{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013812154696132596, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003683241252302026, 'mean_word_length': 5.879746835443038, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Transnational Learning and Environmental Policy Advice: Theory Vs. Practice

In this paper, we seek to clarify further the processes of internationalization on environmental policy convergence by focussing narrowly on transnational communication as a mechanism for policy learning mediated by a country’s policy analytical capacity. We argue that without significant policy analytical capacity, it is unlikely for transnational communication as a source of lesson drawing to translate into environmental policy convergence. Based on a survey of Canadian provincial public servants, we find that policy analysts in the environmental policy sector do not engage in significant interaction or training outside of their own jurisdictions and are therefore unlikely to engage in extensive trans-national or international learning. This paper clarifies an important finding of Holzinger, Knill and Sommerer (2008) that while transnational communication leads to harmonization in the presence of policy, it does not result in convergence around particular policy instruments or their settings.