IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/wzbreg/fsii01201.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Der Ruf der Sirenen - Zur Dynamik politischen Benchmarkings: Eine Analyse anhand der US-Sozialreformen

Author

Listed:
  • Straßheim, Holger

Abstract

Seit Anfang der achtziger Jahre hat die Politik das Lernen durch Leistungsvergleiche entdeckt. Auf regionaler, nationaler und transnationaler Ebene bezeichnet Benchmarking einen Politikstil, der Entscheidungen im Rückgriff auf best practises formuliert und begründet. Diese Entwicklung wird mal als Ausdruck vermehrten Politiklernens, mal als Ergebnis eines zwanghaften Modewahns gedeutet. Die vorliegende Analyse der US-Sozialreformen zeigt, dass Benchmarking unter Bedingungen des experimentellen Wohlfahrtsstaates die Diffusion von Innovationen tatsächlich enorm beschleunigen und institutionalisieren kann. So erhält in den USA der jüngste sozialpolitische Paradigmenwandel (Welfare-to-Work) seine Dynamik in Verbindung mit einem parallel ablaufenden steuerungspolitischen Paradigmenwandel (Benchmarking). Benchmarking erreicht dieses Transferpotential durch eine Ausblendung des Randbedingungen und Reformfolgen. Seine scheinbare Neutralität macht es unwiderstehlich und unverzichtbar für die Legitimation von Reformentscheidungen. Lokale Sozialverwaltungen entziehen sich allerdings mehr und mehr diesem indirekt erzwungenen Transfer. Es ergeben sich Konsequenzen für die neuere Policy-Transfer-Forschung sowie für die vergleichende Wohlfahrtsstaatsforschung.

Suggested Citation

  • Straßheim, Holger, 2001. "Der Ruf der Sirenen - Zur Dynamik politischen Benchmarkings: Eine Analyse anhand der US-Sozialreformen," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Regulation of Work FS II 01-201, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:wzbreg:fsii01201
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/50766/1/329600958.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Haas, Peter M., 1992. "Introduction: epistemic communities and international policy coordination," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(1), pages 1-35, January.
    2. Ron Haskins, 1991. "Congress writes a law: Research and welfare reform," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(4), pages 616-632.
    3. Mosley, Hugh & Mayer, Antje, 1999. "Benchmarking national labour market performance: A radar chart approach," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Labor Market Policy and Employment FS I 99-202, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    4. Esping-Andersen, Gosta, 1999. "Social Foundations of Postindustrial Economies," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198742005.
    5. Rose, Richard, 1991. "What is Lesson-Drawing?," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(1), pages 3-30, January.
    6. Adler, Emanuel & Haas, Peter M., 1992. "Conclusion: epistemic communities, world order, and the creation of a reflective research program," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(1), pages 367-390, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christensen, Mark & Newberry, Susan & Potter, Bradley N., 2019. "Enabling global accounting change: Epistemic communities and the creation of a ‘more business-like’ public sector," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 53-76.
    2. Ishani Mukherjee & Michael Howlett, 2015. "Who Is a Stream? Epistemic Communities, Instrument Constituencies and Advocacy Coalitions in Public Policy-Making," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 3(2), pages 65-75.
    3. Erik Baekkeskov, 2016. "Explaining science-led policy-making: pandemic deaths, epistemic deliberation and ideational trajectories," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 49(4), pages 395-419, December.
    4. Olivier Malay, 2017. "Beyond GDP indicators: A tension between powerful stakeholders and transformative potential?," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2017018, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    5. Tanja Börzel & Thomas Risse, 2000. "International Relations Theory and European Integration," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers 56, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    6. Olaf Corry & David Reiner, 2016. "It’s the Society, Stupid! Communicating Emergent Climate Technologies in the Internet Age," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1610, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    7. Nina Boeger & Joseph Corkin, 2017. "Institutional Path-Dependencies in Europe's Networked Modes of Governance," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(5), pages 974-992, September.
    8. Kaidonis, Mary A., 2009. "Critical accounting as an epistemic community: Hegemony, resistance and identity," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 290-297.
    9. Sharon Werning Rivera, 2004. "Elites and the Diffusion of Foreign Models in Russia," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 52(1), pages 43-62, March.
    10. Creplet, F. & Dupouet, O. & Kern, F. & Mehmanpazir, B. & Munier, F., 2001. "Consultants and experts in management consulting firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(9), pages 1517-1535, December.
    11. Patrik Marier, 2017. "The politics of policy adoption: a saga on the difficulties of enacting policy diffusion or transfer across industrialized countries," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(3), pages 427-448, September.
    12. Fikresus Amahazion, 2016. "Epistemic Communities, Human Rights, and the Global Diffusion of Legislation against the Organ Trade," Social Sciences, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 5(4), pages 1-31, October.
    13. Elliott, Chris & Schlaepfer, Rodolphe, 2001. "Understanding forest certification using the Advocacy Coalition Framework," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(3-4), pages 257-266, July.
    14. Sharif, Naubahar, 2006. "Emergence and development of the National Innovation Systems concept," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 745-766, June.
    15. Katharina Rietig, 2011. "The influence of academics as insidernongovernmental actors in the Post-Kyoto Protocol Climate Change Negotiations: a matter of timing, network and policyentrepreneurial capabilities," GRI Working Papers 58, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    16. Alastair Stark, 2019. "Policy learning and the public inquiry," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 52(3), pages 397-417, September.
    17. Malay, Olivier E., 2019. "Do Beyond GDP indicators initiated by powerful stakeholders have a transformative potential?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 100-107.
    18. Ngai, L. Rachel & Pissarides, Christopher A., 2009. "Welfare policy and the distribution of hours of work," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 28698, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    19. Claude Paraponaris, 2017. "Plateformes numériques, conception ouverte et emploi," Post-Print halshs-01614430, HAL.
    20. Sam Hickey & Tom Lavers & Miguel Niño-Zarazúa & Jeremy Seekings, 2018. "The negotiated politics of social protection in sub-Saharan Africa," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2018-34, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).

    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:zbw:wzbreg:fsii01201. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wzbbbde.html .

    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.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.