Introduction

The journal Policy & Politics occupies unique intellectual terrain. From the outset it has sought to foster a dialogue between the discipline of political science and the field of public administration. It has recognised the ambiguity in the nature of public administration: it is both a field of academic endeavour and a set of professional practices. The journal has a foundational commitment to ensuring that the products of the academy are informed by the insights of practice, while making sure those products are accessible to reflexive practitioners. The journal has worked with the grain of policy studies in emphasising the importance of all the components of policy making: it views politics as relevant throughout the policy process, rather than being contained within the complex choreography of the institutions of representative democracy. There has consequently been limited support for models relying on a simplistic division between politics and administration; the journal has been associated with significant contributions to debates over policy implementation and policy in action (notably Barrett and Hill, 1984). The journal has been openminded on questions of methodology: it has accommodated a broad range of quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods. It has responded sympathetically to significant shifts in the intellectual terrain such as increasing emphasis upon inter-professional and joint working, the arrival of the discourses and practices of public management, and more recent preoccupations with questions of governance beyond the state.

The 40th anniversary of the journal is an opportunity to reflect upon both its achievements and the current state of the debates. Interest in appraising the current state of the field of policy studies is evident elsewhere (Nowlin, 2011). There have recently been calls for greater consideration of how researchers go about their work and what it is they are seeking to achieve (Raadschelders, 2011; Cairney, 2013a). The lack of reflection on the philosophical foundations of alternative analytical perspectives is highlighted as problematic. Detailed work exploring important philosophical currents in thinking continues (Whetsell and Shields, 2013) but this type of reflection is yet to be routinely integrated into research activity. Embracing deeper reflection can, however, be uncomfortable. It can surface significant problems.