect public resources will grow.

The goal of this panel is to further explore how and under what conditions policies are terminated or dismantled. The key question underpinning the panel is: how can we better understand and explain policy termination in policy analysis?

Bardach, E. (1976). Policy termination as a political process. Policy Sciences, 7(2), 123–131.

Bauer, M. W., & Knill, C. (2014). A conceptual framework for the comparative analysis of policy change: Measurement, explanation and strategies of policy dismantling. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 16(1), 28–44.

Hacker, J. S. (2004). Privatizing risk without privatizing the welfare state: The hidden politics of social policy retrenchment in the United States. American Political Science Review, 98(2), 243-260.

Pierson, P. (1994). Dismantling the Welfare State? Reagan, Thatcher and the Politics of Retrenchment. Cambridge University Press.

This panel encourages discussion on an issue that is extremely prevalent in the policy making process, but which has received less attention by policy scholars. In so doing, we are interested in filling the many research gaps in the literature on policy termination and hope to expand its scope and impact as an area of research that should be of concerned for all.

We invite papers that contribute to conceptual development and theorizing about the nature of policy termination, offer empirical comparative or single case studies that analyze these dynamics in more detail, and/or propose methodological insights for such studies. We are particularly interested in studies from across the globe to understand whether and how policy termination of all types varies in different political, economic, and geographic contexts.

Papers may address some of these themes/broad questions:

1. Empirical analysis of termination through dismantling, including analysis of:

· Detailed single or comparative case studies of termination and/or dismantling

· Political, partisan, or ideological factors that influence dismantling

· Contextual social, economic, or political factors that enable or hinder dismantling

· Policy design features, such as instruments or sectoral characteristics, that influence dismantling decisions or processes

· Sunset clauses and policy termination

2. Theoretical and conceptual work exploring:

· Conceptual definitions of policy termination, as distinct from other forms of policy change 

· New theoretical perspective(s) or insights on termination

· Insights from existing policy literatures, such as policy feedback, institutionalism, path dependency, and ideas, on policy dismantling

· Insights from the broader literature on politics and political behaviour, including political ideology and partisanship, for understanding and explaining how and why actors engage in policy termination, including dismantling

· The place of policy termination in the policy cycle

We intend to publish papers presented in a special issue of a journal or as an edited book collection.

We propose to host this panel onsite.