TY - JOUR
T1 - The magic of harmonisation
T2 - a case study of occupational health and safety in Australia
AU - Windholz, Eric
AU - Hodge, Graeme
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors are thankful to the supporting staff of the Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology, Peshawar, Pakistan. It is due to their efforts which they put into keeping the Computer Lab open for extra hours and providing the authors with opportunity to use it. The authors also extend their gratitude to Engr. Salman Ilahi, Department of Electrical Engineering and Engr. Irfan Ahmad, Department of Industrial Engineering, UET Peshawar, for their valuable input and suggestions throughout this work.
Publisher Copyright:
© Copyright 2012 Taylor and Francis Group LLC.
Copyright:
Copyright 2021 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2012
Y1 - 2012
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84946473107&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/23276665.2012.10779391
DO - 10.1080/23276665.2012.10779391
M3 - Article
VL - 34
SP - 137
EP - 155
JO - Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration
JF - Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration
SN - 2327-6665
IS - 2
ER -