Origins
Comparing British and Swedish social policy, Heclo (1974) argued that policy changes not only through interest-group power struggles but also as officials and experts reflect on the problems of existing policy. Politics, he wrote, involves puzzling as well as powering. Policy learning has since become a central concept for explaining policy change.
Levels and types of learning
Hall (1993) separated first-order change in instrument settings, second-order change in the instruments themselves, and third-order change in goals and frameworks of thought, the last being a shift in policy paradigm. May (1992) distinguished instrumental, social and political learning, while Sabatier (1988) stressed policy-oriented learning within and across advocacy coalitions. Rose (1993) examined lesson-drawing from other countries, feeding research on policy transfer and policy diffusion.
Assessment and limits
Bennett and Howlett (1992) noted that studies disagree about who learns, what is learned and with what effect. It is hard to show that learning actually caused change, and power and interests can block or distort it. Dunlop and Radaelli (2013) systematised the field into reflexive, epistemic, hierarchical and bargaining modes of learning.
FAQ
- What is policy learning in simple terms?
- It is governments learning from past successes and failures, and from other countries, and adjusting policy accordingly.
- What is Hall's third-order change?
- The deepest form of learning, in which the goals and the way of framing the problem change, not just the instruments.
Sources reviewed: 2026-10-26
References
- Heclo, H. (1974). Modern social politics in Britain and Sweden: From relief to income maintenance. Yale University Press. The classic that framed policymaking as collective puzzling, not only powering.
- Hall, P. A. (1993). Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: The case of economic policymaking in Britain. Comparative Politics, 25(3), 275–296. Distinguishes first-, second- and third-order change as forms of social learning.
- Bennett, C. J., & Howlett, M. (1992). The lessons of learning: Reconciling theories of policy learning and policy change. Policy Sciences, 25(3), 275–294. Sorts learning theories by who learns, what, and to what effect.
- May, P. J. (1992). Policy learning and failure. Journal of Public Policy, 12(4), 331–354. Separates instrumental, social and political learning and links them to failure.
- Sabatier, P. A. (1988). An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein. Policy Sciences, 21(2–3), 129–168. Policy-oriented learning within and across advocacy coalitions.
- Rose, R. (1993). Lesson-drawing in public policy: A guide to learning across time and space. Chatham House. How governments draw lessons across time and space.
- Dunlop, C. A., & Radaelli, C. M. (2013). Systematising policy learning: From monolith to dimensions. Political Studies, 61(3), 599–619. A four-type typology that systematises policy learning.