Renewal of LIEPP

LIEPP is renewed for five more years by French ANR
  • Actualité Sciences PoActualité Sciences Po

Following its first four years of activities, LIEPP has been evaluated by an international jury assembled by the National Research Agency (ANR), which has decided to prolong LIEPP's financing for five more years (Find here LIEPP's complete activity report).

The continuations of LIEPP was made possible thanks to the Sciences Po researchers involved with the laboratory since its inception and thanks to their numerous projects at LIEPP. ANR's international jury stressed the quality of research carried out within LIEPP and confirmed the importance of continuing this work. This success is the fruit of the collective engagement of Sciences Po on this project and we would therefore like to thank all of our members and those who support us every day to make it all possible: our affiliated researchers, our institutional partners, the Sciences Po support services, and all of the students who participate regularly in our activities.

ANR's evaluation is based on a scientific report of LIEPP's activities sinces its creation in 2011, a financial examination of the laboratory and finally, on the oral audition before ANR given by the Director of Sciences Po, Frédéric Mion and LIEPP co-Directors, Bruno Palier and Etienne Wasmer.

LIEPP is now entering its second phase of activity, marked by the continuation of its primary lines of activities for its research groups and the implementation of fourteen new projects successful in the 2015 open call for projects (complete list here). Several seminars and conferences are already planned for the coming weeks and are open to all interested in the evaluation of public policy. You can also retrieve records of previous events as well as all LIEPP publications on our website.

* * *

 

Main achievements of LIEPP as of January 1st, 2015

The Laboratory for Interdisciplinary Evaluation of Public Policies (LIEPP) is a single-site based laboratory associated with the Idex Université Sorbonne Paris Cité (USPC), involving 116 researchers (68 Sciences Po researchers and 48 external affiliates). LIEPP aims to transcend disciplinary boundaries through collaboration between economists, sociologists and political scientists, also engaging lawyers and historians in the area of public policy evaluation.

Since its creation in 2011, LIEPP has recruited six international level assistant professors. 

           

Quoc-Anh
Do

PhD Economics, Harvard University

LIEPP/Dpt of economics at Sciences Po

Emanuele
Ferragina

PhD, Comparative Social Policy University of Oxford

LIEPP/OSC

Joan
Monras

PhD Economics, Columbia University

LIEPP/Dpt of economics at Sciences Po

Nathalie
Morel

PhD, Sociology, Université Paris I, Panthéon-Sorbonne

LIEPP/CEE

Anne
Revillard

PhD, Sociology,

Institut des Sciences Sociales du Politique – CNRS /ENS de Cachan

LIEPP/OSC

Jan
Rovny

PhD, Political Science, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

LIEPP/CEE

 

LIEPP has also launched six thematic research groups:

● Educational Policies

● Evaluation of Democracy

Discrimination and Social Inequalities

Health Policies

Higher Education and Research

Socio-fiscal Policies

Their work makes use of a wide variety of social sciences methods (modeling, diff-in-diff, surveys or questionnaires, focus groups or field observation). Results in all these fields have been made available to a broader audience. Examples among many include: the understanding of the determinants of self-censorship of students' orientation; a comprehensive overview of socio-fiscal expenditures relating to social protection; or a focus on the links between democracy and the public perception of policy efficiency.

Overall, LIEPP has financed research leading to 116 scientific papers and 124 scientific events. It has attracted 1.3 million euros in external funding, and initiated several collaborations with many institutions in charge of public policy evaluation.  

Collaborations with these institutions are subject to a charter of ethics with a commitment not to accept any scientific evaluation projects that would be subject to publication restrictions by the project sponsor. LIEPP's governance and incentives' structures have promoted a sytematic interdisciplinary approach, while preserving the academic excellence of the work completed.

LIEPP consistently responds to solicitations from large public evaluation stakeholders to offer its thoughts on methodology and on how to improve practices with respect to international research.

AttachmentSize
Report-LIEPP-2011-2014-EN-diffusion.pdf5.92 MB
Tags :

La commande publique d’enquêtes d’opinion

19 - 20 oct. 2015
  • CC BY-NC-ND 2.0_Julien Lagarde_on_Flickr_2CC BY-NC-ND 2.0_Julien Lagarde_on_Flickr_2

                                                    

 

19 et 20 octobre 2015
 

Sciences Po

Amphithéâtre Erignac

13 rue de l'université, Paris 7e


Colloque organisé par le LIEPP et le groupe de projet de l’AFSP PopAct « Opinion publique & Action publique » avec le soutien du Centre d’études européennes de Sciences Po et de l’UMR PACTE, de Sciences Po de Grenoble.

Responsables scientifiques :
Céline Belot (PACTE / Sciences Po Grenoble)
Laurie Boussaguet (Université de Rouen / CEE)
Frédéric Gonthier (Sciences Po Grenoble / PACTE)
Charlotte Halpern (CEE / Sciences Po)

DÉCOUVRIR LE PROGRAMME


Quel est le rôle attribué à la commande publique d’enquêtes d’opinion dans l’action publique ? Depuis plus de 40 ans, la pratique par les gouvernants d’enquêtes (i.e., de sondages, d’entretiens, de focus groups ou d’observations) visant à « prendre le pouls de l’opinion » s’est généralisée, et ce à tous les niveaux de gouvernement. La croissance continue de la commande de sondages et autres modes de « recueil » de l’opinion par l’Elysée de Charles De Gaulle à Jacques Chirac en est un exemple frappant. Cette tendance s’est encore renforcée sous Nicolas Sarkozy. En cela, les présidents français ne se distinguent pas de leurs homologues étrangers, les travaux américains mettant également en évidence l’intérêt croissant des présidents depuis John Kennedy pour les instruments visant à faire surgir l’opinion. De fait, jamais dans l’histoire des démocraties les gouvernants ne semblent s’être autant souciés de l’opinion des gouvernés.

Pour autant, si cette pratique s’est développée, saisir l’usage qui en est fait, comprendre quels intérêts elle sert dans l’action publique et quel rôle lui est attribué par les gouvernants s’avère encore aujourd’hui malaisé. Plusieurs questions se posent : Sommes-nous entrés dans une nouvelle ère politique où la consultation permanente de l’opinion offre une boussole pour les gouvernants, en leur donnant la possibilité de répondre aux demandes des citoyens sur le temps court et de se conformer à l’idéal des gouvernants responsive ? Si tel est le cas, comment expliquer que malgré cette consultation constante des gouvernés, ceux-ci se montrent plus critiques vis-à-vis des gouvernants et des décisions politiques que par le passé ? Doit-on plutôt considérer que la commande publique d’enquêtes d’opinion répond aux besoins des gouvernants, non seulement de prévoir l’acceptabilité sociale d’une décision, mais également de développer des argumentaires visant à faire « changer l’opinion » ? Le cas échéant, de quel type de changement parle-t-on ? S’agit-il d’accompagner les transformations de l’opinion en utilisant les enquêtes pour lui renvoyer une image adéquate d’elle-même ? S’agit-il encore, suivant les principes du marketing social, de promouvoir des comportements désirables parce qu’utiles à un groupe ou la société dans son ensemble ? Quelle est alors la place de la commande publique d’enquête en aval de la décision politique ? Peut-elle intervenir simplement comme un instrument d’évaluation d’une politique publique ? Comment rendre compte de ses effets sociaux et notamment des stratégies d’appropriation plurielles dont les enquêtes d’opinion peuvent faire l’objet ?

Autant de questions qui restent largement sans réponse, non pas seulement pour les observateurs extérieurs mais pour les praticiens eux-mêmes qui, sont rarement invités à expliciter leurs pratiques. A l’évidence, certaines de ces pratiques relèvent de logiques institutionnelles, économiques et symboliques que les acteurs ne souhaitent pas spontanément divulguer et peuvent donc résister à objectiver. Pour autant, nous faisons le pari, à travers ce colloque qui réunira autour d’une même table différents acteurs de la commande publique d’enquêtes d’opinions - élus, élites administratives en charge de la commande d’enquêtes, praticiens des instituts de sondages ou des agences de communication, et universitaires spécialistes de ces questions - que le dévoilement, ne serait-ce que partiel, des mécanismes à l’oeuvre permettra d’enrichir la réflexion collective sur ces pratiques en France et dans les institutions européennes.

Le colloque sera organisé autour du schéma de production d’une commande d’enquête d’opinion, en commençant par les origines de la commande, la décision effective de la prise de commande, la passation d’un marché entre client et prestataire(s), et enfin, les usages de la commande.

                            
                                             
AttachmentSize
Programme_la commande publiques d'enquêtes d'opinion_8.10.2015 v2.pdf363.63 KB

Socio-Fiscal Group Co-Directors publish book

  • Actualité Sciences PoActualité Sciences Po

Co-Directors of the LIEPP Socio-Fiscal Policy research group, Clément Carbonnier and Nathalie Morel, have published with Palgrave Macmillan a book on their research titled, The Political Economy of Household Services in Europe.

Abstract:

Over the past two decades, countries in Continental and Northern Europe have set up specific policies to promote the development of household services. This edited volume analyses the aims pursued with these policies, and the ways in which the issues have been framed. It examines the resultant labour market outcomes, focusing on the forms and quality of employment in the household services sector, and highlighting both the symbolic and economic effects of the construction of domestic and care services as low-skilled, low-value work. The authors demonstrate how these policies have actively contributed to the structuring of dualisms within the labour market, reinforcing social, gendered and ethnic divides. They also shed light on the distributive effects of these policies, which essentially benefit affluent households, and question their efficiency, not least with regard to their employment objectives.

The book is the culmination of a LIEPP project that began in October 2013 with a two-day international conference on "Analysing the Political Economy of Household Services."

The final work was also based on two prior LIEPP publications:

This book will soon be available at the Sciences Po library.

To purchase this book directly from Palgrave-Macmillan, please see here.

Tags :

Call for contributions: Fiscal welfare in Europe

deadline: October 23

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CALL FOR CONTRIBUTIONS

"Fiscal Welfare in Europe"

Organised by Nathalie Morel (Sciences Po / CEE & LIEPP) & Michaël Zemmour (Université Lille 1 / Clersé and Sciences Po / LIEPP)

 

Dates: May 26th-27th, 2016
Venue: Sciences Po, Paris, France

In a seminal essay, Titmuss (1958) highlighted the ‘social division of welfare’, distinguishing between three sources of welfare: social, occupational and fiscal welfare. He noted that most scholarship on the welfare state restricted itself to the world of social welfare, failing to note the growing scale and distributive tendencies of occupational and fiscal systems, and the ways in which they often ran counter to the distributive directions of the social welfare system.

Fifty years on, fiscal welfare remains largely ‘the hidden welfare state’, despite the growing use of tax expenditures/‘preferences’ for social purposes. Indeed, most European countries now support the development of private pensions through tax incentives, and these have also been on the increase in the fields of healthcare, family policy, housing, childcare and eldercare, household services, as well as for low-income earners. Despite the OECD’s data collection on “Tax Breaks for Social Purposes”, social tax expenditures in European countries remain largely un-documented. Some types of programs are rather well identified (e.g. child allowances, in-work tax credits) but tax breaks concerning pensions, health insurance or social services have remained less visible and deserve greater scrutiny.

For instance the conditions of eligibility (for households as well as for private services) to benefit from tax allowances, the types of taxes concerned by these tax benefits (personal income tax, earmarked payroll tax, corporate tax, VAT…), or the (absence of) complementarity between direct benefits (in cash and in kind) and fiscal benefits are seldom exposed and analysed in the social policy literature.

As the more developed US-based literature on the ‘hidden welfare state’ has shown, the use of tax expenditures for social purposes raises many important issues, whether it be in terms of the democratic political process as these schemes remain largely invisible to mass publics and are less scrutinised than general direct expenditures; in terms of the distributive effects of such policies; or in terms of the governance of social protection, with an increased delegation of responsibilities towards the private sector (Howard, 1997; Hacker, 2002; Mettler, 2011).

While this US literature may be useful in shedding light on some of the issues around the growth and consequences of the use of social tax expenditures in Europe, the specificities of the form taken by social tax expenditures, as well as the specific institutional, political and economic context of European welfare states may nonetheless call for a different analytical framework.

The aim of this workshop is to gather contributions dealing with the uses and consequences of social tax expenditures across European welfare states. In particular, we welcome contributions that address one (or more) of the following dimensions:

1. The politics of social tax expenditures
2. The distributional effects of social tax expenditures
3. Changes in the governance of social protection linked to the development of social tax expenditures 4. Country-level or comparative analyses of the form and role of social tax expenditures in relation to the national tax-benefit arrangements.

The aim of this seminar is to prepare the publication of an edited book with an international publisher. Submission of abstracts and full papers:

Submission of abstracts and full papers:

Abstracts (1 page) should be submitted by October 23rd, 2015 to nathalie.morel@sciencespo.fr and michael.zemmour@univ-lille1.fr
Notification of acceptance will be sent by November 9th, 2015
Full papers will be due on May 2nd, 2016 so that papers can be read by all in advance.

Practicalities:
Transport and accommodation will be covered by the seminar organizers.

Workshop sponsor: Sciences Po LIEPP
Workshop partners: ESPAnet and RT6 (Réseau de l’Association Française de Sociologie: Protection sociale, politiques sociales et solidarités) / Espanet France

 

AttachmentSize
Call for contribution-Fiscal welfare in Europe 3.pdf188.79 KB

Workshop on 'Party Position, Salience and Political Outcomes'

16 October 2015
Sciences Po, 98 rue de l'université, Paris
  • CC BY AITOFFCC BY AITOFF

In cooperation with OxPo, LIEPP will sponsor the workshop, 'Party Position, Salience and Political Outcomes' to be held at Sciences Po on Friday, 16 October.

LIEPP Assistant Professor and Evaluation of Democracy group researcher, Jan Rovny, is co-organising the workshop with Professor Stephen Whitefield of Prembroke College at Oxford University.

Project Summary: This workshop is part of a larger project by OxPo and participated in by several LIEPP affiliated researchers (see participants below).

While party positioning on political issues has long been at the forefront of research in political behaviour, it may, however, matter only to the extent that it occurs on politically relevant political issues. The Rikerian, strategic tradition, thus suggests that voter preference distributions can be altered by parties as they shift salience across issues, thus affecting what voters consider when they vote. Consequently, some parties invest into certain political issues, in hopes of being associated with them (issue ownership), while other parties seek to use various tangential issues to upset the political status quo. These dynamics are fundamentally important for political outcomes because they determine not only what parties propose, but also what parties do, when in positions of power, and how voters respond to them.

This workshop is one in a series between Sciences Po and Oxford University that will address these dynamics from a number of perspectives. First, the participants seek to empirically assess the relationship between partisan issue positions and issue salience, and political outcomes (vote choice, policy proposals, etc.). To do this, we secondly aim to explore the available data resources: the Rohrschneider and Whitefield expert surveys, the Chapel Hill Expert Surveys, and the Comparative Manifesto Project datasets, as well as various electoral and sociological (individual level) data sources.

Workshop participants include :

  • Sciences Po: Mirjan Dageforde (CEE), Florence Faucher (CEE/LIEPP), Emiliano Grossman (CEE/LIEPP), Isabelle Guinaudeau, Jan Rovny (CEE/LIEPP), and Nicolas Sauger (CEE/LIEPP)
  • Oxford: Elias Dinas, Geoffrey Evans, Sergi Pardos, Chris Prosser, Robert Rohrschneider, and Stephen Whitefield
  • Gothenburg: Carl Dahlstrom, Jonathan Polk 
Tags :