The use of placebo policies to escape from policy traps

References

• Alford, J. and Head, B. (2017) ‘Wicked and less wicked problems: a typology and a contingency framework’, Policy and Society 36(3): 397–413.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Althaus, C. (2008) Calculating Political Risk, Sydney: University Of New South Wales Press.
   Google Scholar
• Boin, A., ‘t Hart, P., Stern, E. and Sundelius, B. (2017) The Politics of Crisis Management: Public Leadership Under Pressure, 2nd ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Buchanan, J. (2010) ‘Drug policy under New Labour 1997–2010: prolonging the war on drugs’, Probation Journal 57(3): 250–62.
   Google Scholar
• Cairney, P. (2011) Understanding Public Policy: Theories and Issues, London: Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Clarke, L.B. (1999) Mission Improbable: Using Fantasy Documents to Tame Disasters, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cm 3945 (1998) Tackling Drugs to Build a Better Britain: The Government’s Ten-Year Strategy for Tackling Drugs Misuse, London: The Stationary Office.
   Google Scholar
• Colebatch, H.K. and Hoppe, R. (eds) (2018) Handbook on Policy, Process and Governing, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Crewe, I. and King, A. (2013) The Blunders of Our Governments, London: Oneworld.
   Google Scholar
• Daigneault, P.-M. and Béland, D. (2014) ‘Taking explanation seriously in political science’, Political Studies Review 13(3): 384–92.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edelman, M. (1971) Politics as Symbolic Action: Mass Arousal and Quiescence, Chicago, IL: Markham.
   Google Scholar
• Edelman, M. (1977) Political Language: Words That Succeed and Policies That Fail, New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Elliot, D. and McGuiness, M. (2002) ‘Public inquiry: panacea or placebo?’, Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management 10(1): 14–25.
   Google Scholar
• Gurran, N. and Phibbs, P. (2015) ‘Fixing the housing problem? Policy capture and busy work in Australia’, Housing Studies 30(5): 711–29.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gustafsson, G. (1983) ‘Symbolic and pseudo policies as responses to diffusion of power’, Policy Sciences 15(3): 269–87.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gustafsson, G. and Richardson, J.J. (1979) ‘Concepts of rationality and the policy process’, European Journal of Political Research 7(4): 415–36.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hay, C. (2002) Political Analysis: A Critical Introduction, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Hay, C. (2017) ‘Explanation, prediction, causation – an unholy trinity? Appreciative comments on The Philosophy and Methods of Science’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations 15(2): 180–6.
   Google Scholar
• HC 330 (2010) ‘Goats and Tsars: Ministerial and Other Appointments Outside Parliament’, House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee, Eighth Report of Session 2009–10, London: Stationary Office.
   Google Scholar
• Head, B.W. and Alford, J. (2015) ‘Wicked problems: implications for public policy and management’, Administration & Society 47(6): 711–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hindmoor, A. (2004) New Labour at the Centre: Constructing Political Space, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hogwood, B.W. and Peters, B.G. (1985) The Pathology of Public Policy, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Howlett, M. (2009) ‘Governance modes, policy regimes and operational plans: a multi-level nested model of policy instrument choice and policy design’, Policy Sciences 42(1): 73–89.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hunt, N. and Stevens, A. (2004) ‘Whose harm? Harm reduction and the shift to coercion in UK drug policy’, Social Policy & Society 3(4): 333–42.
   Google Scholar
• Jansson, K. (2005) British Crime Survey – Measuring Crime for 25 Years, London: Home Office.
   Google Scholar
• Jenkins-Smith, H.C., Nohrstedt, D., Weible, C.N. and Ingold, K. (2018) ‘The advocacy coalition framework: an overview of the research program’, in C.M. Weible and P.A. Sabatier (eds), Theories of the Policy Process, 4th ed., New York: Westview Press, pp. 135–172.
   Google Scholar
• John, P. (2012). Analysing Public Policy, 2nd ed., London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, B.D. and Baumgartner, F.R. (2005) The Politics of Attention: How Government Prioritizes Policy Problems, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lasswell, H.D. (1956) The Decision Process: Seven Categories of Functional Analysis, College Park: University of Maryland.
   Google Scholar
• Luetjens, J., Mintrom, M. and ‘t Hart, P. (eds) (2019) Successful Public Policy: Lessons From Australia and New Zealand, Canberra: ANZSOG.
   Google Scholar
• MacGregor, S. (2000) ‘Editorial: the drugs-crime nexus’, Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy 7(4): 311–16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacGregor, S. (2017) The Politics of Drugs: Perceptions, Powers and Policies, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• McConnell, A. (2017a) ‘Policy success and failure’, in B.G. Peters (ed.), Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics, Oxford: Oxford University Press, available at https://www.oxfordre.com/politics/politics/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-137
   Google Scholar
• McConnell, A. (2017b) ‘Hidden agendas: shining a light on the dark side of public policy’, Journal of European Public Policy 3(2): 1739–58.
   Google Scholar
• McConnell, A. (2018) ‘Rethinking wicked problems as political problems and policy problems’, Policy & Politics 41(1): 165–80.
   Google Scholar
• Newcombe, R. (1999) ‘The people on drugs: British attitudes to drugs laws and policies’, DRUGLINK, 12–15 July/August.
   Google Scholar
• Parsons, C. (2007) How to Map Arguments in Political Science, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pepin-Neff, C. (2019) Flaws: Shark Bites and Emotional Public Policy Making, Springer/Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Peters, B.G. (2005) ‘The problem of policy problems’, Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis 7(4): 349–70.
   Google Scholar
• Peters, B.G. (2019) Policy Problems and Policy Design, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Powell, M. (ed.) (1999) New Labour, New Welfare State? The ‘Third Way’ in British Social Policy, Bristol: Policy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Seddon, T., Ralphs, R. and Williams, L. (2008) ‘Risk, security and the “criminalization” of British drug policy’, British Journal of Criminology 6(1): 818–34.
   Google Scholar
• Sharman, J.C. (2011) The Money Laundry: Regulating Global Finance in the Criminal Economy, Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, M.J. (2011) ‘Tsars, leadership and innovation in the public sector’, Policy & Politics 29(3): 343–59.
   Google Scholar
• Stimson, G.V. (2000) ‘“Blair declares war”: the Unhealthy state of British drug policy’’, International Journal of Drug Policy 11(4): 259–64.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stone, D. (2012) Policy Paradox, 3rd ed., New York: W.W. Norton.
   Google Scholar
• Stringer, J.K. and Richardson, J.J. (1980) ‘Managing the political agenda: problem definition and policy making in Britain’, Parliamentary Affairs 33(1): 23–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weible, C.M. and Sabatier, P.A. (eds) (2018) Theories of the Policy Process, 4th ed., New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar