History for policy

What is the value of history for the in-principle assessment of government intervention in rural Australia?

David McLean, Ian Gray

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The case of the relevance of history to government policy analysis and development must contend with opposition from several sources, including the scepticism of many historians towards the idea of applied history. We argue that these objections have obscured the extent to which historical awareness can contribute to sound policy choices and cast light on the value of government intervention. We see particular value in the methods devised by Richard Neustadt and Ernest May to help policy makers think historically. By applying these methods to a case that raises questions about the pros and cons of government intervention, the privatisation of government railways in New South Wales, Australia, we show the potential of applying these methods to policy analysis.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)190-197
Number of pages8
JournalRural Society
Volume21
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2012

Fingerprint

policy analysis
history
privatization
railway
method
policy
Government intervention
Policy analysis
government policy
objection
Privatization
Government policy
Wales
Skepticism
Policy development
Policy choice
Railway
Government
Politicians

Cite this

@article{1f4b16c93b89461b8837582596716d40,
title = "History for policy: What is the value of history for the in-principle assessment of government intervention in rural Australia?",
abstract = "The case of the relevance of history to government policy analysis and development must contend with opposition from several sources, including the scepticism of many historians towards the idea of applied history. We argue that these objections have obscured the extent to which historical awareness can contribute to sound policy choices and cast light on the value of government intervention. We see particular value in the methods devised by Richard Neustadt and Ernest May to help policy makers think historically. By applying these methods to a case that raises questions about the pros and cons of government intervention, the privatisation of government railways in New South Wales, Australia, we show the potential of applying these methods to policy analysis.",
keywords = "Applied history, Government intervention, Policy-making, Privatisation, Transport policy",
author = "David McLean and Ian Gray",
note = "Imported on 12 Apr 2017 - DigiTool details were: month (773h) = June, 2012; Journal title (773t) = Rural Society: the journal of research into rural and regional social issues in Australia. ISSNs: 1037-1656;",
year = "2012",
month = "6",
doi = "10.5172/rsj.2012.21.3.190",
language = "English",
volume = "21",
pages = "190--197",
journal = "Rural Society: the journal of research into rural and regional social issues in Australia",
issn = "1037-1656",
publisher = "eContent Management Pty Ltd",
number = "3",

}

History for policy : What is the value of history for the in-principle assessment of government intervention in rural Australia? / McLean, David; Gray, Ian.

In: Rural Society, Vol. 21, No. 3, 06.2012, p. 190-197.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - History for policy

T2 - What is the value of history for the in-principle assessment of government intervention in rural Australia?

AU - McLean, David

AU - Gray, Ian

N1 - Imported on 12 Apr 2017 - DigiTool details were: month (773h) = June, 2012; Journal title (773t) = Rural Society: the journal of research into rural and regional social issues in Australia. ISSNs: 1037-1656;

PY - 2012/6

Y1 - 2012/6

N2 - The case of the relevance of history to government policy analysis and development must contend with opposition from several sources, including the scepticism of many historians towards the idea of applied history. We argue that these objections have obscured the extent to which historical awareness can contribute to sound policy choices and cast light on the value of government intervention. We see particular value in the methods devised by Richard Neustadt and Ernest May to help policy makers think historically. By applying these methods to a case that raises questions about the pros and cons of government intervention, the privatisation of government railways in New South Wales, Australia, we show the potential of applying these methods to policy analysis.

AB - The case of the relevance of history to government policy analysis and development must contend with opposition from several sources, including the scepticism of many historians towards the idea of applied history. We argue that these objections have obscured the extent to which historical awareness can contribute to sound policy choices and cast light on the value of government intervention. We see particular value in the methods devised by Richard Neustadt and Ernest May to help policy makers think historically. By applying these methods to a case that raises questions about the pros and cons of government intervention, the privatisation of government railways in New South Wales, Australia, we show the potential of applying these methods to policy analysis.

KW - Applied history

KW - Government intervention

KW - Policy-making

KW - Privatisation

KW - Transport policy

U2 - 10.5172/rsj.2012.21.3.190

DO - 10.5172/rsj.2012.21.3.190

M3 - Article

VL - 21

SP - 190

EP - 197

JO - Rural Society: the journal of research into rural and regional social issues in Australia

JF - Rural Society: the journal of research into rural and regional social issues in Australia

SN - 1037-1656

IS - 3

ER -