Facilitators and Constraints of Policy Learning for Administrative Capacity in the Western Balkans

Abstract

Drawing on the policy-transfer literature, where processes such as Europeanization accentuate the role of policy networks as facilitators or constraints in the implementation of acquis 1 , in addition to the familiar mechanism of "conditionality", the principal objective of this article is to explore the challenges of policy learning toward administrative-capacity building and, more specifi cally, the role of what I refer to here as "donor-bureaucrat-contractor" networks in the Western Balkans. By employing a qualitative methodology consisting of forty semi-structured interviews and focus groups with policymakers, donor offi cers, civil-society experts and consultants in the region during the period of January 2011 to December 2016, a critical analysis of aid-supported policy learning via training as a conduit to administrative capacity-building reveals a series of context-specifi c dimensions, such as the informality of such networks, overreliance on local NGOs as "capacitybuilding" implementation partners and the ability of the context to aff ect donor behaviour -all ultimately contributing to the (non-) occurrence of policy transfer. Th e overarching conclusion this article draws is that potential answers to problems with aid-supported policy learning in the region may probably lie in the invisible workings of the aforementioned networks rather than solely in the offi cial channels of communication between Brussels and regional governments. From a policymaking standpoint, this conclusion in itself may as well be construed as a recommendation to mobilize future research surrounding the impact of such networks on European Union (EU) accession processes in the region. Th is may encourage research organizations both in the EU and the region to (re) orient future endeavors towards this dimension of administrative capacity-building -a core requirement for EU accession -especially as the EU itself faces its own enlargement dilemmas following Brexit while the region faces threats of a potential revival of "old" ethnic

Understanding the Concept of Policy Transfer: A Systematic Literature Review Approach

“…Worth to note that there were three past studies focused on European policy (Karini, 2017;Dabrowski, Musialkowska, & Polverari, 2018a;Dabrowski, Musialkowska, & Polverari, 2018b), two studies originated from policy experience in United States of America -USA (Bauer, 2010;Stone, de Oliveira, & Pal, 2019), and another two studies from United Kingdom -UK (Keating & Cairney, 2012;Dolowitz, 2017). The remaining articles were derived from Australia (Walker, 2019), Brazil (de Oliveira & Pal, 2018, China (Zhang & Yu, 2019), Germany (Barabasch, 2010), Indonesia (Nugroho, Zuiderwijk, Janssen, & de Jong, 2015), Malaysia (Siddiquee, 2010), Netherlands (Minkman, van Buuren, & Bekkers, 2018), and Sweden (Petridou & Olausson, 2017) with each country had published an article on policy transfer.…”

“…In terms of the publication year, three articles were published in 2010 (Barabasch, 2010;Bauer, 2010;Siddiquee, 2010), an article was published in 2012 (Keating & Cairney, 2012), and in 2015 (Nugroho et al, 2015). Next, three articles were published in 2017 (Dolowitz, 2017;Karini, 2017;Petridou & Olausson, 2017), followed by four articles published in 2018 (Dabrowski et al, 2018a;Dabrowski et al, 2018b;de Oliveira & Pal, 2018;Minkman et al, 2018) and three articles published in 2019 (Stone et al, 2019;Walker, 2019;Zhang & Yu, 2019). These articles (n=15) were included in the review for further thematic analysis.…”

“…These articles (n=15) were included in the review for further thematic analysis. In the case of methodology, four studies employed primary data through qualitative approach (Nugroho et al, 2015;Karini, 2017;Petridou & Olausson, 2017;Walker, 2019) while the rest applied secondary data as review papers.…”