Rethinking the travel of ideas: policy translation in the water sector

Abstract

The travel of policy ideas across countries is a widely acknowledged phenomenon. Conventional approaches to the study of this process hinge on concepts such as 'policy transfer', 'policy diffusion', 'lesson-drawing' and 'institutional isomorphism'. These approaches are influential in understanding public policy; however, they assume perfect rationality of actors, the stability of governance scales and the immutability of policy ideas in their travel. I propose policy translation as a new approach to counter these shortcomings and study the travel of policy ideas in order to shed light on pertaining policy questions, such as whether the travel of policy ideas may be navigated, and if so, how. I illustrate the relevance and value of policy translation with a case study from the water sector in Turkey.

Organizing cross-sectoral collaboration in river basin management: case studies from the Rhine and the Zhujiang (Pearl River) basins

“…In terms of comparative methodology, the study employs the ´most different systems design´ method (Otner, 2010), which enables a deeper understanding of differences in causal mechanisms to achieve a similar outcome. This analysis and methodology can inform exercises of ´lesson drawing´ (Benson et al 2012) or ´policy translation´ (Mukhtarov, 2014) between European and Chinese decision-makers, managers and researchers interested in managing river basin social-ecological systems for sustainability and adaptability. Three workshops were co-organised by the authors with the active participation of water managers and academic experts working on the selected case studies.…”

Project owners – Overlooked factors of uncertainty in the example of a water infrastructure improvement project?

“…A matter of much concern here is the recognition that policy translation is nonlinear (Mukhtarov, 2014). Although, in the past non-linearity of implementation or adoption was also highlighted due to policy design (May, 2003) or Lipksy's classical ''street level bureaucracy'' (Hupe and Hill, 2007), the more recent studies more convincingly argue that the context matters and influences.…”

“…Mosse and Lewis (2005: 22) argued in relation to international aid projects that ''practices of development actors are not governed by policy prescription, but generated by very different and diverse administrative, political or social-relational logics which are concealed by rationalizing policy''. Mukhtarov (2014: 3) highlights the important of the agent and argues at policy transfer ''focuses primarily on actors and the process by which policies and practices travel, as well as on transfer agents''. In addition, Mukhtarov et al (2014) argued that efficiency of the institutional design process depends either on the designers or implementers of the programs.…”

Interactive institutional design and contextual relevance: Water user groups in Turkey, Azerbaijan and Uzbekistan

“…Whether defined as ''policy adaptation'' (Ingram and Schneider, 1990), ''policy translation'' (Freeman, 2009;Mukhtarov, 2014), ''policy re-design'' (Bobrow and Dryzek, 1997) or ''implementation as evolution'' (Pressman and Wildawsky, 1979) institutional design is always contingent on the policy context. However, the debate has raged since the 1980s whether such modification is the result of poor design from 'the top' or the courtesy of poor implementation 'on the bottom'.…”