Autobiographical reflections on bridging the policy–academy divide

Abstract

In this roundtable, a panel of distinguished scholars reflects on the possibilities, dangers and rewards of academics transgressing the policy–academy divide. Both Krasner and Nye point to the differences in culture between policy and academic realms. Krasner shows how the policymakers are primarily concerned with conceptual framing while academics are more concerned with testing propositions. He describes how the garbage-can model of policymaking accurately suggests that academic ideas may matter, but if they do happenstance and luck are more important than quality. Nye points to how policymaking is heavily influenced by the pressures of time. While he acknowledges the danger of academics compromising truth in the face of power, he notes that scholars can equally lose their objectivity. Stein warns that the powerful ‘evolutionary instinct’ of social scientists being able to make ‘better’ policy is a ‘conceit’ and scholars must ultimately be prepared to leave if they believe that the decision they opposed violates their moral principles and are operationally costly. Keohane concludes the panel by praising scholars who work effectively in policy, but also pointing out some of the risks of scholars venturing into this very different world. Quoting Keynes, he advises academics interested in policymaking to ‘beware the bad fairy’. The original discussion took place at the International Studies Association Annual Conference held in San Francisco in 2008. Below are the edited transcripts of the discussion, including further post-panel reflections

Notes

¹ I turned to fiction to dramatize some of these moral dilemmas in The power game: a Washington novel (Nye 2006).