Learning from Abroad?Policy transfer – The cases of Germany and Austria

11th LPR Network Seminar, Tallinn, 18-19 September 2014

Dr. Sonja Blum, Austrian Institute for Family Studies at the University of Vienna

Tel.: (+43) 01 4277 48910Email: sonja.blum@univie.ac.at

www.oif.ac.at

LPR Workshop Tallinn | 18-19 September 2014 2

„Learning from abroad“ – Analytical framework

www.oif.ac.at

LPR Workshop Tallinn | 18-19 September 2014 3

Recently in Austria…

Symposium “Challenges of a modern, sustainable family policy”

Explicit aim to learn from Denmark on the way of making Austria “most family-friendly country in Europe”

Jesper Zwisler announced to take idea of

Austrian FamilyApp “home to his minister”

Zwisler: “We cannot ‘learn’ from each other,

we can only be inspired.”

Sophie Karmasin, Austrian family minister;Jesper Zwisler, Permanent Secretary from Denmark

www.oif.ac.at

LPR Workshop Tallinn | 18-19 September 2014 4

On a more general level in European family policies…

Political focus on international comparison (“learning from abroad”)

e.g. discussion on “efficiency” of family policies

Politicians, researchers, etc. engaged in spreading “best practices”

e.g. “Partner months” in parental leave policies

Increased activity of the EU in the soft-law-area (OMC)

E.g. Barcelona childcare targets

What are the conditions for, and how to study such “learning from abroad”?

Horizontal

Vertical

www.oif.ac.at

LPR Workshop Tallinn | 18-19 September 2014 5

Theoretical framework: Policy transfers

Policy transfer is a…

„…process in which knowledge about policies, administrative arrangements, institutions and ideas in one political setting (past or present) is used in the development of“ these elements in another political setting

(Dolowitz and Marsh, 2000)

Theoretical framework focusing on:

How? – Transfer mechanisms

Who? – Actors

What? – Objects

Which results? – Output degrees

www.oif.ac.at

LPR Workshop Tallinn | 18-19 September 2014 6

Mechanisms and outputs of policy transfers (Dolowitz and Marsh, 2000)

Mechanisms

Continuum from “rational” lesson-drawing to coercion

Most of the time: “voluntary”, but with perceived necessity (e.g. due to problem pressure, social norms, etc.)

Output degrees

Inspiration, i.e. impulse for a policy change

Combination, i.e. combining elements from different policies

Emulation, i.e. transfer of the ideas behind a policy

Copying, i.e. direct, complete transfer of a policy (very rare!)

www.oif.ac.at

LPR Workshop Tallinn | 18-19 September 2014 7

The cases of Germany and Austria

www.oif.ac.at

LPR Workshop Tallinn | 18-19 September 2014 8

Methods: Case selection and period of investigation (Blum 2014, 2012)

Period of investigation: 2000-2010

30 qualitative, semi-structured expert interviews; qualitative content analysis

Case selection: areas of parental leave and public childcare

= 8 reform cases

www.oif.ac.at

LPR Workshop Tallinn | 18-19 September 2014 9

1 January2007

Income replacement•Part-time employment up to 30 hours allowed for parental benefit recipients; then 67% of the lost income are paid up to an income ceiling of € 2,700•For formerly non-employed parents, there is a minimum sum of € 300 (but abolished for social assistance recipients in 2010)

12 + 2 months

ca. 67% max.€ 1,800

1 January1986

childcare benefit

(Erziehungsgeld)

Parental benefit

• At introduction: 10 months flat-rate benefit (DM 600)• 1988: extension to 12 months, then successive

extension to 24 months • 2001: Introduction of a second variant

• 24 months standard amount € 300• 12 months budget amount € 450

The parental benefit in Germany (2007)

www.oif.ac.at

LPR Workshop Tallinn | 18-19 September 2014 10

The parental benefit in Germany (2007)

Role model of the Nordic countries (in particular: Sweden)

High exchange on the ministerial and parliamentary levels in the context of the parental benefit reform

“We had an international exchange in the sense that, also in the years prior to the introduction of the parental benefit, we always looked at what regulations exist abroad. There were also trips of the ministry top level to Scandinavia and so on. (…) It is obvious that you have to find your own regulation. But what we did, indeed, is to look at some detailed regulations. For example, what are the eligibility criteria? How long are the partner months in Sweden?” (Interview 19)

Steering effect and high output degree (emulation)

www.oif.ac.at

LPR Workshop Tallinn | 18-19 September 2014 11

The income-dependent childcare benefit (KBG) in Austria (2010)

1 January2002

1 January2008

1 January2010

Flat-rate variants(Additional earnings limit of € 16,200 annually – or individualized additional earnings limit of 60% of the income in the calendar year before birth of the child)

12 + 2 months

ca. € 1.000

15 + 3 months

ca. € 800

20 + 4 months

ca. € 624

30 + 6 months

ca. € 436

12 + 2 months

ca. 80% max.€ 2.000

Income-dependent variant(Additional earnings limit of € 6,100)

www.oif.ac.at

LPR Workshop Tallinn | 18-19 September 2014 12

Income-dependent childcare benefit (KBG) in Austria (2010)

“Spontaneous” policy transfer from Germany in the run-up to the elections

High exchange on the ministerial level

“The German family minister von der Leyen was even invited by the ÖVP (Austrian People’s Party) in the run-up to the 2008 elections. She gave a speech on the parental benefit, its implementation and effects – and then the ÖVP jumped on the bandwagon. (Interview 5)

Steering effect, output degree of ‘combination’

www.oif.ac.at

LPR Workshop Tallinn | 18-19 September 2014 13

Summary: Role of policy transfers in the reform processes

Reform Effects Source Object(s) Output degree

Parental leave (2001)

TAG (2005)Parental benefit (2007)KiföG (2008)

Strongly intensifyingWeakly intensifyingsteering

steering

EU

EUSweden (+ EU)

EU

policy

ideas, policyideas, policy

ideas, policy

combination

inspirationemulation

emulation

KBG (2002)KBG (2008)KBG (2010)15a (2008)

nonenonesteeringStrongly intensifying

--Germany(+ EU)EU (+ Germany)

--policyideas, policy

--combinationinspiration

Source: Own table on the basis of the case studies

Decisive explanatory factor for family policy reforms!

www.oif.ac.at

LPR Workshop Tallinn | 18-19 September 2014 14

Conclusions: What is needed for policy transfers / learning from abroad?

Knowledge on and spreading of good practices

In practice, however, actual transfer contingent on much more than this, e.g.:

Beneficial transfer conditions (e.g. here: similar institutional and cultural background, geographical closeness, shared language and media)

Support of national actors and chance to insert/push idea within concrete policy processes (“windows of opportunity”)

Adaptation to national situation and respective output degree (e.g. inspiration, whereas direct copying very unlikely)

Thank you for your attention!

www.oif.ac.at

LPR Workshop Tallinn | 18-19 September 2014 16

References

• Blum, S. (2014): No need to reinvent the wheel: Family policy transfers in Germany and Austria. Policy Studies, 35 (4), 357-76.

• Blum, S. (2012): Familienpolitik als Reformprozess. Deutschland und Österreich im Vergleich. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

• Dolowitz, D.P. and Marsh, D. (2000): Learning from Abroad: The Role of Policy Transfer in Contemporary Policy-Making. Governance, 13 (1), 5-24.