New directions in policy borrowing research

Abstract

Research on policy borrowing is a well-established research area of comparative education. Over the past 20 years or so it gained prominence among globalization scholars. Of great interest is not so much the question of which reforms ''travel'' internationally, and which ones are homebound, but rather why traveling reforms resonate in a given context and at a specific moment, and how they are subsequently translated or locally adapted. In addition to issues of reception and translation, questions on the politics and economics of policy transfer are central to this research area. Empirical studies have shown that borrowing reforms from other countries, from other sectors within a country, or from ''international standards'' broadly defined often help coalition-building in a country. Policy borrowing also helps to mobilize financial resources, especially when it is preceded by political talk of falling behind some international standards or ''best practices.'' Therefore, the methods of inquiry used, the type of research questions asked, and the conclusions drawn in this body of research tend to address political and economic aspects of educational reform. Arguably, a transnational perspective is indispensable to carry out this kind of intellectual project. The academic preoccupation with policy borrowing has helped to formulate the contours of comparative policy studies. The article provides a brief overview of the main tenets of policy borrowing research and then focuses specifically on three aspects: policy reception, policy projection, and the rise of the global education industry as a new actor and beneficiary of global education policy.

Educational Policy Borrowing in the Cameroonian Higher Education System: A debatable Paradigm from Stakeholders

“…According to Steiner-Khamsi (2014, 2016, educational borrowing research can be divided into two strands, normative and analytical. On the one hand, studies that take a normative approach aim at identifying best practices that can be transferred from one system to another (Steiner-Khamsi, 2016).…”

“…According to Steiner-Khamsi (2014, 2016, educational borrowing research can be divided into two strands, normative and analytical. On the one hand, studies that take a normative approach aim at identifying best practices that can be transferred from one system to another (Steiner-Khamsi, 2016). On the other hand, analytical studies aim at understanding the why and how policy borrowing occurs, and the impact borrowed policies may have on existing practices (Steiner-Khamsi, 2016).…”

“…On the one hand, studies that take a normative approach aim at identifying best practices that can be transferred from one system to another (Steiner-Khamsi, 2016). On the other hand, analytical studies aim at understanding the why and how policy borrowing occurs, and the impact borrowed policies may have on existing practices (Steiner-Khamsi, 2016). Although both strands are important, in this study, our focus is on the analytical strand, examining why policy borrowing occurs in the Cameroonian higher education system, bringing out arguments both for and against policy borrowing from a general standpoint, and using Cameroon's implementation of Bologna principle to illustrate a case of policy borrowing.…”

Discursive contestations and pluriversal futures: A decolonial analysis of educational policies in the United Arab Emirates

“…Recent scholarship on global education policy has examined multiple dimensions of globalization in education (Mundy, Green, Lingard, & Verger, 2016). This line of research has focused on how entrepreneurs engage in trading policies around the world (Ball, 2012(Ball, , 2016, how private sector actors promote reform packages to carve out niches in national education markets (Au & Ferrare, 2015;Steiner-Khamsi, 2016), and how international organizations -such as the OECD or the World Bank -use global policies as tools of global education governance (Klees, Samoff, & Stromquist, 2012;Rizvi & Lingard, 2010). The introduction of global policies into national spaces is often followed by changes that are only symbolic, reflecting how national elites engage with the "global speak" of transnational policy trade (Steiner-Khamsi, 2010.…”

“…The locus of domination may have shifted from state actors to private sector entities in the Global North (Ball, 2012), but control through dependencies and resource extraction has remained. Educational consultancies and edu-businesses create these dependencies by first telling national policy-makers or local educators what "new" education should look like and then selling to them the services that will allegedly accomplish the necessary change (Steiner-Khamsi, 2016). As national actors begin the acquisition of services, they become enmeshed in relationships of protracted dependence on foreign experts to provide them with the policy blueprints, curriculum shells, or teacher training models regardless of their potential fit for the socio-historic and cultural conditions of their educational practices.…”