The Magic of Harmonisation: A Case Study of Occupational Health and Safety in Australia

Abstract

Harmonisation is both a substantive policy reform and a political project. Using the lens of Pollitt and Hupe’s “magic concepts of government” and the harmonisation of Australia’s occupational health and safety laws as a case study, this article argues that as a political project harmonisation has a magical rhetorical quality that obscures traditional differences, eases the business of governing, and makes it almost irresistible as a policy solution. The article observes, however, that harmonisation’s magic is: illusory in that it obscures rather than resolves policy differences; seductive in that it entices stakeholders to overestimate its capacity to reconcile such differences; and time limited with reform outcomes eventually becoming vulnerable and fragile. The article concludes that harmonisation’s “magic” and its limitations need to be better acknowledged, with government use of harmonisation tools being approached with a healthy level of scepticism, and policy and regulatory review processes being designed to guard against its seductive qualities.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Eric Windholz

Eric Windholz is an Associate with the Monash Centre for Regulatory Studies, Faculty of Law, Monash University, and Graeme Hodge is Professor of Law and Director, Monash Centre for Regulatory Studies, Faculty of Law, Monash University, Australia.

Graeme Hodge

Eric Windholz is an Associate with the Monash Centre for Regulatory Studies, Faculty of Law, Monash University, and Graeme Hodge is Professor of Law and Director, Monash Centre for Regulatory Studies, Faculty of Law, Monash University, Australia.