Volume 18, 2016 Issue #2 – Special Issue – Comparative Analysis of Unpopular Social Policy Reform and Strategic Communication

Unpopular Social Policy Reform and Strategic Communication: An Introduction

Authors: Georg Wenzelburger, Felix Hörisch

Introduction:Do voters punish governments for unpopular policies and does strategic communication affect this relationship? How do the characteristics of political systems impact on the way political leaders communicate such unpopular policies and how can we explain these cross-national differences? In recent years, when the debt crisis in many industrialized countries pushed austerity policies to the top of the political agenda, questions like these were of utmost importance for policy makers and scholars of comparative public policy showed increased interest in the politics of unpopular policies. However, we still lack a thorough understanding of the relationships that are at work when governments implement unpopular policies – such as austerity measures or welfare state cutbacks. Drawing lessons from extrapolations or through comparisons and synthesis to develop an understanding of factors applicable along systems can significantly contribute to the domain. View Full Text

Taking Stock of the Comparative Literature on the Role of Blame Avoidance Strategies in Social Policy Reform

Author Barbara Vis

Subjects: welfare retrenchment, blame avoidance strategies, credit-claiming retrenchment, comparative social policy analysis

Abstract: This article takes stock of and reviews the comparative literature on blame avoidance strategies in social policy reform to identify the conditions under which blame avoidance strategies are necessary (or not). This helps to solve the seemingly contradictory findings that blame avoidance strategies may not (always) be necessary while they are often employed. Moreover, it proposes that experimental designs help to establish the effect of blame avoidance strategies and presents an approach for assessing systematically the employment and success of blame avoidance strategies. Hereby, the article outlines a research agenda for comparative theory development.

Framing Effects and Comparative Social Policy Reform: Comparing Blame Avoidance Evidence from Two Experiments

Author: Pascal König

Subjects: welfare state retrenchment, comparative political communication, blame avoidance, framing, Italy 2011–2012, welfare state retrenchment

Abstract: Governments’ policy organization and communication, treated as an independent variable, has been shown to increase the public endorsement of unpopular reforms and to help to avoid blame. This study aims to shed further light on such strategic action from a largely neglected angle. It considers reform communication as a dependent variable and makes the case that the content of this communication does not so much depend upon blame avoidance motives but is primarily a function of contextual factors conditioning the limits and resources for a convincing communication. Using the Italian Monti government as a case where blame avoidance can be expected to be least likely, the analysis nonetheless shows clear features that resemble blame avoidance strategies for this case, namely a pronounced risk framing and justifications based on political cooperation. This communication can however, it is argued, be made plausible in light of political-institutional, political-cultural and economic circumstances.

A Comparative Analysis of Hospital Readmissions in France and the US

Authors: Michael Gusmano, Victor G Rodwinv, Daniel Weisz, Jonathan Cottenet & Catherine Quantin

Subjects: comparative health systems analysis, hospital readmissions, French health system, Medicare

Abstract: Policymakers in the US and France are struggling to improve coordination among hospitals and other health care providers. A comparison of hospital readmission rates, and the factors that may explain them, can provide important insights about the French and US health care systems. In addition, it illustrates a methodological approach to comparative research: how an empirical inquiry along a single indicator can reveal broader issues about system-wide differences across health care systems and policy. Using data from three French regions, the article extends a previous national-level comparison indicating that rates of hospital readmission for the population aged 65+ are lower in France than in the US. In addition, we extend the range of variables available in the national comparison by drawing on neighborhood-level income data available from a previous study of access to primary care among three French regions. Within France, the odds of surgical hospital readmission are significantly lower in private for-profit hospitals compared with public hospitals. Patients who live in lower income neighborhoods are also more likely to be readmitted for medical and surgical conditions than are patients living in higher income neighborhoods, but this income effect is weaker than in the US. The article concludes with a discussion of how these findings reflect broader system-wide differences between the US and French health systems and the ways in which policymakers attempt to coordinate hospitals and community-based services.

Theory-Driven Comparative Policy Analysis

Authors: Frans K.M. van Nispen & Peter W.A. Scholten