IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirc/v42y2024i2p179-197.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The politics of generating best practice knowledge: Epistemic practice and rendering space technical in a European Commission working group on education policy

Author

Listed:
  • Natalie Papanastasiou

Abstract

This paper seeks to understand how best practice knowledge is constructed and maintained as a hegemonic form of policy knowledge. The paper argues that best practice is based on two claims: firstly, that best practice draws on situated practices of ‘what works’ in specific policy contexts, and secondly, that best practice uses these practices to build universal policy lessons that can be transferred across political space. How do policy actors tasked with generating best practices manage to deal with the challenge of integrating knowledge that is situated in particular places with knowledge that holds true across political space? The paper explores this question through the lens of political discourse analysis and studies the relationship between epistemic practice and the social construction of space. Drawing on observation and interview data, the paper analyses how best practices are generated by a group of education policy experts coordinated by the European Commission. Analysis demonstrates that producing best practices involves ‘rendering space technical’ whereby the complex, relational nature of political space is transformed into a series of ‘contextual variables’ from which universal policy mechanisms can be extracted. This allows for the enactment of an epistemic practice which draws clear distinctions between policy and political space rather than understanding them as co-constitutive – a dualism which is pivotal for upholding the hegemonic status of best practice. By analysing counter-hegemonic moments where the claims of best practice are called into question, the paper also considers alternatives to rendering space technical in policymaking practices.

Suggested Citation

  • Natalie Papanastasiou, 2024. "The politics of generating best practice knowledge: Epistemic practice and rendering space technical in a European Commission working group on education policy," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 42(2), pages 179-197, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirc:v:42:y:2024:i:2:p:179-197
    DOI: 10.1177/2399654420962108
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2399654420962108
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2399654420962108?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dominic Stead, 2012. "Best Practices and Policy Transfer in Spatial Planning," Planning Practice & Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(1), pages 103-116.
    2. Anna Wesselink & Hal Colebatch & Warren Pearce, 2014. "Evidence and policy: discourses, meanings and practices," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 47(4), pages 339-344, December.
    3. Macmillen, James & Stead, Dominic, 2014. "Learning heuristic or political rhetoric? Sustainable mobility and the functions of ‘best practice’," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 79-87.
    4. Luciano Vettoretto, 2009. "A Preliminary Critique of the Best and Good Practices Approach in European Spatial Planning and Policy-making," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(7), pages 1067-1083, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dorina Pojani & Dominic Stead, 2015. "Going Dutch? The export of sustainable land-use and transport planning concepts from the Netherlands," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 52(9), pages 1558-1576, July.
    2. Macmillen, James & Stead, Dominic, 2014. "Learning heuristic or political rhetoric? Sustainable mobility and the functions of ‘best practice’," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 79-87.
    3. Ryan Anders Whitney & David López-García, 2023. "Fast-track institutionalization: The opening of urban planning best practice agencies in Mexico City," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 41(3), pages 600-616, May.
    4. Vincent Caby, 2023. "Techniques for overcoming difficult interdisciplinary dialogue in expert panels: lessons for interactional expertise," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-12, December.
    5. Kukulska-Kozieł, Anita, 2023. "Buildable land overzoning. Have new planning regulations in Poland resolved the issue?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    6. Massimiliano Agovino & Massimiliano Cerciello & Aniello Ferraro & Antonio Garofalo, 2022. "A Regional Perspective on Social Exclusion in European Regions: Context, Trends and Policy Implications," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 8(2), pages 409-433, July.
    7. Marcin Dąbrowski & Viktor Varjú & Libera Amenta, 2019. "Transferring Circular Economy Solutions across Differentiated Territories: Understanding and Overcoming the Barriers for Knowledge Transfer," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(3), pages 52-62.
    8. Zuzana Novotn & Petra nov & Adriana Laputkov, 2016. "Evaluation of the Quality of Governance in African Countries using Aggregate Indicators," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 6(2), pages 682-687.
    9. Si-Ying Tan & Araz Taeihagh & Kritika Sha, 2021. "How Transboundary Learning Occurs: Case Study of the ASEAN Smart Cities Network (ASCN)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-19, June.
    10. Dominic Stead & Jochem de Vries & Tuna Tasan-Kok, 2015. "Planning Cultures and Histories: Influences on the Evolution of Planning Systems and Spatial Development Patterns," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(11), pages 2127-2132, November.
    11. E. E. A. Wolf & Wouter Van Dooren, 2017. "How policies become contested: a spiral of imagination and evidence in a large infrastructure project," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(3), pages 449-468, September.
    12. Weldon, Isaac & Parkhurst, Justin, 2022. "Governing evidence use in the nutrition policy process: evidence and lessons from the 2020 Canada food guide," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 112430, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    13. Iris Stucki & Fritz Sager, 2018. "Aristotelian framing: logos, ethos, pathos and the use of evidence in policy frames," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 51(3), pages 373-385, September.
    14. Yongjin Choi & Ashley M. Fox & Jennifer Dodge, 2022. "What counts? Policy evidence in public hearing testimonies: the case of single-payer healthcare in New York State," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 55(4), pages 631-660, December.
    15. Kathryn Oliver & Warren Pearce, 2017. "Three lessons from evidence-based medicine and policy: increase transparency, balance inputs and understand power," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 3(1), pages 1-7, December.
    16. Hennen, Leonhard & Nierling, Linda, 2019. "The politics of technology assessment," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 17-22.
    17. Wanglin Yan & Rob Roggema, 2019. "Developing a Design-Led Approach for the Food-Energy-Water Nexus in Cities," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(1), pages 123-138.
    18. Maria Rosaria Di Nucci & Michael Krug & Lucas Schwarz & Vincenzo Gatta & Erik Laes, 2023. "Learning from Other Community Renewable Energy Projects: Transnational Transfer of Multi-Functional Energy Gardens from the Netherlands to Germany," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-24, April.
    19. Živanović, Zora & Tošić, Branka & Berisha, Erblin & Perić, Ana, 2023. "An attempt to locate the Russian spatial planning system within the European planning families," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    20. Shiuhshen Chien & Xufeng Zhu & Tingjia Chen, 2015. "Self-learning through teaching: Singapore's land development policy transfer experience in China," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 33(6), pages 1639-1656, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:envirc:v:42:y:2024:i:2:p:179-197. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.