IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jnlpup/v36y2016i02p219-250_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Explaining styles of political judgement in British government: comparing isolation dynamics (1959–1974)

Author

Listed:
  • Six, Perri

Abstract

During their time in office, British governments’ styles of political judgement or bias in policymaking often become shorter in term and less intellectually coherent, sometimes in passive or coping ways, sometimes shifting toward imposition. This article offers an explanation, developing the neo-Durkheimian theory of institutional dynamics. Changing judgement style, it argues, is driven by changes in administrations’ informal institutional ordering of social organisation. “Isolation dynamics†are shifts in that ordering towards weakly cohesive but strongly constrained “isolate†forms. Increased isolate ordering is reflected in less cohesive but more constrained judgement style. Novel distinctions within isolate ordering explain key differences among administrations’ trajectories. Using extensive archival data, three British administrations between 1959 and 1974 are compared. The study finds that, among otherwise contrasting administrations, reinforcement or undermining in informal social organisation drove changes in styles of political judgement, as shown in their ways of framing policy problems, risks, time horizons, etc.

Suggested Citation

  • Six, Perri, 2016. "Explaining styles of political judgement in British government: comparing isolation dynamics (1959–1974)," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 36(2), pages 219-250, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jnlpup:v:36:y:2016:i:02:p:219-250_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0143814X15000100/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jnlpup:v:36:y:2016:i:02:p:219-250_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/pup .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.