Adaptation and Integration through Policy Re-categorization

Abstract

This comparative study analyses how the state alcohol monopoly systems in Finland, Norway and Sweden were affected by interaction with the European Union (EU). Pressures from the EU, as well as the contrasting domestic responses in this process, are viewed in relation to how these institutions were integrated in terms of consistency, interdependence and structural connectedness. The article goes beyond the frequent observation that external scrutiny and pressures challenge national policy coherence to show that domestic public policies also may emerge more coherent and integrated. It is suggested that the relationship between the way public policies are integrated, categorized and re-categorized provides important insights towards our understanding of the dynamics of public policy.

Sorting through the garbage can: under what conditions do governments adopt policy programs?

“…We do so for two main reasons: first, policy programs are an especially common form of intervention in the field of public health. However, as stated above in general, also with regard to public health and alcohol policy in particular, research so far was interested in policy change (Baumberg and Anderson 2008;Ugland 2003) and instrument choice (Meier 1994;Sager 2009), but not in program adoption. Second, Switzerland is highly federalistic and decentralized, with the main competences for public policies held at the sub-national level of the cantons.…”

“…We believe the garbage can model of organizational choice (Cohen et al 1972) to fit this shoe for two reasons: first, we consider program adoption an administrative rather than a political decision, and accordingly, we need an organizational theory of decision-making rather than a political theory. Second, alcohol policy is a field of great ambiguity as it can be framed in different ways from trade and EU integration policy to agricultural policy to health and social policy (Ugland 2003). The garbage can model was developed to deal with decision-making in situations with problematic preferences as can be constituted by competing frames.…”

Multilevel Union Administration

“…According to the General Food Law of 2002, EU food safety policy is based on an integrated policy approach (European Communities 2002). Policy integration can be defined in terms of consistency, interdependence and structural connectedness (Ugland 2003), and food safety policies are integrated to the extent that they are coherent and interlinked with the objective of ensuring safe food, and in as much as this objective penetrates all relevant policy sectors and all levels of government. This chapter takes an in-depth look at the EU project of establishing an integrated approach to food safety across different levels.…”

Europeanization: Solution or Problem?

“…Of course, one can see this as yet another mechanism of 'impact', but with the qualification that the notion of impact goes beyond the 'reaction' to Europe Let us illustrate figure 1 with an example. In a study on alcohol monopoly in Finland, Norway and Sweden, Ugland (2003) shows that at the beginning of the 'policy story' domestic policy actors were coping with alcohol as a problem of health policy. The advent of EU competition policy produced a re-formulation of policy problems.…”