Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/71235
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorCatherine Althausen_US
dc.date.accessioned2021-01-27T03:34:10Z-
dc.date.available2021-01-27T03:34:10Z-
dc.date.issued2015en_US
dc.identifier.citationASR: Chiang Mai University.Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities 3, 1 (Jan-Jun 2016), p. 1-25en_US
dc.identifier.issn2465-4329en_US
dc.identifier.uri01 CMUJ-ASR 2016(1).indden_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/71235-
dc.descriptionASR (Asian Social Research) was first launched in 2014 by Chiang Mai University. However, it has a longer history, with its genesis in 2002 as part of Chiang Mai University Journal.This journal was split into two in 2007, with the formation of ASR's predecessor, the Chiang Mai University Journal of social Sciences and Humanities, which was later restyled as ASR in 2014, and began publishing online in 2015.en_US
dc.description.abstractCross-jurisdictional learning exchange opportunities are unanimously endorsed as offering value, not only to individual and organizational development, but also to policy growth and jurisdictional diplomatic relations (see, for example, Robinson, 2016). When pressed for measurable impact, however, the question is how? On what grounds do such pursuits provide value and what, if anything, is unique to the style or practice of exchange that promotes value? This article explores links between three otherwise disconnected literatures to explore the possibilities of a unique Asia-Pacific pedagogy that marries substantive comparative policy learning with practical soft diplomacy outcomes, as well as learning and executive training enhancement. The first two literatures exist in comparative policy theory and practice, namely: (a) policy learning literature on best, smart, promising, and wise practices (see, for example, Bardach n.d.; Wesley-Esquimaux and Calliou, 2011); and (b) policy diffusion/ transfer/lesson-drawing literature (see, for example, Rose, 1993; Dolowitz and Marsh, 2000; Shipan and Volden, 2008). The third literature set is situated within policy training practice, namely, interactive and immersive learning pedagogy used in the executive education space (see, for example, Alford and Brock, 2014). These literatures all speak to value propositions underpinning cross-jurisdictional learning exchanges, but in different ways. This anticle uses the discrete case of the partnership between the Australia and New Zealand School of Government (ANZSOG) and the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (LKYSPP) to probe and synthesize these different literature perspectives. It maps an exploratory set of propositions to test with empirical research. It argues that there may be unique Asia-Pacific benefits in the soft diplomacy and hard policy arenas that come with cross-jurisdictional learning exchanges in the policy and public administration sphere. The paper advocates for more self-conscious reflection by practitioners and theorists on unique elements of an Asia-Pacific pedagogy that might characterise particular value impacts for countries in the region, as well as for the region itselfen_US
dc.language.isoEngen_US
dc.publisherFaculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, Chiang Mai Universityen_US
dc.subjectAsia-Pacific Regionen_US
dc.subjectPublic Administrationen_US
dc.subjectPolicyen_US
dc.titleSoft Diplomacy or Hard Policy Benefits? Exploring the Value of Cross-jurisdictional Learning Exchanges in Policy and Public Administration across the Asia-Pacific Regionen_US
Appears in Collections:CMUL: Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in CMUIR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.