Policy Shocks and the Rapid Spread of Name, Image, and Likeness Policies

• In Event: Education, Democracy, and Discrimination

Abstract

What role do exogenous policy shocks play in the rapid diffusion of policy innovations? There are times when decisions are made, particularly by national governments, that wipe the policy slate clean and create a policy vacuum for subnational governments in federal systems. The question becomes how do subnational governments respond? The time for learning is short, which should bias governments towards emulation and copying by drawing upon any information they can find to develop a new policy regime. We examine one such case of rapid exogenous policy shock – the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to invalidate limits on education-related compensation for student athletes under the nation’s anti-trust laws. Seeing the writing on the wall, the NCAA revised related restrictions on name, image, and likeness (NIL) compensation. Prior to the NCAA v. Alston case was taken up by the court only a handful of states had passed laws allowing NIL compensation. California was the first in 2019, with 40 additional states following by the end of 2021. This is a rapid diffusion that meets the characteristics of a typical fast diffusing policy: high salience and low technical complexity. But we argue that the looming U.S. Supreme Court case also helped to propel this policy, even though it did not explicitly address the question of NIL. Anecdotal takes abound regarding this linkage, but we will test it.

Using a triangulation approach, we leverage policy adoption data, bill text, and legislative statements to examine how the spread of NIL policy evolved from the first adoption in 2019, through the period when the Supreme Court was considering Alston, to the post-decision period. We examine the roles of athletic conferences, competition among states with large athletic programs, and legislative copying in the rapid diffusion of this innovation. Our research confirms that NIL policy is niche, and thus tends to diffuse among clusters where its constituents (i.e., student-athletes) are present in greater numbers. It also illustrates how state resources and civic incentives shape political decisions. Sports are considered a mechanism of social cohesion and bonding that creates community and impacts the perceptions of fans. This paper suggests that such civic connections can be leveraged to help states keep up with peers that have competing institutions and sports programs. This research has implications for the study of policy diffusion, and more specifically the varied rates at which policies diffuse.

Authors

• Darrell Lovell, West Texas A&M University

• Daniel J Mallinson, Penn State, Harrisburg