II. Theory Policies diffuse in a multitude of ways at different rates for many reasons. Diffusion for this paper is defined as the spread of ideas, most often polices of political importance. While many theories surround this idea, this paper will focus on the idea of coercion. Coercion as defined by Shipan and Volden (2008), as powerful actors wanting adoption. This powerful actor is most commonly another state. This assumes a state’s desire to conform to one or multiple other actors’ ideas, and that there is a reward from such action, not being sanctioned. Coercion is best displayed in comparative politics, as Shipan and Volden (2008) state, and is a popular way to achieve a shift in policies, as it there is a reward from solidarity the
…show more content…
Rate of Adoption is affected by 5 characteristics, according to Rogers (2003): Relative Advantage, Complexity, Compatibility, Observability, and Trialability. I will focus on two of these traits. First, relative advantage is defined as the amount a new idea is seen as better than the current (Rogers 2003). It is affected since coercion provides a new steak, conformity, in the diffusion process, which can be the tipping point towards adoption. In this paper conformity is an example of relative advantage. Complexity are degree to which an innovation is perceived as relatively difficult and how much the new ideas results and policy can be perceived (Rogers 2003). Complexity is decreased by EU coercion since recommendations often provide guidelines and strong rationale for adopting a measure. These mechanisms will be seen most clearly in late adopters or those with no intention of adopting, since other states have already adopted and would be much less affected. Coercion has many effects but these two areas are principal reasons it is successful, especially in the case of the European …show more content…
Learning, as defined by Shipan and Volden (2008), involves determining whether a policy was successful somewhere else, making adoption is more in other similar countries. Learning is often known for one of the most successful modes for diffusion of policies. This is a conflicting argument to EU’s policy being coercive instead each country learned from each other’s policies and adopted. Relative advantage could also play into learning, knowledge of others adoptions and success with good outcomes would speed up adoption. Compatibility may also be accessible if the adopters have the same norms as the possible adoptee. However, in the comparison of two countries both will be examined for coercion and learning and their effects on enforcement as theories suggest. Overall this paper aims to address coercion or learning and break down in their effects on the mechanisms of adoption as well as implementation and enforcement.
I will hypothesize that coercion is an aspect in European Union recommendations to members and leads to passage of desired policy and then lacking enforcement across member states but also consider learning as a mechanism for adoption of policies, particularly pre-recommendation. If EU policy making is coercive, then I should find that pre-law bans and their enforcement is more effective than laws made post-ban while considering public
Rate of Adoption is affected by 5 characteristics, according to Rogers (2003): Relative Advantage, Complexity, Compatibility, Observability, and Trialability. I will focus on two of these traits. First, relative advantage is defined as the amount a new idea is seen as better than the current (Rogers 2003). It is affected since coercion provides a new steak, conformity, in the diffusion process, which can be the tipping point towards adoption. In this paper conformity is an example of relative advantage. Complexity are degree to which an innovation is perceived as relatively difficult and how much the new ideas results and policy can be perceived (Rogers 2003). Complexity is decreased by EU coercion since recommendations often provide guidelines and strong rationale for adopting a measure. These mechanisms will be seen most clearly in late adopters or those with no intention of adopting, since other states have already adopted and would be much less affected. Coercion has many effects but these two areas are principal reasons it is successful, especially in the case of the European …show more content…
Learning, as defined by Shipan and Volden (2008), involves determining whether a policy was successful somewhere else, making adoption is more in other similar countries. Learning is often known for one of the most successful modes for diffusion of policies. This is a conflicting argument to EU’s policy being coercive instead each country learned from each other’s policies and adopted. Relative advantage could also play into learning, knowledge of others adoptions and success with good outcomes would speed up adoption. Compatibility may also be accessible if the adopters have the same norms as the possible adoptee. However, in the comparison of two countries both will be examined for coercion and learning and their effects on enforcement as theories suggest. Overall this paper aims to address coercion or learning and break down in their effects on the mechanisms of adoption as well as implementation and enforcement.
I will hypothesize that coercion is an aspect in European Union recommendations to members and leads to passage of desired policy and then lacking enforcement across member states but also consider learning as a mechanism for adoption of policies, particularly pre-recommendation. If EU policy making is coercive, then I should find that pre-law bans and their enforcement is more effective than laws made post-ban while considering public