Pub Date : 2026-03-09DOI: 10.1007/s11077-026-09606-y
Nora von Ingersleben-Seip, Daniel Mügge
Current debates about international cooperation in AI governance remain both simplistic and muddled, pitting global forms of collaboration against selective alliances among “like-minded countries”. We propose a more nuanced and systematic approach to cooperative AI governance based on three considerations. First, different kinds of governance issues lend themselves to different kinds of cooperation. Second, not all AI is created equally: different kinds of AI raise different governance challenges, thus requiring varied forms of cooperation. Third, the same is true for the development and deployment phases of AI systems. Integrating these three factors, we explain why some challenges can only be addressed through global cooperation, while for others selective cooperation is an equally effective, or even more effective, solution. In consequence, governments should not insist on either global or selective cooperation. Instead, they should opt for the scope of collaboration that is most effective for solving any particular governance issue at hand.
{"title":"Global, selective, or both? The case for differentiated cooperation in AI governance","authors":"Nora von Ingersleben-Seip, Daniel Mügge","doi":"10.1007/s11077-026-09606-y","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-026-09606-y","url":null,"abstract":"Current debates about international cooperation in AI governance remain both simplistic and muddled, pitting global forms of collaboration against selective alliances among “like-minded countries”. We propose a more nuanced and systematic approach to cooperative AI governance based on three considerations. First, different kinds of governance issues lend themselves to different kinds of cooperation. Second, not all AI is created equally: different kinds of AI raise different governance challenges, thus requiring varied forms of cooperation. Third, the same is true for the development and deployment phases of AI systems. Integrating these three factors, we explain why some challenges can only be addressed through global cooperation, while for others selective cooperation is an equally effective, or even more effective, solution. In consequence, governments should not insist on either global or selective cooperation. Instead, they should opt for the scope of collaboration that is most effective for solving any particular governance issue at hand.","PeriodicalId":51433,"journal":{"name":"Policy Sciences","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.3,"publicationDate":"2026-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147374333","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-03-09DOI: 10.1007/s11077-026-09603-1
Margarita Manosalvas Vaca, Juan Federico Pino Uribe
{"title":"Euthanasia, institutions, and constitutional innovation in Ecuador: testing the multiple streams framework to explain agenda setting in Latin America","authors":"Margarita Manosalvas Vaca, Juan Federico Pino Uribe","doi":"10.1007/s11077-026-09603-1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-026-09603-1","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51433,"journal":{"name":"Policy Sciences","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.3,"publicationDate":"2026-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"147374271","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-02-16DOI: 10.1007/s11077-026-09600-4
Toyib Aremu, Travis Reynolds, Fritz Sager
{"title":"Patterns of evidence use in Nigerian policymaking: insights from latent class analysis","authors":"Toyib Aremu, Travis Reynolds, Fritz Sager","doi":"10.1007/s11077-026-09600-4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-026-09600-4","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51433,"journal":{"name":"Policy Sciences","volume":"244 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.3,"publicationDate":"2026-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146205154","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-02-13DOI: 10.1007/s11077-026-09601-3
Yifei Yan, M Ramesh
Despite accountability’s centrality to good governance , policymakers such as senior government officials are rarely held responsible for the quality of and reasoning behind their policy choices. Conventional accountability mechanisms are mostly fixated on procedural compliance , without sufficiently attending to whether policies are well-designed , evidence-based , or achieve intended outcomes. This paper argues that “policy choice accountability”—requiring policymakers to justify decisions , demonstrate evidence use , and accept responsibility for results—represents a critical missing dimension in governance systems. Through illustrative case examples , including education transformation in Ceará , Brazil , we show how this dimension of accountability can be strengthened through our three-pillar framework.Addressing this gap is essential for confronting complex policy challenges effectively across diverse contexts. The paper contributes to accountability theory by establishing policy choice as a distinct dimension requiring specific oversight mechanisms beyond traditional administrative and political accountability. For practice , it proposes concrete threshold conditions for application that can enhancepolicy effectiveness and democratic governance.
{"title":"Accountability for policy decisions: addressing gaps in theory and practice","authors":"Yifei Yan, M Ramesh","doi":"10.1007/s11077-026-09601-3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-026-09601-3","url":null,"abstract":"<jats:italic>Despite accountability’s centrality to good governance</jats:italic> , <jats:italic>policymakers such as senior government officials are rarely held responsible for the quality of and reasoning behind their policy choices. Conventional accountability mechanisms are mostly fixated on procedural compliance</jats:italic> , <jats:italic>without sufficiently attending to whether policies are well-designed</jats:italic> , <jats:italic>evidence-based</jats:italic> , <jats:italic>or achieve intended outcomes. This paper argues that “policy choice accountability”—requiring policymakers to justify decisions</jats:italic> , <jats:italic>demonstrate evidence use</jats:italic> , <jats:italic>and accept responsibility for results—represents a critical missing dimension in governance systems. Through illustrative case examples</jats:italic> , <jats:italic>including education transformation in Ceará</jats:italic> , <jats:italic>Brazil</jats:italic> , <jats:italic>we show how this dimension of accountability can be strengthened through our three-pillar framework.</jats:italic> <jats:italic>Addressing this gap is essential for confronting complex policy challenges effectively across diverse contexts. The paper contributes to accountability theory by establishing policy choice as a distinct dimension requiring specific oversight mechanisms beyond traditional administrative and political accountability. For practice</jats:italic> , <jats:italic>it proposes concrete threshold conditions for application that can enhance</jats:italic> <jats:italic>policy effectiveness and democratic governance.</jats:italic>","PeriodicalId":51433,"journal":{"name":"Policy Sciences","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.3,"publicationDate":"2026-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146196684","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-02-09DOI: 10.1007/s11077-026-09599-8
Thu N. A. Pham
This article examines the persistence of an automobility-centric paradigm in the development of urban policies for sustainable mobility. It draws on the policy composition framework to analyze individual elements of transport policies, from macro-level goals and logics of selecting instruments, to meso-level objectives and instruments, as well as micro-level policy targets and instrument calibrations. The study considers four types of change, namely layering, drift, conversion, and replacement to analyze the evolution of strategies, action plans and policies in the City of Espoo, Finland, a car-centric city with an ambitious carbon neutrality goal. The results show tensions in the development of instruments and their calibrations that simultaneously emphasize both sustainability and the freedom of using cars, which ultimately supports the expansion of private car infrastructure. The article highlights how legacies of car-centric policies can restrain the scope of future policy intervention and potentially lead to an impasse in the transition to more sustainable urban transport policies.
{"title":"When transformation challenges legacy: tensions in the layering of urban transport policies","authors":"Thu N. A. Pham","doi":"10.1007/s11077-026-09599-8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-026-09599-8","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the persistence of an automobility-centric paradigm in the development of urban policies for sustainable mobility. It draws on the policy composition framework to analyze individual elements of transport policies, from macro-level goals and logics of selecting instruments, to meso-level objectives and instruments, as well as micro-level policy targets and instrument calibrations. The study considers four types of change, namely layering, drift, conversion, and replacement to analyze the evolution of strategies, action plans and policies in the City of Espoo, Finland, a car-centric city with an ambitious carbon neutrality goal. The results show tensions in the development of instruments and their calibrations that simultaneously emphasize both sustainability and the freedom of using cars, which ultimately supports the expansion of private car infrastructure. The article highlights how legacies of car-centric policies can restrain the scope of future policy intervention and potentially lead to an impasse in the transition to more sustainable urban transport policies.","PeriodicalId":51433,"journal":{"name":"Policy Sciences","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.3,"publicationDate":"2026-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146153735","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-04DOI: 10.1007/s11077-025-09591-8
Allegra H. Fullerton
{"title":"Coalition stability and cohesion in a transgender policy conflict","authors":"Allegra H. Fullerton","doi":"10.1007/s11077-025-09591-8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-025-09591-8","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51433,"journal":{"name":"Policy Sciences","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.3,"publicationDate":"2025-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145680290","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-12-01DOI: 10.1007/s11077-025-09595-4
Magni Szymaniak-Arnesen, Adela Gąsiorowska
Deliberative minipublics (DMPs), such as citizens’ assemblies (CAs), comprising randomly selected citizens, have become an increasingly popular means to complement traditional political decision-making. DMPs are claimed to overcome the challenges of liberal democracy by democratizing policy-making and enhancing the epistemic value of public decisions. To date, research has largely focused on DMPs’ internal processes or their role within the broader political system. There is, however, still a limited number of studies analyzing the substantive outputs of such deliberative fora, i.e., their policy recommendations. This research note proposes a categorical framework for analyzing and comparing DMPs’ recommendations across cases. It was built on existing theoretical approaches to public policy outputs and policy advice. To adapt the theory to the specificity of DMPs, we used the insights from nine in-depth interviews and two focus groups conducted with citizens, policy experts, stakeholders, and civil servants, who evaluated recommendations from ten CAs in Poland. A total of 20% of recommendations from ten Polish CAs ( n = 130) were initially pilot-coded to refine the framework and then to test its reliability. The study provides an easily applicable tool for comparative analysis of DMPs’ outputs across cases without requiring contextual data. The provided categories of recommendations may help further research on the relationship between DMP designs and the quality of their recommendations, also contributing to the study of DMPs’ policy impact.
{"title":"Assessing the substantive outputs of deliberative minipublics: a categorical framework for policy recommendations","authors":"Magni Szymaniak-Arnesen, Adela Gąsiorowska","doi":"10.1007/s11077-025-09595-4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-025-09595-4","url":null,"abstract":"Deliberative minipublics (DMPs), such as citizens’ assemblies (CAs), comprising randomly selected citizens, have become an increasingly popular means to complement traditional political decision-making. DMPs are claimed to overcome the challenges of liberal democracy by democratizing policy-making and enhancing the epistemic value of public decisions. To date, research has largely focused on DMPs’ internal processes or their role within the broader political system. There is, however, still a limited number of studies analyzing the substantive outputs of such deliberative fora, i.e., their policy recommendations. This research note proposes a categorical framework for analyzing and comparing DMPs’ recommendations across cases. It was built on existing theoretical approaches to public policy outputs and policy advice. To adapt the theory to the specificity of DMPs, we used the insights from nine in-depth interviews and two focus groups conducted with citizens, policy experts, stakeholders, and civil servants, who evaluated recommendations from ten CAs in Poland. A total of 20% of recommendations from ten Polish CAs ( <jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 130) were initially pilot-coded to refine the framework and then to test its reliability. The study provides an easily applicable tool for comparative analysis of DMPs’ outputs across cases without requiring contextual data. The provided categories of recommendations may help further research on the relationship between DMP designs and the quality of their recommendations, also contributing to the study of DMPs’ policy impact.","PeriodicalId":51433,"journal":{"name":"Policy Sciences","volume":"112 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.3,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145651558","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-11-26DOI: 10.1007/s11077-025-09596-3
Liz Richardson, Catherine Durose, Paul Cairney, John Boswell
{"title":"How should policy actors respond to buzzwords? Three ways to deal with policy ambiguity","authors":"Liz Richardson, Catherine Durose, Paul Cairney, John Boswell","doi":"10.1007/s11077-025-09596-3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-025-09596-3","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51433,"journal":{"name":"Policy Sciences","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.3,"publicationDate":"2025-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145599886","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：