Private philanthropy or policy transfer? The transnational norms of the Open Society Institute

Abstract

The Open Society Institute (OSI) is a private operating and grant-making foundation that serves as the hub of the Soros foundations network, a group of autonomous national foundations around the world. OSI is a mechanism for the international diffusion of expertise and 'best practices' to post communist countries and other democratizing nations. Focusing on the 'soft' ideational and normative policy transfer the paper highlights the engagement in governance that comes with OSI transnational policy partnerships.World count: 7,830

Philanthropy, the Big Society and Emerging Philanthropic Relationships in the UK

“…The globalization of philanthropy refers to the global expansion of institutions for, and ways of engaging in, philanthropy (Leat 2007). Though not the subject of this article, the trends analysed in this article suggest forces of mimetic isomorphism (see Leat 2006: 28;Harrow 2011: 5) and institutional and policy transfer at work (Daly 2008;Stone 2010).…”

Policy Transfer Research: Still Evolving, Not Yet Through?

“…The work of Mark Evans and Jonathan Davies (1999), Simon Bulmer et al . (2007), Diane Stone (2010) and many others speaks directly to these themes.…”

“…But we also discussed how the locus of research had nonetheless widened significantly to explore transfer between multiple scales, both vertically and horizontally across time and space, to include state and non-state actors. Associated processes such as Europeanisation, multi-level governance, internationalisation and globalisation were also touched upon.The work of Mark Evans and Jonathan Davies (1999), Simon Bulmer et al (2007), Diane Stone (2010) and many others speaks directly to these themes.…”

Policy Transfer and Instrument Constituency: Explaining the Adoption of Conditional Cash Transfer in the Philippines

“…Many policy transfer studies fall into the trap of over‐theorization but under‐operationalization (Marsh & Sharman, ), owing in part to methodological limitations. Although some works began to unpack ‘policy’ into ‘hard’ elements such as institutional arrangements and programs (Dolowitz & Marsh, ; Rose, ) and ‘soft’ elements or ideas and norms transmitted through ‘ideational channels’ (Stone, , , ), how these different elements come together remain poorly understood. These issues confronted by the policy transfer literature loop back to the difficulty in assessing agency during the transfer process.…”