The problem raised by causality in comparative policy analysis is twofold. First, how can we be sure there is actually a causal relationship between two variables, factors or events? Second, what do we really know about the causal forces, the individual motivations and the institutions at work between the alleged explanandum and the explanans (and vice versa)? The answer to these questions depends on whether we intend to predict what can or will happen if the same cause is present at different points in time or space, or whether we are willing to explain a causal process linking a trigger (i.e. a cause, a factor or a determinant) to an outcome, a result or an effect. To contribute to the discussion, we build on a typology of models of causation, coined as “regularity” (if causality is about generalizations based on constant variations), “necessity” (if it is about causal powers at work in contingent situations), “ideal-type” (if it is about historical patterns or chains of events), and “social construction” (if it is about actors’ frames and values). Each model fulfills a different purpose when addressing causality. The article explains how these models work and command the selection and utilization of the methods. This introduction discusses the contribution to the discussion made by the four articles included in this special issue, which are organized by model of causation.

Abstract This collection presents an effort to draw on the COVID-19 global pandemic, as a rare “naturally occurring experiment”, to advance the comparative public policy scholarship and disseminate knowledge on international policy approaches to this extreme crisis situation. From a comparative lens, these articles reveal how factors such as partisan politics, intergovernmental relationships, culture, and state capacity shape crisis policy responses in contrast to normal policymaking. This collection also provides important lesson drawing: national–local coordination, social safety nets, and a well-organized sector of community workers are all part of a society’s capacity and resilience in a time of crisis.

This chapter first charts the development of the field of comparative policy analytic studies and compares this relatively new domain with the trajectories of comparative politics, and comparative public administration. Then it identifies, maps and compares comparative policy scholarly publications in the EBSCO Academic Complete database and in the Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice (JCPA). The JCPA is chosen because of its unique status as being explicitly and entirely devoted to the study of comparative policy analysis. As such it can serve as a case study for trends and practices in this field. The authors analyse the results of a content analysis of abstracts of articles in other journals and in the JCPA to map the prevalent topics, methods employed, and countries studied. They conclude by discussing the major trends in the work published in comparative policy analysis, the limitations of this work, and further areas for development. A clear finding is that the field of comparative policy analytic studies is on a sharp upward trajectory.

The Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice (JCPA) is now entering its third decade. This Special Issue gives due credit to its having pioneered the field of comparative polic...

In Israel immigration is considered mainly the responsibility of the state, while employment is regarded as a major requirement for social absorption. In 1990, the Absorption Department of the Ministry of Science and Technology, in collaboration with the Ministry of Education and Culture and the Ministry of Immigration and Absorption, initiated retraining of scientists for high school teaching. The retraining policy required scientists to follow a downward vertical movement both in terms of professional and social status. In addition, the scientists were forced to abandon any attachment to their occupation and previously established professional networks and interests, and to adopt different orientations. The wave of Russian immigration between 1989 and 1991 brought a large number of highly qualified scientists to Israel. These immigrants were faced with social and professional integration problems. Absorption and adult-retraining problems are assumed to be major potential interfering variables in an immigrant retraining context.

Comparative policy analysis has emerged as a distinct field of study in the past two decades, however only one journal is explicitly devoted to its study: the Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice (JCPA). This article performs a content analysis of abstracts in the field of comparative policy analysis to determine the contours of the field. First, the paper charts the development of comparative policy analysis and compares the trajectories of comparative politics, comparative public administration and comparative policy analysis. Second, the paper analyzes the results of the abstract coding to reveal the methods employed, countries studied, the number of countries studied and the countries of the authors' institutions. The results from JCPA and other journals in the Elton B. Stephens Co. (EBSCO) Academic Complete database are compared to distinguish the dominant role that JCPA plays in the field. Finally, it discusses the major trends in the work published in comparative policy analysis, the limitations of the current publications and further areas for development. A clear finding is that the field of comparative policy analysis is on a sharp upward trajectory.

This Special Issue of the Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis marks its 20th anniversary. To celebrate the event and to stimulate discussion, we invited leading scholars in the field to reflect on comparative policy analysis, its theory and its practice, its faults and its possibilities, its past and its future. Their articles speak for themselves, and so we have chosen an unconventional format for this introductory essay. Rather than merely summarize the articles, we will engage with them, test and stretch some of their conclusions about comparative policy analysis. Then, as befits an academic journal in a reflective mood, we will outline our thoughts about what JCPA should avoid in the next 20 years, and what it might embrace. This is not an editorial statement or manifesto. Rather, it is a glance back at our infant and teenage years (and those of the field), with hopeful anticipation of the challenges and prospects of maturity. We also indulge in some reminiscence, the rare privilege of such anniversary celebrations (see articles by Geva-May and by Lynn). The explicit rationale for including the particular articles selected for this Special Issue has been to encompass some of the main aspects of the comparative policy analysis domain. First, we identify the need for, and related trajectory of, comparative policy analysis in the last two decades (Geva-May et al.), then in Lynn and Malinowska we provide an illustration of different levels of comparison: international between nations, between policies – immigration and education ‒ and the application of comparative research methods and tools for a comparative policy analytic study. The four following articles seek to identify and address the past roots of comparative public policy and the present interconnections with political science (Guy Peters), public administration (Van de Walle and Brans) and public policy (Radin and Weimer; Howlett). Finally, Engeli, Rothmayer Allison and Montpetit look into the future promise of comparative policy analytic studies.

North American and European public policy programs are placed in a comparative context and assessed in light of domestic and global developments. The historical background of policy analysis and research in light of the nature and scope of American influence, the development of differences and similarities in policy analysis versus research, the roles and impacts of ‘experiential learning’ tools such as co-ops and internships, and the roles and impacts of accreditation bodies, are identified and discussed as key determinants in the development and nature of public policy programs.

The relationship between policy analysis and public budgeting has spurred quite some debate since the 1960s when Robert McNamara, Secretary of Defense in the Kennedy administration, launched his Planning Programming Budgeting System (PPBS) in an effort to improve the allocation of resources and efficiency in the public sector.More recently, we have witnessed a revival of performance budgeting due to the New Public Management (NPM) movement, which may be considered as a vehicle to serve old wine in a new bottle.The bouquet is fine as the negotiations about next year's budget are now flavored by performance information.However, the aftertaste is somewhat backward as the constraints of performance budgeting have become clear.In this paper we look back at the 50year history of budgetary reform to assess the progress that we have made since the first efforts to establish a more evidence-based fiscal policy.At the end, we conclude that budgets are still largely decided by power rather than by truth, or evidence that something works.

The contribution of this chapter is in its comparative overview of the graduate programs of public affairs/public policy in Israel, the assessment of their adherence to normative curricular practice in the United States, Canada and Europe, as well as their support of the public service in the Israeli context. With public policy analysis gradually becoming a profession in Israel, the programs of public policy, public administration and public affairs serve as the main pipeline for the training and development of a knowledgeable public service. Our underlying assumption is that the way public policy analysis is instructed, plays (a) a central role in the future approach and orientation of policy analysts in general as members of a professional community; and, (b) helps the Israeli public service become a more accountable, systematic, effective, and transparent system able to support democratic tenets and compete in the global markets.