Policy transfer and learning in the field of transport: A review of concepts and evidence

Transport Policy

Volumn 18, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 492-500

  Marsden, Greg ^a   Stead, Dominic ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

^b DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Policy transfer; Transport policy; Urban transport

Indexed keywords

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; ORGANIZATIONAL FRAMEWORK; TRANSPORTATION PLANNING; TRANSPORTATION POLICY; URBAN POLICY; URBAN TRANSPORT;

EID: 79953090589     PISSN: 0967070X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2010.10.007     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Anable, J., Lane, B. and Kelay, T. (2006). An evidence base review of public attitudes to climate change and transport behaviour, London: Department for Transport Report, available online from 〈〉 (accessed 13 October 2009). http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/sustainable/climatechange.
2. Bennett C.J. What is policy convergence and what causes it?. British Journal of Political Science 1991, 21(4):215-233.
3. Benz A. Inter-regional competition in co-operative federalism: new modes of multi-level governance in Germany. Regional and Federal Studies 2007, 17(4):421-436.
4. Betsill M., Bulkeley M. Transnational networks and global environmental governance: the cities for climate protection program. International Studies Quarterly 2004, 48(2):471-493.
5. Borras S., Jacobsson K. The open method of co-ordination and new governance patterns in the EU. Journal of European Public Policy 2004, 11(2):185-208.
6. Bulmer S., Padgett S. Policy transfer in the European Union: an institutionalist perspective. British Journal of Political Science 2004, 35(1):103-126.
7. Commission of the European Communities - CEC Communication for the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on Thematic Strategy on the Urban Environment. COM (2005) 718 final 2006, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, available online from 〈www.ec.europa.eu/environment/urban/thematic_strategy.htm〉 (accessed 13 October 2009).
8. Common R. Public management and policy transfer in Southeast Asia 2001, Ashgate, Aldershot.
9. De Jong M., Lalenis K., Mamadouh V. The theory and practice of institutional transplantation; experiences with the transfer of policy institutions 2002, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht/London/Boston.
10. De Jong M., Edelenbos M. An insider's look into policy transfer in transnational expert networks. European Planning Studies 2007, 15(5):687-706.
11. De Jong M., Geerlings H. Exchanging experiences in transport infrastructure policies between Denmark and the Netherlands. International Journal of Technology, Policy and Management 2005, 5(2):181-199.
12. DiMaggio P., Powell W. The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organisational fields. American Sociological Review 1983, 48:147-160.
13. Dolowitz D., Marsh D. Who learns from whom: a review of the Policy Transfer Literature. Political Studies 1996, 44(2):343-357.
14. Dolowitz D., Marsh D. Learning from abroad: the role of policy transfer in contemporary policy making. Governance 2000, 13(1):5-24.
15. Dunlop C. Policy transfer as learning: capturing variation in what decision-makers learn from epistemic communities. Policy Studies 2009, 30(3):289-311.
16. Esping-Andersen G. The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism 1990, Princeton University Press, Princeton (NJ).
17. Evans M. Policy transfer in critical perspective. Policy Studies 2009, 30(3):243-268.
18. Evans M. New directions in the study of policy transfer. Policy Studies 2009, 30(3):237-241.
19. Hass-Klau C. The Pedestrian and City Traffic 1990, Belhaven, London.
20. Heichel S., Pape J., Sommerer T. Is there convergence in convergence research? an overview of empirical studies on policy convergence. Journal of European Public Policy 2005, 12(5):817-840.
21. Hofstede G. Culture's Consequences: International Differences in work-related Values 1980, Sage, Newbury Park (CA).
22. Howlett M. Beyond legalism? Policy ideas, implementation styles and emulation-based convergence in Canadian and US environmental policy. Journal of Public Policy 2000, 20(3):305-329.
23. Iseki H., Yoh A., Taylor B. Are smart cards the smart way to go? Examining their adoption by US Transit Agencies. Transportation Research Record 2007, 1992:45-53.
24. Jacoby W. Imitation and Politics: Redesigning Modern Germany 2000, Cornell University Press, Ithaca (NY).
25. James O., Lodge M. The limitations of 'policy transfer' and 'lesson drawing' for contemporary public policy research. Political Studies Review 2003, 1(2):179-193.
26. Jessop B. Capitalism and its future: remarks on regulation, government and governance. Review of International Political Economy 1997, 4(3):561-581.
27. Kern K., Koll C., Schophaus M. The diffusion of Local Agenda 21 in Germany: comparing the German federal states. Environmental Politics 2007, 16(4):604-624.
28. Kern K., Bulkeley H. Cities, Europeanization and multi-level governance: governing climate change through Transnational Municipal Networks. Journal of Common Market Studies 2009, 47(2):309-332.
29. Langmyhr T. Understanding innovation: the case of road pricing. Transport Reviews 1999, 19(3):255-271.
30. Levi-Faur D., Vigoda-Gadot E. New public policy, new policy transfers: some characteristics of a new order in the making. International Journal of Public Administration 2006, 29(4):247-262.
31. Lodge M. Institutional choice and policy transfer: reforming British and German railway regulation. Governance 2003, 16(2):159-178.
32. Low N., Astle R. Path dependence in urban transport: an institutional analysis of urban passenger transport in Melbourne, Australia, 1956-2006. Transport Policy 2009, 16(2):47-58.
33. MacKinnon D., Shaw J., Docherty I. Diverging Mobilities? Devolution, Transport and Policy Innovation. Current Research in Urban and Regional Studies 2008, vol. 4. Elsevier, Oxford.
34. Marsden, G., 2008. Good Practice in the exploitation of innovative strategies in sustainable urban transport: a review of evidence, Leeds: ITS Project Report for the Volvo Research and Educational Foundation, available online from, 〈〉, (accessed 13 October 2009). http://www.its.leeds.ac.uk/projects/policylearning/VolvoLitReview.pdf.
35. Marsh D., Sharman J.C. Policy diffusion and policy transfer. Policy Studies 2009, 30(3):269-288.
36. Matsumoto N. Analysis of policy processes to introduce Bus Rapid Transit systems in Asian cities from the perspective of lesson-drawing: case studies of Jakarta, Seoul and Beijing 2007, Institute for Global Environmental Strategies, Hayama, available online from 〈www.iges.or.jp/en/ue/pdf/activity03/BAQ_IGES_Ma.pdf〉 (accessed 13 October 2009).
37. May P. Policy learning and failure. Journal of Public Policy 1992, 12(4):331-354.
38. McCann E., Ward K. Relationality/territoriality: towards a conceptualisation of cities in the world. Geoforum 2009, 41(2):175-184.
39. Mintrom M. Policy entrepreneurs and the diffusion of innovation. American Journal of Political Science 1997, 41(3):738-770.
40. OECD Best Practices in Local Development 2001, OECD, Paris.
41. Pierson P. Politics in Time: Politics in Time: History, Institutions, and Social Analysis 2004, Princeton University Press, Princeton (NJ).
42. Razumeyko, N., 2010. Strategic Planning Practices in North-West Russia: European Influences, Challenges and Future Perspectives. In: Adams, N., Cotello, G., Nunes, R. (Eds.), Territorial Development, Cohesion and Spatial Planning. Building on EU Enlargement. Routledge, London, pp. 402-421.
43. Rogers E. The Diffusion of Innovations 2003, Free Press, New York.
44. Rose R. What is lesson-drawing?. Journal of Public Policy 1991, 11(1):3-30.
45. Rose R. Lesson-Drawing in Public Policy 1993, Chatham House, Chatham (NJ).
46. Rose R. Learning from Comparative Public Policy: A Practical Guide 2005, Routledge, Oxon.
47. Shaw J., MacKinnon D., Docherty I. Divergence or convergence? Devolution and transport policy in the United Kingdom. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 2009, 27(3):546-567.
48. Smith H., Raemaekers J. Land use pattern and transport in Curitiba. Land Use Policy 1998, 15(3):233-251.
49. Smith J. The Idea Brokers: The Rise of Think Tanks and the Rise of the Policy Elite 1991, Free Press, New York.
50. Stead D., de Jong M., Reinholde I. Urban transport policy transfer in Central and Eastern Europe. disP - The Planning Review 2008, 172(1):62-73.
51. Van den Bergh J., Leeuwen E., Oosterhuis F., Rietveld P., Verhoef E. Social learning by doing in sustainable transport innovations: Ex-post analysis of common factors behind successes and failures. Research Policy 2007, 36(2):247-259.
52. Wang R. Shaping urban transport policies in China: will copying foreign policies work?. Transport Policy 2010, 17(3):147-152.
53. Ward S.V. Cross-national learning in the formation of British planning policies 1940-99: a comparison of the Barlow, Buchanan and Rogers Reports. Town Planning Review 2007, 78(3):369-400.
54. Watson A. Legal Transplants; an Approach to Comparative Law 1993, University of Georgia Press, Athens (GA).
55. Wolman, H., 1992. Understanding cross-national policy transfers: The case of Britain and the U.S. Governance 5(1), 27-45.
56. Wolman H., Page E. Policy transfer among local governments: an information-theory approach. Governance 2002, 15(4):477-501.
57. Wright L. Latin American busways: moving people rather than cars. Natural Resources Forum 2001, 25(2):121-134.