LIST OF PANELS

This panel aims to bring together scholars from different fields of policy analysis and policy process theories to advance the research agenda revolving around policy learning. This proceeds across three main lines: Conceptual, analytical, and empirical.

Conceptually, policy learning has been deployed as ontology, analytical approach, and lens to explain the policy process and its outcomes (Dunlop & Radaelli, 2013; Kamkhaji, 2022; Zaki, 2024). While significant advances have been made in this area, conceptual ambiguity and fragmentation has also been a hallmark of policy learning research (see Goyal & Howlett, 2018; Zaki, Wayenberg, & George, 2022). This panel calls for contributions that discuss different conceptual approaches to policy learning, aiming to bring clarity to the field’s vast array of conceptual approaches, illustrating the utility of these different conceptualizations, and the optimal conditions under which they can be utilized.

Analytically, the panel will explore two promising pathways. One is the interplay between policy learning within and across theories of the policy process – to illustrate, the narrative policy framework refers to ‘narrative learning’ (Shanahan, Jones, & McBeth, 2011), the advocacy coalition framework to ‘cross-coalition learning’ (Sabatier, 1988), and recent developments in the multiple streams framework refer to learning as key to argumentative coupling of streams (Blum, 2017). In this panel, we pursue contributions that build on this agenda. Yet, we also go beyond what is conventionally classified as theories of the policy process (see Weible, 2023). This is by inviting papers that also address other theoretical perspectives where learning plays a key role yet remains under-explored. For example, in areas such as knowledge utilization, evaluation, and implementation theories. Although evaluation and implementation are often seen as ‘stages’ – an argument has been made for their theoretical status (For example, think of the classic Foundations of Program Evaluation: Theories of Practice, by Shadish, Cook, & Leviton (1990)). The second pathway covers the who and how of policy learning. Specifically, how learning is undertaken by different actor groups, whether the relatively well-researched ones (e.g., policymakers, politicians), or those who are significantly under-researched (e.g., civil servants, scientific experts, citizens, and marginalized groups), the multilevel structures in which learning occurs (e.g., microfoundations including cognitive structures, biases, emotions). Then, turning to the where question, we call for contributions that address learning fora and their different characteristics. For example, ranging from high-level structures such as advisory bodies, to different governance and institutional settings where factors such as the interplay between participatory / deliberative settings and mechanisms of learning can provide novel theoretical insights into policymaking processes and outcomes. This is an important politics-policy connection that has not been explored sufficiently, especially empirically. To conclude, there is a substantive body of research in each of these categories – which the panel aims to connect under the theme of policy learning.

Empirically, the field is marred with the problem of measurement. However, a recent paper (Zaki & Radaelli, 2024) suggests several good practices. The panel will host empirical papers that will demonstrate how learning is identified and measured. We also invite critical papers on the dimensions of learning that are problematic to pin down in a measure or indicator – often, these are the most subtle and interesting dimensions.

Finally, there is the questions about the beneficiaries of learning, or, if you wish, winners and losers. Here we invite papers that re-connect policy learning to some classic ideas in political economy about the incentives for learning, the interplay between policy learning and political objectives of elected policymakers and non-elected bureaucrats and regulators, and the outcomes of learning for societies.

Our research questions revolve around the following broad, yet interrelated themes:

- How to bring clarity of the ontological and epistemological assumptions of policy learning?

- How can policy learning be used in conjunction with other theoretical approaches to advance policy analysis?

- How do so-called evidence-informed “tools” like risk analysis, evaluation studies, and impact assessment of proposed legislation bring learning in empirically observed policy processes?

- How does policy learning occur across different contexts and settings?

- How can the interplay between institutional settings, sites and fora of learning advance our understanding of policy processes and outcomes?

- What is the social quality of learning, how does learning fare in relation to our normative standards?

As for the panel’s intended outcomes, some papers presented at ICPP7 will be included in a book for which we already have a contract. Some of our contributing authors have already been contacted and confirmed their interest in presenting in this panel – if accepted, they will come and present. Depending on the number of papers participating in the panel, we will also consider a special issue of a journal, to be identified with the participants.

The panel is open to contributions from various methodological approaches (qualitative, quantitative, reviews, interpretivism, critical policy studies, philosophy of knowledge, and conceptual development).

Supporting literature
Blum, S. (2017). The Multiple-Streams Framework and Knowledge Utilization: Argumentative Couplings of Problem, Policy, and Politics Issues. European Policy Analysis, 4(1), 94-117. doi:10.1002/epa2.1029

Dunlop, C. A., & Radaelli, C. M. (2013). Systematising policy learning: From monolith to dimensions. Political Studies, 61(3), 599–619. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9248.2012.00982.x

Goyal, N., & Howlett, M. (2018). Framework or metaphor? Analysing the status of policy learning in the policy sciences. Journal of Asian Public Policy, 12(3), 257-273. doi:10.1080/17516234.2018.1493768

Kamkhaji, J. C. (2022). Policy learning and the Euro: The EU's responses to the sovereign debt crisis. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1007/978-3-031-04264-5

Sabatier, P. A. (1988). An Advocacy Coalition Framework of Policy Change and the Role of Policy-Oriented Learning Therein. Policy Sciences, 21, 129-168. doi:10.1007/BF00136406

Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Leviton, L. C. (1990). Foundations of Program Evaluation. London: Sage.

Shanahan, E. A., Jones, M. D., & McBeth, M. K. (2011). Policy Narratives and Policy Processes. Policy Studies Journal, 39(3), 535-561. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2011.00420.x

Weible, C. (2023). Theories Of The Policy Process. NY: Routledge.

Zaki, B. L. (2024). Policy Learning Governance: A new perspective on agency in policy learning theories. Policy & Politics, 52(3), 412–429. doi:10.1332/03055736Y2023D000000018

Zaki, B. L., & Radaelli, C. M. (2024). Measuring policy learning: Challenges and good practices. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 7, 37–46. doi:10.1093/ppmgov/gvae001

Zaki, B. L., Wayenberg, E., & George, B. (2022). A Systematic Review of Policy Learning: Tiptoeing through a Conceptual Minefield. Policy Studies Yearbook, 12(1), 1-52. doi:10.18278/psy.12.1.2

Policy learning has been deployed as ontology, analytical approach, and lens to explain the policy process and its outcomes (Dunlop & Radaelli, 2013; Kamkhaji, 2022; Zaki, 2024). While significant advances have been made in this area, several issues remain in need of further development. This ranges from issues of conceptual ambiguity and fragmentation to the need for better understandings of how to best leverage the intersections between policy learning and different theoretical and conceptual approaches to further policy analysis.

To address these issues, this panel calls for papers that discuss aspects of the Who, how, where, and ‘what for’ of policy learning. In doing so, we aim to bring together scholars from different fields of policy analysis and policy process theories to advance the research agenda on policy learning across three main directions: Conceptual, analytical, and empirical. Specifically, we call for contributions along the following broad questions which can help prospective panellists identify the scope of their paper proposals:

- How to bring clarity of the ontological and epistemological assumptions of policy learning?

- How can policy learning be used in conjunction with other theoretical approaches to advance policy analysis? For example, integrating or researching policy learning within frameworks and theories such as the Narrative Policy Framework, the Advocacy Coalitions Framework, the Multiple Streams Framework, Policy Evaluation, Policy Implementation, emotions, regulation, among others.

- How do so-called evidence-informed “tools” like risk analysis, evaluation studies, and impact assessment of proposed legislation bring learning in empirically observed policy processes? Do they facilitate technocratic learning and narrow down the space for social learning?

- How do features of learning fora, such as their participatory and deliberative aspects, levels of decentralization, autonomy, politicization, and identities, influence policy learning processes and outcomes?

- Where does policy learning occur?

- What do we know about the ‘sites’ of policy learning, such as special committees, expert groups and advisory bodies?

- Can we deliberatively design governance architectures for learning?

- What is the social quality of learning, how does learning fare in relation to our normative standards?

We invite papers from different ontological and methodological approaches, such as qualitative, quantitative, reviews, interpretivism, critical policy studies, philosophy of knowledge, and conceptual development.

Authors are encouraged to reach out to panel chairs for any additional inquiries if needed.