During the past two decades, the study of Cross-National Policy Learning and associated terms (Lesson-Drawing, Policy Transfer, Policy Diffusion, Policy Convergence) has gained relevance in Political Science, Public Administration, and Policy Studies. One of the main reasons for this has been that CNPL studies provide a set of concepts, research questions, and analytical frameworks that are useful to understand how policy changes in one jurisdiction can be traced (at least partially) to other jurisdictions. However, while the CNPL literature offers an interesting template to map out policy changes “across space”, it has been less preoccupied with setting out questions (let alone providing answers) with regards to how those policy changes are influenced by, or evolve across time. This paper will argue that taking into account “how time matters” is crucial for better understanding CNPL processes, as well as the policy changes associated with them, for at least five reasons. First, because learning about foreign institutions or policies is not an open-ended endeavour, but a rather limited one in terms of which lessons might be sought after (and for how long), and which might be realistically applied given time constraints. Second, because time (and implementation lags) might be a key factor in deciding which international lessons/tools should be used in the design of a given policy. Third, taking into account “timing” issues (e.g. electoral cycles) might be relevant for understanding why policymakers get involved in CNPL when they do, and how they try to influence decision-making with foreign lessons when they do so. Fourth, the lessons that can be learned are hugely dependent on the policy ideas, international models, or foreign examples that are available at a given period of time. Lastly, thinking about time in CNPL studies is relevant to understand how a new policy or institution “transferred” from abroad “unfolds” nationally across time.
