This article seeks to place the study of British government in a broader context by exploring the potential contribution of an anti-foundational epistemology. We seek to ‘reinvent’ a self-conscious, sceptical and tentative approach rooted in philosophy and history. The first section defines the Westminster model and the family of linked narratives: traditional sceptics, social science, radical theory, new public management. The second section outlines an anti-foundational epistemology, focusing on the notions of traditions, narratives, decentering and dilemmas. The third section applies this approach to one prominent school of thought about British government: policy networks. We argue that an anti-foundational approach will decenter networks, shifting the locus of analysis from the institutions to individuals, and focus on dilemmas to explain how networks change. Finally, we conclude there is no essentialist account of British government, only complex and diverse narratives, and no tool kit for solving problems, only lessons drawn from many stories.

This article argues the study of traditions is an integral part of the human sciences and then concentrates on how to study traditions. In section 1, we outline a pragmatic approach to traditions, before illustrating our case in section 2 by analysing three features of British government - public sector reform, Thatcherism and joined-up governance. We seek to show it is possible to decenter the idea of tradition and analyse traditions at several levels. Finally, in section 3, we discuss the problems posed when analysing traditions at different levels of generality; including, reifying traditions, essentialism, identifying traditions, and creating traditions.