Policy changes are an unavoidable phenomenon in modern societies. However, radical policy changes occur only seldom and need more scrutinity. Germany is considered to be a strong case for only marginal policy changes because of its many veto players. But why do they happen so often during the last years? Think of the labour market reforms, the exit from nuclear energy after the Fukushima desaster, the abolition of the compulsory military service, the give-up of the conservative family policy etc. Radical policy changes are characterized, first, by an extraordinary short decision-making process and, secondly, replace an existing policy by a new one. Those changes may trigger heated conflicts because the stakes are very high and negotiations are less probably.
The paper will try to answer the following questions: (i) Why do radical policy changes happen and do happen so often in Germany? Are they consciously designed or are they trigged by external events? (ii) Who is pushing them through and why do veto players not play out their vetos? Which strategies follow the government and what are the micro-dynamics? (iii) Which policy designs are attached to radical policy changes and which patchings make them sucessful? (iv) How are they legitimized and how are heated conflicts resolved? (iv) Which consequences will radical policy changes have? One may expect that the speed of change will incraese the need for follow-up reforms and interest groups and stakeholders will try to change or stopp it in the course of implementation. Will we have another policy after the policy?
The paper will be based on empirical research on a variety of radical policy changes in Germany, trying to make some generalizations and hoping to overcome mere description. Thus the paper contributes to theorizing about the causes, courses and consequences of radical policy change.
