Assessing policy transfer from the United States to the British National Health Service

IF 2.2 4区 管理学 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Policy Studies Pub Date : 2023-10-23 DOI:10.1080/01442872.2023.2271417
Daniel Béland, Martin Powell, Alex Waddan
{"title":"Assessing policy transfer from the United States to the British National Health Service","authors":"Daniel Béland, Martin Powell, Alex Waddan","doi":"10.1080/01442872.2023.2271417","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Much has been written about the claim that the British National Health Service (NHS) is becoming more like the US health care system, something a number of commentators view as a form of “Americanization”. Yet, that term is imprecise and unhelpful for rigorous analysis of what has, and has not, happened. This paper uses the lens of policy transfer to explore this issue, which provides a sharper insight into policy development. The paper examines the relevance of the Dolowitz and Marsh framework for the study of policy transfer from the US to the British NHS from 1979 onwards. In terms of the framework’s main research questions, the discussion of the potential US influence on the NHS case stresses the role of policy entrepreneurs in policy transfer. In terms of policy success, however, commentators suggest a mix of uninformed, incomplete, or inappropriate transfer. We conclude that Dolowitz and Marsh do provide a useful framework that asks relevant questions about policy transfer, which provides a more nuanced account of policy transfer from the US to the NHS than the crude term “Americanization”.","PeriodicalId":47179,"journal":{"name":"Policy Studies","volume":"2 4","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Policy Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2023.2271417","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Much has been written about the claim that the British National Health Service (NHS) is becoming more like the US health care system, something a number of commentators view as a form of “Americanization”. Yet, that term is imprecise and unhelpful for rigorous analysis of what has, and has not, happened. This paper uses the lens of policy transfer to explore this issue, which provides a sharper insight into policy development. The paper examines the relevance of the Dolowitz and Marsh framework for the study of policy transfer from the US to the British NHS from 1979 onwards. In terms of the framework’s main research questions, the discussion of the potential US influence on the NHS case stresses the role of policy entrepreneurs in policy transfer. In terms of policy success, however, commentators suggest a mix of uninformed, incomplete, or inappropriate transfer. We conclude that Dolowitz and Marsh do provide a useful framework that asks relevant questions about policy transfer, which provides a more nuanced account of policy transfer from the US to the NHS than the crude term “Americanization”.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估从美国到英国国家卫生服务体系的政策转移
关于英国国家医疗服务体系(NHS)正变得越来越像美国医疗体系的说法,很多评论人士认为这是一种“美国化”。然而,这个术语并不精确,也无助于对已经发生和尚未发生的事情进行严格分析。本文从政策转移的角度来探讨这一问题,为政策制定提供了更清晰的视角。本文考察了Dolowitz和Marsh框架与1979年以来从美国到英国NHS的政策转移研究的相关性。就框架的主要研究问题而言,关于美国对NHS案例的潜在影响的讨论强调政策企业家在政策转移中的作用。然而,就政策成功而言,评论人士认为是不知情、不完整或不适当的转移。我们的结论是,Dolowitz和Marsh确实提供了一个有用的框架,提出了有关政策转移的相关问题,它提供了从美国到NHS的政策转移的更细致入微的描述,而不是粗糙的术语“美国化”。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Policy Studies
Policy Studies PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION-
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
4.50%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: These changes at the structural level of the global system have impacted upon the work of public organizations either directly or indirectly and have broadened the field of action in policy studies. It has five main areas of intellectual interest: 1.To broaden the lens of policy analysis through the publication of research which locates policy-making within a theoretical, historical or comparative perspective. 2.To widen the field of enquiry in policy analysis through the publication of research that examines policy issues in a British, comparative, international or global context. 3.To promote constructive debate on theoretical, methodological and empirical issues in policy analysis.
期刊最新文献
Opposition windows in Delhi’s water utility privatization: going beyond the multiple streams framework The origins of social protection in healthcare: classifying healthcare systems at introduction in 165 countries Digital political campaigning: contemporary challenges and regulation Do intergovernmental interactions increase government spending? Institutional diversity and the immigrant wage gap? A comparison between the German and British experience with statutory minimum wages
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1