Association for Public Policy Analysis & Management

There have been many studies about externalization of policy advice, namely increasing use or influence of policy advice from actors outside the government, such as think tanks, consultants, international organizations, etc. (Halligan, 1995; Craft and Howlett, 2013; Vesely, 2013; Migone and Howlett, 2013). It is less clear to what extent and how externally produced policy advice influences policy processes. This paper studies two cases where an authoritarian city government (Hong Kong) invites external experts to provide knowledge-based and research-based advice. The first case concerns formulating a retirement protection plan for seven million local population (Case I). The second case concerns formulating a local biological strategic action plan (Case II).  Policy advice in both cases is solicited by the government, and involves scientific knowledge, as well as competing values and interests. Despite the similarities, the advisory process in Case I is more open than in Case II. Whereas in Case II, advisory process is highly contentious and attracts high public attention. We trace the policy advisory processes and content analyze government responses to external advice in two cases. We find that in both cases, the government reinterprets the external advice to align with its preferred policy goals and options.  However, in the more contentious advisory process (Case I), the government is more pressured to accommodate external advice in formulating policies. Our findings suggest that opening up policy advisory processes does not necessarily make the government more responsive. Knowledge-based external advice is more likely to influence the policy processes when associated experts seek to mobilize public support for their advice.