Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Disentangling the Notion of Transnational Policy Entrepreneurs: Concluding Remarks

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Transnational Policy Entrepreneurs

  • 173 Accesses

Abstract

The book concludes by summarizing the findings and indicating possibilities for future research. This chapter highlights the theoretical and empirical contribution of the book to existing studies on global policy change and innovation through its focus on transnational policy entrepreneurs. It outlines the factors which have influenced transnational policy entrepreneurship and offers a novel framework for an outcome and practice-oriented approach to implementing and measuring Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development in global cooperation.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
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

  • Abbott, K. W., & Snidal, D. (2000). Hard and soft law in international governance. International Organization, 54(3), 421–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adelle, C., & Jordan, A. (2014). Policy coherence for development in the European Union: Do new procedures unblock or simply reproduce old disagreements? Journal of European Integration, 36(4), 375–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adler, E. (1992). The emergence of cooperation: National epistemic communities and the international evolution of the idea of nuclear arms control. International Organization, 46(1), 101–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alderson, K. (2001). Making sense of state socialization. Review of International Studies, 27(3), 415–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allwood, G. (2013). Gender mainstreaming and policy coherence for development: Unintended gender consequences and EU policy. Women’s Studies International Forum, 39(4), 42–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andonova, L. B. (2017). Governance entrepreneurs: International organizations and the rise of global public–private partnerships. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Arieli, T., & Cohen, N. (2013). Policy entrepreneurs and post-conflict cross-border cooperation: A conceptual framework and the Israeli-Jordanian case. Policy Sciences, 46(3), 237–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashoff, G. (2010). Politikkohärenz: eine zusätzliche Voraussetzung und wesentliche Aufgabe wirksamer Entwicklungspolitik. In J. Faust & S. Neubert (Eds.), Wirksamere Entwicklungspolitik: Befunde, Reformen, Instrumente (pp. 346–377). Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, S. (2007). Sustainable development as symbolic commitment: Declaratory politics and the seductive appeal of ecological modernisation in the European Union. Environmental Politics, 16(2), 297–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, S. B. (2003). Who sustains whose development? Sustainable development and the reinvention of nature. Organization Studies, 24(1), 143–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, M. W., & Ege, J. (2016). Bureaucratic autonomy of international organizations’ secretariats. Journal of European Public Policy, 23(7), 1019–1037.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, M. W., & Ege, J. (2017). A matter of will and action: The bureaucratic autonomy of international public administrations. In International bureaucracy (pp. 13–41). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Béland, D. (2009). Ideas, institutions, and policy change. Journal of European Public Policy, 16(5), 701–718.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Béland, D., & Cox, R. H. (2016). Ideas as coalition magnets: Coalition building, policy entrepreneurs, and power relations. Journal of European Public Policy, 23(3), 428–445.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bensen, D., & Jordan, A. (2011). What have we learned from policy transfer research? Dolowitz and Marsh revisited. Political Studies Review, 9, 366–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biermann, F., & Siebenhüner, B. (2009). The role and relevance of international bureaucracies: Setting the stage. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boasson, E. L. (2018). Entrepreneurship. In A. Jordan, D. Huitema, H. Van Asselt, & J. Forster (Eds.), Governing climate change: Polycentricity in action? (pp. 117–134). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boasson, E. L., & Huitema, D. (2017). Climate governance entrepreneurship: Emerging findings and a new research agenda. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space, 35(8), 1343–1361.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boasson, E. L., & Wettestad, J. (2014). Policy invention and entrepreneurship: Bankrolling the burying of carbon in the EU. Global Environmental Change, C, 29, 404–412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Böcher, M., & Krott, M. (2016). Science makes the world go round: Successful scientific knowledge transfer for the environment. Cham: Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Booth, D. (2012). Development as a collective action problem: Addressing the real challenges of African governance (Synthesis Report). The Africa Power and Politics Programme, ODI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Börzel, T. A., & Risse, T. (2003). Conceptualizing the domestic impact of Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bosselmann, K. (2016). The principle of sustainability: Transforming law and governance. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braun, M. (2014). EU climate norms in East-Central Europe. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 52(3), 445–460.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buhr, K. (2012). The inclusion of aviation in the EU emissions trading scheme: Temporal conditions for institutional entrepreneurship. Organization Studies, 33(11), 1565–1587.

    Google Scholar 

  • Busch, P.-O. (2015). Die Autonomie internationaler Verwaltungsstäbe als Akteure nicht-hierarchischer Politiktransfers. In Internationale Organisationen (pp. 110–135). Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E. G., Pirzadeh, A., & Popescu, D. (2011). Institutional learning and knowledge transfer across epistemic communities: New tools of global governance (2012th ed.). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carbone, M. (2008). Mission impossible: The European Union and policy coherence for development. Journal of European Integration, 30(3), 323–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carbone, M. (2013). Policy coherence and EU development policy. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carbone, M., & Keijzer, N. (2016). The European Union and policy coherence for development: Reforms, results, resistance. European Journal of Development Research, 28(1), 30–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cerna, L. (2013). The nature of policy change and implementation. Paris: OECD Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clemens, M. A., Kenny, C. J., & Moss, T. J. (2007). The trouble with the MDGs: Confronting expectations of aid and development success. World Development, 35(5), 735–751.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornwall, A. (2007). Buzzwords and fuzzwords: Deconstructing development discourse. Development in Practice, 17(4–5), 471–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornwall, A., & Brock, K. (2005). What do buzzwords do for development policy? A critical look at ‘participation’, ‘empowerment’ and ‘poverty reduction’. Third World Quarterly, 26(7), 1043–1060.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Easterly, W. (2002). What did structural adjustment adjust? The association of policies and growth with repeated IMF and World Bank adjustment loans (SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 1106277). Social Science Research Network. http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1106277.

  • Easterly, W. (2014). The tyranny of experts: Economists, dictators, and the forgotten rights of the poor. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Embry, E., Jones, J., & York, J. G. (2019). Climate change and entrepreneurship. In Handbook of Inclusive Innovation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2019). 2019 EU report on policy coherence for development. https://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/2019-eu-report-policy-coherence-development-1_en.

  • Evans, M. (2010). New directions in the study of policy transfer. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feiock, R. C. (2013). The institutional collective action framework. Policy Studies Journal, 41(3), 397–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Florini, A., & Pauli, M. (2018). Collaborative governance for the sustainable development goals. Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies, 5(3), 583–598. https://doi.org/10.1002/app5.252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, J. F. (2014). Rethinking private authority: Agents and entrepreneurs in global environmental governance. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, J. F. (2017). Policy entrepreneurship in climate governance: Toward a comparative approach. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space, 35(8), 1471–1482.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henökl, T., & Trondal, J. (2013). Bureaucratic structure, geographical location and the autonomy of administrative systems evidence from the European External Action Service (ISL Working Paper). University of Agder (2013:7).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hermansen, E. A. T. (2015). Policy window entrepreneurship: The backstage of the world’s largest REDD+initiative. Environmental Politics, 24(6), 932–950.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoebink, P. (2004). Evaluating Maastricht’s Triple C: The ‘C’ of coherence. In The treaty of Maastricht and Europe’s development co-operation (pp. 183–218). Amsterdam: Aksant Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huitema, D., Boasson, E. L., & Beunen, R. (2018). Entrepreneurship in climate governance at the local and regional levels: Concepts, methods, patterns, and effects. Regional Environmental Change, 18(5), 1247–1257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jakobi, A. P., & Martens, K. (2007). Diffusion durch internationale Organisationen: Die Bildungspolitik der OECD. In K. Holzinger, H. Jörgens, & C. Knill (Eds.), Transfer, Diffusion und Konvergenz von Politiken (pp. 247–270). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jakobi, A. P., & Martens, K. (2010). Mechanisms of OECD governance: International incentives for national policy-making? Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jänicke, M. (1993). Ökologisch tragfähige Entwicklung. Von der Leerformel zu Indikatoren und Maßnahmen. Zeitschrift Für Sozialwissenschaften, 3, 149–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins-Smith, H., Nohrstedt, D., Weible, C. M., & Sabatier, P. A. (2014). Advocacy coalition framework: Foundations, evolution, and ongoing research. In C. Weible & P. A. Sabatier (Eds.), Theories of the policy process (pp. 183–223). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joshi, D. K., Hughes, B. B., & Sisk, T. D. (2015). Improving governance for the post-2015 sustainable development goals: Scenario forecasting the next 50 years. World Development, 70, 286–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kevenhörster, P. (2006). Durch Migration zur Entwicklung? Die Kohärenz von Entwicklungs- und Migrationspolitik im internationalen Vergleich. In S. Baringhorst, J. F. Hollifield, & U. Hunger (Eds.), Herausforderung Migration - Perspektiven der vergleichenden Politikwissenschaft (1st ed., pp. 375–395). Münster: LIT Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knill, C., & Bauer, M. W. (2016). Policy-making by international public administrations: Concepts, causes and consequences. Journal of European Public Policy, 23(7), 949–959.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krook, M. L., & True, J. (2012). Rethinking the life cycles of international norms: The United Nations and the global promotion of gender equality. European Journal of International Relations, 18(1), 103–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langford, M., Sumner, A., & Yamin, A. E. (2013). The millennium development goals and human rights: Past, present and future. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lipscy, P. Y. (2017). Renegotiating the world order: Institutional change in international relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, C. (2010). Policy entrepreneurship in Australia: A conceptual review and application. Australian Journal of Political Science, 39(2), 367–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1998). The institutional dynamics of international political orders. International Organization, 52(4), 943–969.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, D., & Evans, M. (2012). Policy transfer: Coming of age and learning from the experience. Policy Studies, 33(6), 477–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mawdsley, E., Savage, L., & Kim, S.-M. (2014). A ‘post-aid world’? Paradigm shift in foreign aid and development cooperation at the 2011 Busan High Level Forum. The Geographical Journal, 180(1), 27–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4959.2012.00490.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCann, E., & Ward, K. (2012). Policy assemblages, mobilities and mutations: Toward a multidisciplinary conversation. Political Studies Review, 10(3), 325–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meadowcroft, J., Langhelle, O., & Rudd, A. (2012). Governance, democracy and sustainable development: Moving beyond the impasse. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintrom, M., & Luetjens, J. (2019). International policy entrepreneurship. The Oxford handbook of global policy and transnational administration. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198758648.013.35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mintrom, M., & Norman, P. (2009). Policy entrepreneurship and policy change. The Policy Studies Journal, 37(4), 649–667.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moyo, D., & Ferguson, N. (2010). Dead aid: Why aid is not working and how there is a better way for Africa (1 Reprint edition). New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nay, O. (2014). International organisations and the production of hegemonic knowledge: how the World Bank and the OECD helped invent the fragile state concept. Third World Quarterly, 35(2), 210–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newman, A. L. (2008). Building transnational civil liberties: Transgovernmental entrepreneurs and the European data privacy directive. International Organization, 62(1), 103–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nichols, T. (2017). The death of expertise: The campaign against established knowledge and why it matters. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Obrovsky, M., & Schlögl, L. (2011). Politikkohärenz durch Kohärenzpolitik!: Bedingungen für Policy Coherence for Development in Österreich (1st ed.). Wien: Südwind.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (Ed.). (2012). OECD strategy on development. Paris: OECD Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E., & McGinnis, M. D. (2014). Social-ecological system framework: Initial changes and continuing challenges. Ecology and Society, 19(2), 30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pattberg, P. (2017). The emergence of carbon disclosure: Exploring the role of governance entrepreneurs. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space, 35(8), 1437–1455.

    Google Scholar 

  • Persson, A. (2004). Environmental policy integration: An introduction (Policy Integration for Sustainability) (Background Paper). Stockholm Environment Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Picciotto, R. (2005). The evaluation of policy coherence for development. Evaluation, 11(3), 311–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radelet, S. (2004). Aid effectiveness and the millennium development goals (SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 1112641). Social Science Research Network.

    Google Scholar 

  • Risse, T. (2016). Domestic politics and norm diffusion in international relations: Ideas do not float freely. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rist, G. (2007). Development as a buzzword. Development in Practice, 17(4/5), 485–491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rochet, C., Keramidas, O., & Bout, L. (2008). La crise comme stratégie de changement dans les organisations publiques, Abstract. Revue Internationale des Sciences Administratives, 74(1), 71–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sabatier, P. A. (1988). An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Policy Sciences, 21, 129–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sachs, J. D. (2012). From millennium development goals to sustainable development goals. The Lancet, 379(9832), 2206–2211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saurugger, S., & Terpan, F. (2013). Analyser les résistances à la mise en œuvre des normes européennes: une étude des instruments de politique publique. Quaderni, 80, 5–24. https://doi.org/10.4000/quaderni.666.

  • Scharpf, F. W. (1997). Games real actors play: Actor-centered institutionalism in policy research. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmelzer, M. (2016). The hegemony of growth: The OECD and the making of the economic growth paradigm. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmelzer, M., & Leimgruber, M. (Eds.). (2017). The OECD and the international political economy since 1948|Matthieu Leimgruber|Palgrave Macmillan. Palgrave Macmillan. www.palgrave.com/de/book/9783319602424.

  • Stone, D. (2004). Transfer agents and global networks in the ‘transnationalization’ of policy. Journal of European Public Policy, 11(3), 545–566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, D. (2019). Transnational policy entrepreneurs and the cultivation of influence: Individuals, organizations and their networks. Globalizations, 16(7), 1128–1144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trondal, J. (2013). International bureaucracies: Organizational structure and behavioural implications. In B. Reinalda (Ed.), Routledge handbook of international organization (pp. 162–175). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tulmets, E. (2015). Exporting “soft norms” through the European Union’s external policy. Politique Européenne, 46(4), 34–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UN. (2018). United Nations partnerships for SDGs platform. PCSD partnership—A multi-stakeholder partnership for enhancing policy coherence for sustainable development. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/partnership/?p=12066.

  • Weible, C., & Sabatier, P. (2006). A guide to the advocacy coalition framework. In F. Fischer & G. J. Miller (Eds.), Handbook of public policy analysis: Theory, politics, and methods (pp. 123–136). CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weible, C. M., & Sabatier, P. A. (2017). Theories of the policy process. London: Hachette UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinlich, S. (2014). The UN secretariat’s influence on the evolution of peacekeeping. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whaites, A. (2015). Competing for the future: Propositions of power and governance in development (Background Paper). OECD Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeigermann, U. (2016). The proliferation of policy coherence for development – from a vague idea towards a global norm? Dissertation. Münster: IMB Hochschulschrift der Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeigermann, U., & Böcher, M. (2019). Challenges for bridging the gap between knowledge and governance in sustainability policy—The case of OECD ‘focal points’ for policy coherence for development. Forest Policy and Economics, 102005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zürn, M., Binder, M., & Ecker-Ehrhardt, M. (2012). International authority and its politicization. International Theory, 4(1), 69–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany

    Ulrike Zeigermann

Authors
  1. Ulrike Zeigermann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ulrike Zeigermann .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Zeigermann, U. (2020). Disentangling the Notion of Transnational Policy Entrepreneurs: Concluding Remarks. In: Transnational Policy Entrepreneurs. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44893-6_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation