Conference Program

Most comparative studies on public policies, political science and political economy still focus exclusively on the national level and cross-country differences and neglect the territorial articulation of policies within countries. However, Cross-country comparisons often overlook the complexity of multilevel governance settings and subnational variation underlying SWT systems or regimes. Policy implementation involves multiple jurisdictional scales (for instance, countries, regions, provinces and municipalities) and multiple actors. Further, countries present internal spatial divides in contextual socio-economic conditions that affect implementation and outcomes.

Methodological nationalism ignores the consequences of long-term process of rescaling of policy responsibilities above and below the country level; as well as of persisting spatial disparities resulting from the post-industrial shift of capitalist economies. Nevertheless, national governments remain highly relevant in most policy domains even in decentralized settings.

Accordingly, to avoid replacing methodological nationalism with methodological subnationalism or falling into the local trap, comparative research should address the complex territorial articulation of policy provisions in multilevel governance settings. Our argument is that as policies unfold within multilevel settings they contribute to territorially differentiated outcomes that affect the distribution of resources and opportunity within a certain country. This brings to the expectation of significant within-country variation in policy outputs and outcomes and to existence institutional mechanisms that contribute to control or amplify differences among territories. Considering subnational variations can lead to two distinct interpretations. On one hand, it may challenge the validity of classifying national systems or regimes, raising questions about their heuristic utility. On the other hand, it could offer a way to enhance these classifications by incorporating spatial differentiation as a key variable of SWT systems

We put forward an analytical framework to grasp the territorial articulation of multilevel policy provision combining studies on multilevel governance and spatial disparities. We consider four main elements: jurisdictions, politics, policies and contexts. We expect their interaction to play out through mechanisms of coordination (or lack thereof) and to be significantly connected to spatial disparities in policy outputs and outcomes.

Empirically, we apply this frame to the analysis of vocational education and training (VET) provision. VET is of utmost importance for the provision of skills, labour market opportunities, social cohesion and economic growth. VET policy lies at the intersection of education and the labour market: this implies that local socio-economic conditions strongly affect policy needs and outputs; moreover, decision-making and implementation competences on VET policy are often assigned to subnational governments. To what extent VET provision differs between and within the case studies? How is VET articulated within multilevel governance settings and how do spatial divides affect the provision and outcomes of vocational training?

Our argument is explored through a comparison of multilevel VET provision in four EU countries characterised by different transitions and welfare regimes (Walther, 2017), namely Italy, Austria, Bulgaria, Finland. The country selection responds to the exploratory logic of a diverse case study design, coherent with our goal of conceptual and empirical clarification of the territorial articulation of policies within complex multilevel settings.