LIST OF PANELS

The objective of the proposed panel is to advance the research programme on policy paradigms: one currently fragmented across disciplinary and epistemological groups within the scholarly community. The need for a panel on policy paradigms is motivated by the fact that the concept’s usefulness has been subject to numerous critiques over the years, culminating in a recent call for scholars to dispense with the paradigm construct (Jabko & Schmidt, 2021). Yet, many policy scholars continue to invoke policy paradigms in their research (Alons, 2020; Daigneault et al., 2021; Daugbjerg & Feindt, 2017; Hogan & Howlett, 2015; Sewerin et al., 2022). Moreover, the language of paradigm change continues to feature prominently in the popular literature on social, economic and technological transitions, which is largely separate and distinct from the public policy literature (Kaplinsky, 2021; Perez, 2002; Swilling, 2020). A key question for discussion and debate is whether paradigms retain analytical purchase for explaining policy stability and change following significant revisions to Peter Hall’s classic theory on the role of policy paradigms in processes of social learning (Hall, 1993). If paradigms transcend mere descriptive heuristics, additional questions arise concerning how paradigms constitute causal variables in policy processes, including those which underlie social, economic and technological transitions. Methodological questions regarding how paradigms may be operationalized and measured must also be answered for hypothesis testing to proceed (Daigneault, 2015). Notwithstanding the intuitive appeal and popularity of the concept, a theory of policy paradigms is notably absent from major public policy textbooks (Cairney, 2012; Capano & Howlett, 2020; Weible & Sabatier, 2018). One possibility is that theory on policy paradigms need not stand alone, but may rather be subsumed by other theories of the policy process and political economy (Baumgartner, 2013; Cairney & Weible, 2015; John, 2018; Streeck & Thelen, 2005). In any case, precisely how paradigms fit in the policy scholar’s analytical toolbox is an open question that warrants serious attention.

The panel will address questions like the following. Does the paradigm concept serve an analytical purpose beyond shorthand for widely held and institutionalized ideas? If paradigms are causal, how and when are they causal vis-à-vis other determinants of policy change and stability? Relatedly, in what ways is theory on policy paradigms useful for policy practitioners? What is the relationship between policy paradigms and other paradigms (e.g., scientific paradigms, techno-economic paradigms)? Is the paradigm construct useful only for studying public policy or is it useful for analyzing and understanding any social choice situation? Can paradigms be integrated into other theories of political economy and/or the policy process?  How/can we better integrate the policy feedback and policy paradigm literatures? How can we operationalize and measure policy paradigms, as well as their impacts on policy-making? How do policy paradigms in different policy areas connect with one another in reinforcing or undermining ways?

The objective of the panel is to advance the research programme on policy paradigms. The need for a panel on policy paradigms is motivated by the fact that the concept’s usefulness has been subject to numerous critiques over the years, culminating in a recent call for scholars to dispense with the paradigm construct (Jabko & Schmidt, 2021). Yet, many policy scholars continue to invoke policy paradigms in their research (Alons, 2020; Daigneault et al., 2021; Daugbjerg & Feindt, 2017; Hogan & Howlett, 2015; Sewerin et al., 2022). A key question for discussion and debate is whether paradigms retain analytical purchase for explaining policy stability and change following significant revisions to Peter Hall’s classic theory on the role of policy paradigms in processes of social learning (Hall, 1993). If paradigms transcend mere descriptive heuristics, additional questions arise concerning how paradigms constitute causal variables in policy processes, including those which underlie social, economic and technological transitions. Methodological questions regarding how paradigms may be operationalized and measured must also be answered for hypothesis testing to proceed (Daigneault, 2015). One possibility is that theory on policy paradigms need not stand alone, but may rather be subsumed by other theories of the policy process and political economy (Baumgartner, 2013; Cairney & Weible, 2015; John, 2018; Streeck & Thelen, 2005). In any case, precisely how paradigms fit in the policy scholar’s analytical toolbox is an open question that warrants serious attention.

Submissions dedicated to improving scholarly understanding of policy paradigms are welcome. We particularly invite submissions that draw on theories of paradigm change to analyze and understand social, economic and technological transitions.