About Interrogating policy orthodoxy in the period following the Global Financial Crisis
Interrogating policy orthodoxy in the period following the Global Financial Crisis
About this Collection
Governments broadly responded to the Global Financial Crisis of the late 2000s in one of two key ways: i) largescale borrowing given historically low interest rates and public investment to protect living conditions where possible and stimulate private sector activity; ii) cutting public budgets and (notionally) borrowing in order to reduce perceived risk of default and a larger proportion of public spending being directed toward paying interest rates. Nations that pursued the former, like Australia and the US, greatly limited the damage resulting from the crisis, with Australia avoiding a recession altogether. Those who pursued austerity, with the UK an exemplar, experienced far deeper recessions that resulted in greatly reduced growth, little evidence of reduced borrowing as a proportion of GDP and significant harms for population health and wellbeing. The UK’s approach was informed by two key pieces of research: i) a study underpinned by data that has been suggested to be both incorrectly calculated and selectively used claiming when government debt to GDP is above 90%, growth reduces ii) a study by a Harvard academic who, it has been reported, was subsequently dismissed for ‘research misconduct’, and which underpinned the field of ‘nudging’, promoted by what became the Government’s Behavioural Insights Team and which enabled policymakers to switch responsibility for personal wellbeing from public spending to individuals.
This collection engages with research that was potentially overlooked during the post-financial crisis period due to the predominance of studies that fit the policy orthodoxy. It also engages with the reasons why such orthodoxy develops and how it can be challenged in future. The collection engages with economic theory, policy development and behavioural science, all of which intermingled and mutually reinforced each other in the period under examination.
The harms that resulted to economic and social wellbeing from the policy orthodoxy building up to and following the Global Financial Crisis of the late 2000s have become much more widely reported in recent years, including with regard to health and the economy. However, the UK Government maintains fiscal rules, underpinned by unverified projections from the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), that constrain its ability to increase spending to levels that are likely required to reverse the effects of austerity. Some, such as the New Economics Foundation, suggest that the OBR was designed by George Osborne, a key architect of austerity policies as Chancellor of the Exchequer from 2010-2016, to lock in the economic policies his Government favoured. As such, policy positions built on evidence that has since been severely undermined remain favoured by Government’s such as the UK’s.
This collection begins to challenge this inherited orthodoxy through coherent, rigorous and thematically linked research. It provides a spotlight for approaches that may be rejected by editors of periodicals who are heavily tied to the orthodoxy and enables a discussion of how such situations may be avoided in future.
Possible subject and subtopics include, but are not limited to: Social science, behavioural science, psychology, public policy, public administration, economics, political science, international relations, political theory, and history.
Key article types may include Research Articles, Policy Briefs, Essays, Method Articles, Opinion Articles, Reviews and Systematic Reviews
About the Guest Advisor
Elliott Johnson is Professor of Public Policy and Vice Chancellor's Fellow at Northumbria University, Senior Fellow of the Higher Education Academy and Public Affairs Lead for the Common Sense Policy Group.
His work focuses on inequalities and social determinants of health, particularly the impact of work and social security and especially in relation to disabled people. This includes understanding health impact, economic feasibility, public acceptability and the development of narratives capable of persuading opponents of evidence-based policy. A core project within this has been his examination of the public health case for Basic Income.
Elliott’s work has often depended on deploying innovative research and communication methods to include and amplify the voices of underrepresented groups. This has been supported by more than £2.6m in research funding.
His background as a research leader in the third sector, including senior leadership team membership and management of large research budgets, means that he has a fundamental commitment to achieving impact in his work. This approach has resulted in the creation of sector-wide standards, shaping of organisational approaches and influencing of local, regional and national government policy, often with regard to social security.
His work has been covered by national and international outlets, including the Guardian, Independent, Times, Telegraph, Spectator, FT, BBC, Sky News, Channel 4 News, ITV News, Channel 5 News and CNBC.
This collection engages with research that was potentially overlooked during the post-financial crisis period due to the predominance of studies that fit the policy orthodoxy. It also engages with the reasons why such orthodoxy develops and how it can be challenged in future. The collection engages with economic theory, policy development and behavioural science, all of which intermingled and mutually reinforced each other in the period under examination.
The harms that resulted to economic and social wellbeing from the policy orthodoxy building up to and following the Global Financial Crisis of the late 2000s have become much more widely reported in recent years, including with regard to health and the economy. However, the UK Government maintains fiscal rules, underpinned by unverified projections from the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), that constrain its ability to increase spending to levels that are likely required to reverse the effects of austerity. Some, such as the New Economics Foundation, suggest that the OBR was designed by George Osborne, a key architect of austerity policies as Chancellor of the Exchequer from 2010-2016, to lock in the economic policies his Government favoured. As such, policy positions built on evidence that has since been severely undermined remain favoured by Government’s such as the UK’s.
This collection begins to challenge this inherited orthodoxy through coherent, rigorous and thematically linked research. It provides a spotlight for approaches that may be rejected by editors of periodicals who are heavily tied to the orthodoxy and enables a discussion of how such situations may be avoided in future.
Possible subject and subtopics include, but are not limited to: Social science, behavioural science, psychology, public policy, public administration, economics, political science, international relations, political theory, and history.
Key article types may include Research Articles, Policy Briefs, Essays, Method Articles, Opinion Articles, Reviews and Systematic Reviews
About the Guest Advisor
Elliott Johnson is Professor of Public Policy and Vice Chancellor's Fellow at Northumbria University, Senior Fellow of the Higher Education Academy and Public Affairs Lead for the Common Sense Policy Group.
His work focuses on inequalities and social determinants of health, particularly the impact of work and social security and especially in relation to disabled people. This includes understanding health impact, economic feasibility, public acceptability and the development of narratives capable of persuading opponents of evidence-based policy. A core project within this has been his examination of the public health case for Basic Income.
Elliott’s work has often depended on deploying innovative research and communication methods to include and amplify the voices of underrepresented groups. This has been supported by more than £2.6m in research funding.
His background as a research leader in the third sector, including senior leadership team membership and management of large research budgets, means that he has a fundamental commitment to achieving impact in his work. This approach has resulted in the creation of sector-wide standards, shaping of organisational approaches and influencing of local, regional and national government policy, often with regard to social security.
His work has been covered by national and international outlets, including the Guardian, Independent, Times, Telegraph, Spectator, FT, BBC, Sky News, Channel 4 News, ITV News, Channel 5 News and CNBC.
Collection Advisor
-
Elliott Johnson
View Profile