PPG concepts Flashcards
heuristic model
a simplified approach used to solve complex problems through experience-based techniques, often relying on “rules of thumb” or educated guesses rather than strict algorithms. This model emerged in cognitive science and artificial intelligence research to streamline decision-making, especially in uncertain environments. In practice, it can be seen in business strategy and policy-making, where rigid models may not be applicable. Its relevance lies in helping to address complex issues flexibly, though it may sacrifice accuracy for speed.
The policy cycle
a framework that breaks down policy-making into sequential stages: agenda-setting, formulation, decision-making, implementation and evaluation. Developed in political science, it structures the development and review of policies across democratic and organizational processes. Today, governments and organizations use this model to ensure comprehensive policy oversight. It is significant as it allows for systematic analysis and improvements within policy processes.
Institutions
structures or mechanisms of social order and cooperation that govern the behavior of individuals within a community. Rooted in sociology and political theory, institutions encompass laws, traditions, and organizations that facilitate societal stability. Examples range from legal systems to educational institutions, and their role is essential in providing predictable structures within which societies operate.
Polity
refers to an organized society or state governed by established political structures, rules, and systems. Originating from Greek political theory, it describes both the physical institutions of government and the social organization they serve. Contemporary examples include democratic states and international organizations. Its importance lies in shaping how political authority is structured and legitimized.
Bureaucracy
a formal system of organization marked by hierarchy, standardized procedures, and impersonal relationships, as theorized by Max Weber. It is commonly seen in government agencies and large corporations today. Bureaucracy ensures efficiency and consistency but is often criticized for rigidity and resistance to innovation.
A unitary system
centralizes power within a single, national government, which retains authority over local governments. Common in countries like France, this system contrasts with federal structures by limiting local autonomy. Its relevance lies in promoting a cohesive national policy, though it may limit regional representation.
The federal system
divides powers between a central government and regional governments, allowing both levels to govern independently within certain domains. This structure, seen in the U.S. and Germany, was developed to balance national unity with regional autonomy. It promotes localized governance but can lead to conflicts of jurisdiction.
A confederal system
a loose alliance of sovereign states that retain primary authority, delegating limited powers to a central body. Historically, it has been used in alliances like the Articles of Confederation in the U.S. Its relevance lies in preserving state sovereignty but can weaken centralized governance.
Liberal democracy
a political system combining representative democracy with protections for individual rights and freedoms. Emerging from Enlightenment ideals, it is prevalent in Western nations like the U.S. and the U.K. Liberal democracy ensures that governance respects individual autonomy while promoting public accountability.
Negative liberty
refers to the freedom from external interference, emphasizing personal autonomy and protection against state intervention. Originating in liberal philosophy, it underpins rights like freedom of speech and privacy. Its relevance is in protecting individuals from undue control and enabling self-determination.
Positive liberty
involves the capacity to act on one’s free will, often requiring external support like education or health services. Philosophers like Isaiah Berlin distinguished it from negative liberty. Its relevance lies in ensuring individuals have the necessary means to achieve autonomy, promoting equality and social welfare.
Avowals of Intent as Idea of Policy
refer to official statements by policy-makers declaring their goals or intended actions. These avowals help clarify objectives and can generate public support. They are relevant as a communication tool for transparency and can shape public expectations.
Constitutional Provisions as Idea of Policy
formal, codified guidelines within a nation’s constitution that shape policy frameworks and government structure. They provide foundational legal guidance and establish rights. Such provisions are crucial for maintaining legal consistency and stability in policy-making.
“White Papers” Published by Cabinet Ministries as Idea of Policy
government publications that outline proposals and policies, often used to introduce new legislation. Typically seen in parliamentary systems like the UK, they allow public and legislative review of policy intentions. Their relevance is in fostering debate and refining policies before implementation.
Arms-length agencies
organizations established by the government but operate independently to prevent political influence in their operations. These agencies, common in regulatory and service functions, ensure impartiality and expertise. Their importance lies in balancing government oversight with operational autonomy.
Quasi Non-Government Organizations (Quangos)
Quangos are entities funded by the government but function independently, blending aspects of the public and private sectors. Prominent in the UK, they provide specialized public services. Their value lies in flexibility and efficiency, though they may lack transparency
territorial Synchrony
The geographic alignment between a sovereign state’s boundaries, its government jurisdictions and the location of economies, cultures, problems & publics. Maintaining synchrony ensures consistent service delivery and policy implementation. Its relevance lies in reducing disparities and enhancing national coherence.
Implementation Deficit as a Consequence of Loss of Territorial Synchrony
An implementation deficit arises when policies are unevenly applied across regions, often due to a lack of territorial synchrony. This leads to inconsistencies in service delivery and policy outcomes, undermining effectiveness and fairness.
Learning Deficit as a Consequence of Loss of Territorial Synchrony
A learning deficit occurs when decentralized policy applications prevent sharing of best practices across regions. This limits organizational learning and adaptability, weakening overall policy development and execution.
Legitimacy Deficit as a Consequence of Loss of Territorial Synchrony
Legitimacy deficit refers to the public perception of unfair or inconsistent governance due to regional disparities in policy implementation. This undermines trust in government and can reduce civic engagement
The market model of politics views
political interactions as transactions where individuals act in self-interest, akin to economic markets. Developed from public choice theory, it underpins policies that favor deregulation and competition. Its relevance lies in promoting efficiency but may overlook collective societal needs
The polis model
contrasts with the market model by emphasizing collective goals, community interests, and public good over individualism. Originating from political theory, it stresses civic engagement and equity, valuing collaboration over competition in governance. Its importance lies in promoting social cohesion and addressing common societal issues.
public policy
Public policy refers to the principles and actions adopted by government authorities to address societal issues and achieve specific objectives. It originated from the need for systematic governance and effective decision-making, especially during the emergence of modern states in the 19th century. Today, public policy encompasses a wide range of areas, including health care, education, and environmental regulation, and is shaped through legislative processes, executive actions, and public input. Its relevance lies in influencing the well-being of citizens, guiding government priorities, and fostering accountability, ultimately playing a crucial role in shaping societal outcomes and addressing collective challenges.
the policy actor model
- Political skills
- Analytical skills
-Managerial (operational) skills
Policy or political acumen
Policy or political acumen refers to the ability to understand and navigate the complexities of political processes and policy-making effectively. This concept has roots in the study of political science, where recognizing the nuances of governance and the interplay between different stakeholders is essential for successful leadership and advocacy. Today, political acumen is vital for politicians, lobbyists, and public administrators, as it allows them to craft effective policies, build coalitions, and influence public opinion. Its significance lies in enhancing decision-making and strategic planning, ultimately leading to more informed and responsive governance that addresses the needs and concerns of constituents.
structure
pre-existing governance organisations, institutions and policies in which any new decision must be situated
agency
the capacity of any given actor or group to take a decision in accordance with their wishes, values, ideals, and responsibilities
atributes of liberal democracy
- The Rule of Law (Constitution)
- Freedoms & Rights that balance positive & negative
liberties - Democratic participation (free & fair elections) and
representation by an elected assembly - Vertical Accountability: government answers to the
public via democratic elections - Horizontal Accountability: separation of powers between
legislature, judiciary and executive (Trias Politica) - Equality in Justice for all citizens before the law – a “veil
of ignorance” - Reasoned decision-making
Baseline
refers to an accurate assessment of the “business-as-usual” scenario—essentially what would happen if no changes were made and existing trends continued. It serves as a reference point for evaluating the effects of proposed policy actions.
Current Conditions: Understanding the status quo.
Current and Expected Trends: Analyzing ongoing trends that could affect the situation.
Effects of Existing Policies: Evaluating how current policies are impacting the baseline conditions.
Foreseeable Policies or Programs: Considering the potential impacts of other policies that may come into play.
The Rational Decision Model
a structured approach that emphasizes a logical and systematic process for making choices. Originating from economic theories, this model assumes that decision-makers can identify problems, gather relevant information, weigh options, and select the most effective solution based on objective criteria. In practice, it is commonly used in governmental and organizational settings to guide policy development and implementation. Its relevance lies in promoting thorough analysis and justification of decisions, although it may overlook the complexities and unpredictability of real-world scenarios.
The Incremental Decision Model
suggests that policy decisions are often made through small, gradual changes rather than sweeping reforms. This model emerged as a critique of the rational decision-making process, emphasizing that policymakers frequently work within existing frameworks and adapt policies incrementally based on past experiences and feedback. Contemporary examples can be seen in various sectors’ budget adjustments and regulatory reforms. Its significance lies in recognizing the practical constraints of policy-making, allowing for flexibility and learning over time, albeit sometimes at the cost of innovation or comprehensive solutions.
The Garbage Can Model
presents a more chaotic view of decision-making, arguing that policies emerge from a mix of problems, solutions, and participants in a seemingly random manner. Developed by Cohen, March, and Olsen, this model highlights the unpredictability of policy processes, where decisions can arise without a clear agenda or rational analysis. This model is often applied in organizations or settings with ambiguity and conflicting interests. Its relevance is in acknowledging that not all decision-making follows a linear path and that political and organizational environments can lead to serendipitous outcomes, emphasizing the importance of adaptability and timing in policy-making.
issue framing
refers to the defining and presenting a particular problem in a way that shapes public perception and influences the policy agenda. Originating from communication and political theory, this concept highlights how the framing of an issue can affect the opinions, beliefs, and actions of stakeholders, including policymakers and the public. Current examples include how climate change is framed either as an environmental crisis or an economic opportunity, which can lead to different policy responses. The relevance of issue framing lies in its power to steer discussions, prioritize certain aspects of a problem, and mobilize support or opposition, thereby playing a crucial role in determining which issues receive attention and how solutions are formulated.
Hobson’s choice in policy-making
refers to a scenario where decision-makers are presented with one clearly favorable option alongside a range of undesirable alternatives, effectively making the preferred choice the only viable option. This concept is rooted in the idea that by highlighting a good option while minimizing or presenting the others as unfeasible or less beneficial, decision-makers can steer stakeholders toward a specific course of action. An example can be seen in environmental policy discussions, where a government might promote renewable energy as the optimal choice while framing fossil fuels as harmful and outdated. The significance of Hobson’s choice lies in its ability to simplify complex decisions, making the preferred option appear more attractive, but it can also lead to concerns about transparency and the exclusion of diverse perspectives in the policy-making process.
Willingness to pay
refers to the maximum amount individuals or groups are prepared to spend to secure a specific benefit or avoid a loss associated with a policy change. This concept is rooted in economic theory and is often used in cost-benefit analysis to evaluate the potential impact of proposed policies, particularly in areas like environmental regulation, public health, and infrastructure development. Current examples include assessing public support for new transportation projects or environmental protections by gauging how much people would be willing to invest in these initiatives. The relevance of willingness to pay lies in its ability to provide policymakers with insights into public priorities and values, helping to allocate resources effectively and justify policy choices based on the perceived benefits to society. However, it can also raise ethical considerations regarding equity, as not all individuals may have the same capacity to express their willingness to pay, potentially skewing policy outcomes in favor of wealthier stakeholders.
Deontological morality
an action is morally right or wrong in and of itself, regardless of the intended consequences of that action. An ethical framework that emphasizes the importance of following rules, duties, and obligations when determining the morality of an action, regardless of the consequences that may arise. Rooted in the philosophy of Immanuel Kant, this approach asserts that certain actions are inherently right or wrong based on established principles and moral laws. For example, telling the truth or fulfilling a promise is considered morally obligatory, regardless of any potential negative outcomes. In contemporary contexts, deontological morality is often applied in legal and professional ethics, where adherence to codes of conduct is paramount. Its significance lies in providing a clear and consistent approach to ethical decision-making, promoting accountability and integrity, although it can sometimes conflict with consequentialist perspectives that prioritize outcomes over rules.
Utilitarian morality
an ethical framework that evaluates the morality of actions based on their consequences, specifically aiming to maximize overall happiness or utility for the greatest number of people. Rooted in the philosophies of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, utilitarianism posits that the best action is the one that produces the most favorable balance of good over harm. For instance, a policy decision that benefits a majority, even if it disadvantages a minority, may be deemed justifiable within this framework. In contemporary settings, utilitarian principles are often applied in public policy, economics, and health care, where cost-benefit analyses aim to determine the most effective interventions. The relevance of utilitarian morality lies in its pragmatic approach to ethics, promoting outcomes that enhance collective well-being. However, critics argue that it can lead to morally questionable decisions, as it may sacrifice individual rights and justice for the sake of the greater good.
rationality
- a decision-making principle (maximising benefits for the greatest number of people)
- good evidence (to enhance our understanding of problems, objectives, and potential solutions)
- a coherent objective
- some logic: deduction, induction, abduction
Soft power
is a form of influence that a country or organization exerts by attracting and persuading others, rather than through coercion or force. Coined by political scientist Joseph Nye in the late 20th century, this concept emphasizes the use of cultural appeal, political values, and foreign policies to shape global perceptions and encourage voluntary cooperation. Current examples include the United States leveraging Hollywood, music, and educational exchange programs to enhance its global image, or South Korea promoting its culture through K-pop and media. Soft power is significant because it enables countries to foster goodwill, build alliances, and achieve strategic goals without military or economic pressure, although its effectiveness can be limited by conflicting interests or cultural resistance.
decisionism and technocracy
Decisionism, associated with the ideas of political theorist Carl Schmitt, emphasizes the role of authority and sovereignty in decision-making, particularly in exceptional situations where quick, decisive action is needed. This approach values the ability of a leader or governing body to make bold decisions based on their judgment, even when it bypasses standard procedures or expert advice. Decisionism is often seen in times of crisis, where decisions are made rapidly by those in power without prolonged consultation, focusing on the legitimacy of decisive action rather than procedural consensus.
Conversely, technocracy prioritizes expertise and data-driven decision-making by specialists, scientists, or technical experts. In this model, decision-making relies on specialized knowledge and analysis to solve complex problems, assuming that experts, rather than elected officials, are best suited to make informed choices. This approach is prevalent in policy areas like climate science, public health, and economic planning, where technical expertise is essential.
Pragmatism
Pragmatism is a philosophical approach that values practical outcomes and real-world applications over abstract principles or theoretical consistency. Emerging in the late 19th century, pragmatism argues that the truth of an idea or policy lies in its usefulness and effectiveness in achieving desired results. Rather than being bound by fixed doctrines, pragmatists adapt their ideas to suit the context, focusing on what works best in a given situation.
Today, pragmatism is seen in policy-making, business, and law, where flexible, outcome-oriented approaches are often preferred over rigid adherence to ideology. Its relevance lies in its adaptability, as it encourages openness to new ideas and solutions that can address current challenges. However, critics argue that pragmatism can sometimes lack moral or ideological consistency, potentially overlooking long-term values for short-term gains.
Epistemic authority
refers to the credibility and trustworthiness of a person or institution in providing knowledge, particularly in areas requiring specialized expertise. This authority is granted to individuals or groups recognized as reliable sources of information, such as scientists, academics, or expert institutions, based on their knowledge, qualifications, and demonstrated competence in a specific field. The concept originates from epistemology, the study of knowledge, where understanding the sources and justification of beliefs is central.
In contemporary society, epistemic authority is significant in fields like medicine, law, and environmental science, where experts’ insights guide public understanding and policy decisions. Epistemic authority is valuable for promoting informed decision-making and helping people navigate complex information. However, reliance on epistemic authority can be challenged by misinformation, public mistrust, or situations where authorities disagree, highlighting the need for transparency and accountability in maintaining this trust.
De jure authority vs de facto authority
De jure authority refers to the power granted by legal or formal frameworks, where an individual or institution is authorized by law or official rules to hold and exercise power. This is authority “by law.” For example, an elected president has de jure authority to govern because they hold office through legal means and are officially recognized as the legitimate leader.
De facto authority, on the other hand, is the power exercised in practice, regardless of whether it has formal legal backing. It refers to authority “in fact” rather than “in law.” A military leader who takes control of a country through a coup, for instance, may hold de facto authority by effectively governing, even though they lack de jure authority under the nation’s legal system.
The relevance of understanding de facto versus de jure authority is important in political science and law, as it highlights situations where actual control does not match legal legitimacy. Such situations often lead to debates about legitimacy, especially in contexts of political transitions, disputed governments, or conflicts between official and practical sources of power.
Territorial synchrony
refers to the alignment and coordination of policies and services across different geographic regions within a country. It ensures that national standards, regulations, and services are consistently implemented and accessible across territories, preventing disparities in policy outcomes between regions. The concept is particularly relevant in governance structures where local governments or agencies have varying levels of autonomy, such as in federal or decentralized systems.
In practice, maintaining territorial synchrony can be seen in efforts to provide equal healthcare, education, or infrastructure standards nationwide, regardless of local differences. The importance of territorial synchrony lies in promoting equity and unity within a country, as well as ensuring that all citizens, regardless of location, receive similar levels of public services and protections. However, challenges to territorial synchrony can arise when regions have distinct needs or priorities, which may lead to disparities in service quality, known as an “implementation deficit.”
network governance
refers to the approach to public problem‐solving in which we no longer simply rely on the state to impose solutions, but instead conceive of problem‐solving as a collaborative effort in which a network of actors, including both state and non‐state organizations, play a part
Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) i
nvolves calculating and comparing the total costs and total benefits of a project, policy, or action in monetary terms. CBA quantifies both the costs (such as resources, time, or environmental impact) and the benefits (such as economic gains, improved quality of life, or social value) to determine whether the benefits outweigh the costs. This method is useful for assessing whether an initiative is worth pursuing based on its overall economic impact. However, one challenge with CBA is that not all benefits or costs are easily quantifiable in monetary terms, particularly social and environmental factors.
institutional void
where there are no clear and generally accepted rules and norms according to which politics is to be conducted and policy measures are to be agreed upon.
Risk-based decision-making
is an approach where choices are made based on the evaluation and management of potential risks involved in various options. This method involves assessing the likelihood and impact of risks to minimize negative outcomes and increase the chances of success, particularly in complex or uncertain situations. Originally used in fields like finance, engineering, and safety, it has expanded into areas like public policy, healthcare, and environmental planning, where decision-makers must balance benefits against potential hazards.
For example, in public health policy, a risk-based approach might involve evaluating the potential spread of a disease when deciding on vaccination strategies or lockdown measures. The relevance of risk-based decisions lies in their ability to systematically address uncertainty, helping policymakers, businesses, and institutions to make informed choices that weigh both short-term and long-term impacts. However, these decisions can sometimes be constrained by incomplete data or unforeseen factors, which may lead to over- or underestimating risks and affecting outcomes.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA)
focuses on comparing the costs of different ways to achieve a specific outcome or goal without necessarily converting those outcomes into monetary terms. CEA is often used when the primary objective is clear but difficult to monetize, such as improving public health, educational outcomes, or environmental quality. For example, CEA may compare different treatments for a disease based on cost per life saved or cost per unit improvement in health. CEA is valuable in resource allocation when effectiveness is the main concern, though it does not provide a direct measure of total benefit relative to cost, as in CBA.
Rationality Project
In the context of public policy, the Rationality Project seeks to improve the quality and effectiveness of policy-making by promoting rational, evidence-based approaches to decision-making. By applying principles of logic, data analysis, and scientific reasoning, policymakers can aim to make choices that are better informed and less prone to common cognitive biases, such as confirmation bias or overconfidence. This approach emphasizes using empirical data, risk assessments, and cost-benefit analyses to evaluate potential policy outcomes systematically, ensuring that policy decisions are aligned with the best available evidence.
For example, in public health policy, the Rationality Project’s principles encourage the use of data-driven modeling to anticipate disease spread and evaluate interventions, rather than relying on intuition or political pressures. Similarly, in environmental policy, rational approaches can help assess the long-term costs and benefits of various energy sources, prioritizing actions that yield the greatest positive impact for society.
However, while the Rationality Project promotes more objective and transparent policy-making, critics point out that public policy also involves values, ethics, and social considerations that may not fit neatly into a purely rational framework. Issues like equity, cultural differences, and political realities often complicate the application of purely rational approaches. Thus, while the Rationality Project provides valuable tools, a balanced approach that incorporates ethical and social dimensions is crucial for truly effective and inclusive policy-making.
new public manegement
New Public Management (NPM) emerged as a reform movement in the 1980s, significantly shaped by the political ideologies of leaders like UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and US President Ronald Reagan. Rooted in neoliberal principles, NPM aimed to make public administration more efficient, market-oriented, and customer-focused, challenging traditional bureaucratic methods. Thatcher and Reagan promoted NPM reforms as a way to reduce government spending, curb the influence of the state, and introduce private-sector practices into public services.
Under Thatcher, NPM reforms involved extensive privatization, outsourcing, and a push toward “value for money” in public spending. Her administration transferred several public services, including utilities and transport, to private companies, aiming to reduce government involvement and increase efficiency. Similarly, Reagan’s administration emphasized deregulation, tax cuts, and downsizing government agencies, promoting competitive outsourcing and performance-based evaluations in public programs.
These NPM reforms significantly impacted public sectors in both countries, leading to a more business-like approach in government services. However, they also sparked debates over accountability, equity, and service quality. Critics argue that while NPM improved efficiency in some areas, it sometimes prioritized cost-cutting over public welfare, reduced job security for public sector employees, and introduced profit motives that could undermine public interest in essential services. Despite these critiques, NPM remains influential in public administration globally, particularly in countries pursuing efficiency-driven governance models.
The subsidiarity principle
is a governance concept that advocates for decisions to be made at the most localized level capable of effectively addressing an issue, rather than at a centralized authority. In practice, subsidiarity can be seen in the European Union, where national or local governments manage issues like regional development or social policy unless they require broader EU-level intervention. Similarly, federal systems such as the United States or Germany embody subsidiarity by dividing responsibilities across local, state, and national governments.
Jurisdictions
refer to the legal authority or area within which a particular government, court, or institution has the power to create, enforce, or interpret laws. Jurisdictions define the geographic, subject-matter, or institutional scope of authority, delineating which entities are responsible for governing or regulating different areas. This concept applies at various levels, from local to national to international, and is foundational to organizing governance and legal systems.
For example, a city government has jurisdiction over municipal issues such as local policing, zoning, and public utilities, while a national government has jurisdiction over broader issues like defense, immigration, and trade. Courts also have defined jurisdictions, with some handling only federal cases and others dealing with specific types of disputes, such as family law or criminal law.
Jurisdictions are essential for maintaining order, as they clarify which authorities are responsible for particular issues, helping to prevent conflicts of authority and enabling efficient governance. However, overlapping or unclear jurisdictions can lead to confusion, conflicts, and inefficiencies, especially in cases involving multiple governing bodies or cross-border issues.
Three models of network coordination
- Participant governed
- Lead organisation governed
- A “Network Administrative Organisation”: external, independent organisation nominated to coordinate
“issue-attention” cycle
immediate concerns and calls for action run up against the difficulties and costs involved in correcting or altering relevant policy behavior. Government and public attention drifts elsewhere until the issue is again raised to the forefront of public or government attention by some event and/or interest group.
agenda
a list of issues to which the public, the media, governmental officials and others in the policy community are saying some serious attention at any given time and that are sometimes acted upon. What is on the agenda is influenced by demographics, political/ economic situation
stages of the agenda-setting cycle
Inside issue initiation: This stage occurs when policy actors within the government identify and define policy problems, often using their institutional knowledge and resources to shape solutions. Government insiders control the timing and framing of the issue as it moves through policy-making processes.
Outside issue initiation: Initiated by external actors like interest groups, the media, or the public, this stage involves pushing an issue onto the government agenda, often using public pressure and advocacy. These actors must have political resources and skills to navigate obstacles and influence government decision-makers.
Issue articulation: Policy actors clarify and frame the issue in this stage, often using data and theoretical frameworks to ensure their definitions are valid and persuasive. This framing helps shape the public and government’s understanding of the problem, directing the policy discourse.
Issue expansion: This stage involves broadening the scope of the issue by gaining wider support, involving more stakeholders, and aligning the issue with other relevant problems. Actors work to increase the salience of the issue, ensuring that it gains more attention across different sectors and actors.: make others care abt ur issue
Agenda Entrance: In this final stage, the issue successfully enters the formal government agenda, often facilitated by identifying policy windows. This entrance can be strategic, influenced by timing, political support, and readiness of proposed solutions.
Agenda universe
Systemic agenda: all ideas, usually kind of radical, but they are brought all to the table to discuss
Institutional agenda: all issues that are currently being considered by a governmental institution= they made their way into decision-making settings
Decisions agenda: all issues that are about to be acted upon in a governmental institution
venue shopping
Venue shopping in agenda setting is a strategy used by interest groups, policymakers, or activists to advance their issues by shifting their advocacy to different policy-making arenas or “venues” where they believe they have the best chance of success. Rather than focusing exclusively on a single legislative body or agency, they may present their issues across various levels of government (local, state, national), branches (legislative, executive, judicial), or even within the private sector, media, and public opinion.
For example, environmental advocates might “shop” for venues by initially lobbying for climate policy in a state legislature; if unsuccessful, they might turn to federal courts, regulatory agencies, or international bodies, adjusting their approach to the venue’s unique decision-making processes. Venue shopping is often used when existing channels are unresponsive or resistant, and it allows advocates to capitalize on differences in jurisdiction, political makeup, or policy priorities across venues.
groups and models for agenda-setting
bottom-up: social mobilization, media-driven
top-down: party-driven, state-driven, silent action, international
Policy Entrepreneur
A policy entrepreneur is an individual or organization that promotes innovative ideas and works to influence the policy agenda by seizing opportunities to advance their preferred policies or reforms. Policy entrepreneurs may be politicians, bureaucrats, activists, academics, or lobbyists who identify issues, build coalitions, and strategically navigate the political landscape to push their ideas forward. They are often proactive in creating alliances, framing issues compellingly, and taking advantage of “policy windows”—moments when political conditions make it easier to introduce change.
Policy entrepreneurs are crucial in bringing attention to emerging issues or overlooked problems, as they actively work to shape public opinion, garner media attention, and persuade decision-makers. For example, Rachel Carson, with her book Silent Spring, acted as a policy entrepreneur by raising awareness of environmental dangers, which contributed to policy changes in environmental protection.
policy windows
- routinized windows: in which routinized procedural events such as budget cycles dictate agenda openings;
- discretionary windows: where individual political preference on the part of decision-makers dictates window openings;
- random windows: where unforeseen events, such as disasters or scandals, open agenda windows; and
- spill-over windows: where related issues are drawn into already opened windows in other sectors or issue areas, such as when railway safety issues arise due to the increased attention paid to airline or automobile safety due to some crisis or accident (Howlett 1998).
Contingent authority
Contingent authority refers to power or legitimacy that depends on specific conditions or circumstances rather than being absolute or inherent. Unlike formal authority that is grounded in established roles or titles, contingent authority is often situational and can be granted or withdrawn based on the actions, expertise, or perceived trustworthiness of the authority figure. This type of authority is dynamic, often fluctuating with shifts in public opinion, context, or performance outcomes.
In public policy, contingent authority can be observed when experts, leaders, or organizations gain temporary influence during a crisis, like a health emergency or natural disaster, due to their specialized knowledge or ability to respond effectively. For example, during a public health crisis, epidemiologists and health organizations may hold contingent authority as people look to them for guidance. However, this authority can diminish once the situation stabilizes or if the experts fail to meet public expectations.
help-is-harmful”
is shifting the blame of problems to situations where well-intentioned interventions or assistance exacerbate the issues they are meant to solve. This can happen when external support or solutions inadvertently shift responsibility away from the underlying causes of a problem or when they foster dependency, inefficiency, or misalignment with the local context. In policy and governance, this phenomenon often manifests when aid or support is provided without considering the individual’s or communities’ long-term effects or autonomy.
For example, in international aid or humanitarian efforts, donors may focus on providing immediate relief (like food or medical supplies) without addressing the root causes of poverty, inequality, or conflict. This can lead to a situation where the affected community relies on external assistance rather than being empowered to resolve their issues independently. In this case, the “help” may shift the blame away from structural problems like poor governance or economic inequality, allowing governments or institutions to avoid addressing these systemic issues.
The “help-is-harmful” concept highlights the importance of ensuring that interventions are not just palliative but address underlying causes and promote self-sufficiency. It challenges the narrative that aid is always beneficial and underscores the potential harm in solutions that focus on quick fixes rather than long-term, sustainable change. This perspective is relevant in development policy, disaster relief, and domestic social welfare programs.
planned obsolescence
an assertion that a problem once thought to be unintended machine failure (accident) is really a case of intended machine failure (intention).
politicization
transforming any given situation into a social problem
public of victims
a group which is not only the sum of victims but also a social group labelled as a collective and autonomous actor which forms a real social division.
narrative
a specific discursive process which enables individuals to give meaning to their actions by situating them in a story, either real of fictitious about bringing back the past or creating a smash future
wicked problems
problems for which there is no clear definition, seen as being unique (its hard to learn), they are symptoms of other problems, their solutions have rly big consequences so u cant rly improvise, problems are not technical they are normative and diff actors are on it for different reasons.
Agency
refers to the capacity of individuals or entities to act independently and make their own free choices, often within social, political, or institutional constraints. It highlights the ability to influence decisions, take actions, and shape outcomes, contrasting with being passively controlled by external forces. In public policy and governance, agency is crucial for empowerment, as it enables citizens, organizations, or governments to advocate for their interests and effect change within systems of power.
! policy innovations
They may consist of developing something entirely new or useful or, as is more common, employing existing practices, arrangements, or tools in new ways for new uses.
policy formulation
the process of generating a set of plausible policy choices capable of addressing problems identified during agenda setting
policy design
a deliberate, systematic approach to policy formulation. Systematic policy design generally occurs when there is clarity or consensus on:
- Policy goals
- Problem definition
- Politically legitimate solutions
- Institutional capacity for analysis and design activities
- Institutional and political limitations arising from existing
priorities, ideals and policy regimes
Policy analysis for policy design
problem analysis (what/why is it a problem)
needs analysis (is this analysis needed?)
policy process analysis (is the policy-making process likely effective? What adjustments to institutional structure and agency may be needed?)
Policy Theory Analysis (What ‘theory of change’ should underpin policy design? )
Options Analysis (What are our options? What are their strengths and weaknesses? )
Decision Analysis (Which option is best? )
1st order of knowledge: research
seeks to provide facts
2nd order of knowledge: evidence and policy analysis
Provide interpretation for the facts achieved
special advisors
elon musk and donald trump
instruments for policy design
incentives (carrots), dis-incentives (sticks), information/ communication (sermons), decision-steering through behavioural cues (nudges- cigarette thingy)
design capacity
nodality: The government is at the centre of social and informational networks
authority: the government has legitimate legal power to command and prohibit action
treasure: taxpayers’ money used to design and implement policy solutions
organisation: The government possesses personnel, skill, land, buildings and technology
NATO
policy design instruments
substantive instruments:
effecting instruments: policies that seek to effect direct changes
detecting instruments: policies that garner information to help direct change
procedural instruments:
incentivising/ promoting= positive
dis-incentivising/ prohibiting= negative
path dependence
the constraints of preceding institutional practices and policies on design
randomised controlled trials (scientific knowledge used for political analysis)
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are a research method used to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions or policies by randomly assigning participants to either a treatment group (which receives the intervention) or a control group (which does not). This randomization minimizes bias and ensures any observed differences between groups are likely due to the intervention itself. RCTs are widely used in medicine, social policy, and economics, such as testing the impact of cash transfers on poverty alleviation, providing robust evidence for decision-making.
tokenism
the practice of making only a perfunctory or symbolic effort to do a particular thing, especially by recruiting a small number of people from under-represented groups to give the appearance of sexual or racial equality within a workforce
have-not citizens
Have-not citizens refer to individuals or groups within a society who lack access to essential resources, opportunities, or privileges, often due to socio-economic, political, or systemic inequalities. These citizens may experience limited access to education, healthcare, political power, or economic mobility, resulting in a disadvantaged status within the larger society. Addressing the needs of have-not citizens is often a key focus in public policy, aiming to reduce inequality and ensure equitable access to opportunities and rights.
patching
Only incremental changes to existing policy regimes are desirable, necessary or possible
drift
Past failures to update or revise policies leave a legacy that must be accommodated to meet new political/institutional/societal realities
stretching
some policies in a policy mix get extended to cover issues, publics or geographic areas they were not originally designed to cover
layering
new policies are added to a policy mix, without removing or adjusting older policies
packaging
doing something from scratch to create smth new, usually being stopped by the definition from up
influences on formulation leading to non-design
Legislative Bargaining (Compromises between legislators that may be sub-optimal or ineffective)
Clientelism (Policies developed to benefit special interest groups in exchange for political support)
Promotion for electoral advantage (Policies developed with the specific intent of winning electoral advantage)
Bureaucratic politics (Policies developed in ways that ease competition or tension between government
departments/organisations leading to poor policy outcomes)
Budget maximization (you spend the money so you receive same budget or bigger next year)
Leader experiences/preferences (Personal experiences, preferences or ideologies of political leaders)
policy non-design
policymaking occurs but is heavily influenced by political and institutional factors instead of rational design orientation
limitations to policy design
- Power dynamics often mean that policymakers must compromise or follow ideological priorities instead of seeking comprehensive design (Satisficing)
- Complexity of problems and solutions: lead to emergent, unplanned outcomes for which
problem definitions and policy options may be difficult to derive, or solutions may be challenging to evaluate in an evidence-based way in time to allow for adequate response - Path dependence: Institutional structures, networks and practices may limit the ability to design clear, coherent policies
models of public participation
Deliberative democracy: focus groups, city assemblies
Policy co-production/ participatory democracy: participatory budgeting, citizen juries
Digital democracy: consultation, vote trading
policy transfer
The process by which knowledge about policies,
administrative arrangements, institutions, or ideas
in one political system is used in the development
of policies in another system
- Transfer may be voluntary or coerced
- Transfer is often deliberate, even if involuntary
- Transnational governance organisations often promote transfer
mechanisms of policy transfer
copying
learning/ adaptation
forcing
influences on policy transfer
Policy and Institutional Similarities: Between the
borrowing and lending country (e.g., similar political,
economic, bureaucratic or cultural contexts).
* External Pressure: International agreements, foreign
aid conditionality.
* Domestic Factors: Political will, civil society
pressure, and public opinion.
* Networks: The role of think tanks, transnational
networks, and global knowledge sharing
optimism bias
policymakers who assume that many problems will take care of themselves, or will never materialize at all, resulting occasionally in high-profile policy disasters and even more frequently in policies that perform far below expectation
reasons for different levels of EU compliance
Management: the countries have a lack of capacity and resources
Enforcement: intentional non-compliance as a result of governmental prerefences. it is intentional as governments fail to comply with EU policies
if the perceived benefits exceed the costs of non-compliance
Normative: importance of bottom-up pressure, socialisation and learning
Operational planning
is the process of developing initial and intermediate objectives and implementation targets for the interrelated interventions that make up complex policy change initiatives. Tasks need to be linked with specific agencies, and if possible individuals, as well as financial resources; implementation guidelines necessary for the effective interpretation of policies are also typically required.
Transposition
in the context of public policy refers to the process of incorporating international or supranational rules, such as EU directives, into a country’s domestic legal framework. This ensures that the policies or regulations agreed upon at a higher level are implemented and enforced at the national or local level. Effective transposition is critical for maintaining legal consistency and meeting obligations, but delays or misalignments can lead to disputes, fines, or a lack of policy harmonization.
conformance implementation
- refers to the degree to which the centrally decided blueprint is implemented from top to bottom […]. This top-down school, which dominates Europeanization research,
- is primarily interested in comparing the intended and actually achieved outcomes of implementation,
where the degree of the goal attainment serves as an indicator for implementation success.
performance implementation’
denotes whether a policy achieves outcomes that resolve the original policy problem at stake […]. This process-oriented bottom-up perspective emphasizes the role of policy implementers as problem-solvers […]. Hence, it is expected that policy instruments
and goals may undergo context-sensitive modifications during the process of policy implementation.
[…] Ultimately, effective implementation is measured by the extent to which the perceived outcomes
correspond with the preferences of the actors involved in the implementation process
“dependent variable” problem
legal outputs do not necessarily translate into practical outputs and outcomes, and comparable data
on implementation across different member states and policy sectors is often limited
differentiated policy implementation
refers to the process of adapting policies to suit the diverse contexts, needs, or capacities of specific regions, groups, or sectors, rather than applying a one-size-fits-all approach. This method acknowledges variations in resources, priorities, or cultural factors, allowing tailored solutions that enhance the effectiveness and acceptance of policies. It is common in federal systems or international organizations like the EU, where member states or regions have varying levels of autonomy or development.
Creative compliance
refers specifically to situations where capable civil
servants aid determined governments in following formal EU rules while challenging their
substance, designed to create the appearance of norm-conforming behaviour without giving up
their original objectives, but it does not mean non-compliance. Customization is the product of complex combinations of factors, but often with the aim of either making EU policies work in practice, adapting them to local circumstances, or regaining control and
exercising “opposition through the back door”. Strong shared functional interests can actually lead member states to regulate more ambitiously than the minimal EU rules in surprisingly coordinated ways.
In the field of EU environmental policy, implementation performance refers to…
the intensity of domestic actions taken in response to EU law (policy outputs) undertaken by implementers in response to EU policy instruments—relative to the directive’s objectives (vertical aspect) and to other implementers’ outputs (horizontal comparison)—
along three dimensions: the substance, scope, and effort of the domestic rules.
infringement proceedings
are legal actions initiated by a governing body, such as the European Commission, against a member state that fails to comply with its obligations under international or supranational law. These proceedings often address issues like non-compliance with treaties, directives, or regulations. The process typically includes formal notices, opinions, and, if unresolved, referral to a higher court (e.g., the European Court of Justice), potentially resulting in penalties or required corrective actions.
“ex ante” evaluation
before a policy or program is adopted.
“ex-post”
happens after a policy has been implemented, with the aim of determining if and to what extent it has performed as expected. The purpose of the ex-post evaluation is ostensibly to feed into future iterations of policy-making in the form of learning or lessons drawing from experience. But it may also be conducted for many different purposes, including embarrassing opponents for (alleged) policy underperformance or failure.
Policy evaluation
refers broadly to all the activities carried out by a range of state and societal actors to determine how a policy has fared in practice and estimate how it will likely perform. The evaluation examines the means employed and the objectives served by a policy in practice. The results and recommendations from these evaluations are then fed back into further rounds of policy-making and can lead to the refinement of policy design and implementation or, infrequently, to its complete reform or termination.
Value of the policy initiative, the use of specific research methods to produce systematic investigation, and ambition that the evaluation results will be useful.
“triangulated” measures
ensures that what is expected to be measured is actually what is being assessed.
Gross outcomes
consist of all observed changes in an outcome measure for the policy
Net outcomes
those effects that can be directly attributed to the policy
Benchmarking
It is the process of comparing internal performance measures and results against those of others involved in similar activities. It is shorthand for a process of surveying other similar organizations and programs in order to assess “best practices” and the standards to use in comparing and assessing the performance of the agency or policy being evaluated. It involves a systematic effort to compare one’s own practices and outputs against others.
Types of policy learning
- Social learning involves fundamental shifts in public attitudes and perceptions of social problems and policy issues and involves many different types of actors, both inside and outside of governments and existing policy subsystems
- Lesson drawing involves a variety of actors inside of existing subsystems who draw lessons from their own experiences and the experiences of others in implementing existing policies. It is significant at the policy formulation stage. It can also appear in carefully designed evaluative efforts if these provide positive or negative exemplars that evaluators can use as benchmarks for evaluative activities.
- Policy-oriented learning involves clarifying existing goals and policy beliefs based on experiences gained from evaluations of existing policies (Sabatier 1987). It is the most common type of learning to emerge from typical policy evaluation activities.
Sabatier:
(1) improving one’s understanding of the state of variables defined as important by one‘s belief system (or, secondarily, by competing belief systems);
(2) refining one’s understanding of logical and causal relationships internal to a belief system;
(3) identifying and responding to challenges to one’s belief system.
- Government learning involves reviewing policy and program behaviour by existing actors and tends to be means-oriented at best. Its impact and consequences are generally limited to improving the means by which policies are implemented and administered.
“boundary-spanning”
links between governmental and nongovernmental organizations. Policymakers should nurture a healthy policy research community outside government because of its potential to enrich public understanding of policy issues and support the policy analytical capacity of the government.
Participatory monitoring and evaluation (PME)
a process through which stakeholders at various levels:
* engage in monitoring or evaluating a particular project, program, or policy;
* share control over the content, the process, and the results of the activity; and
* engage in identifying and taking corrective actions.
Street-level bureaucrats
people from the local level of government, municipalities who handle the paperwork, and on-site work like public workers, policemen, and teachers.
Lipsky says that they are the ones who:
- interact with the people regularly
- have independence in decision-making
- potentially have an extensive impact on users
- carry out tasks for which they are trained
Their work is affected by:
- scarcity of resources
- ambiguous (sometimes contradictory: citizens, peers, bosses) role expectations
They are placed between the public, their needs, complexity of the society and diversity of situation and the bigger policy goals and government ambitions
Lupsky/s core propositions
- policy as an indeterminate construct that continues to evolve throughout its life cycle
- discretionary actions of SLB become the actual policy
- discretion is structured by factors that influence SLB’s behaviour in systematic ways
- policy implementation is politically significant
discretion
the extent of freedom SLB can exercise, in a specific context, to choose among possible courses of action or inaction. Discretion is necessary since goals are often unclear or even contradictory, and decisions need to be made. Discretion gives SLB significant power over citizens/ clients.
civic entrepreneurship
the role of the public sector staff can play in the wider revitalisation of the public sector, specifically in terms of interacting with service users and communities
citizen agents
their decisions are based on judgements on individual situations (rather than self-interest only), tempered by pragmatism (relationships in addition to rules).
target population
are specific subsets or segments within the larger population that are the primary focus of policy intervention groups whose behaviour is intended to be altered.
Target populations are shaped by policymakers’ value judgements when justifying their agendas to legislatures and the public
Street-level organisations mediate social status and (racial, gender…) identity of target populations
compliance
The immediate aim of most public policy is to invoke behavioural change in the ‘targets’ of
government intervention.
The assumption that policy targets are rational self-maximizers
Policy design are often developd with rudimentary knowledge about how targets are likely
to react
barriers to compliance
- Incentives and sanctions
- Monitoring
- Resources
- Autonomy
- Information
- Attitude and objectives
policy non-take-up
refers to situations where individuals do not receive the public services or social benefits to which they are entitled
Philippe Warin (2016) lists three types of non-take-up:
* non-knowledge, when eligible individuals and households are not aware that certain
public services and social benefits exist;
* non-demand, when they are aware they exist but choose not to claim/apply for them
* non-receipt, when they apply for public services and social benefits but do not receive
them.
policy reception
“the processes through which a public policy is appropriated and co-constructed by the individuals it targets, and through which it produces its effects on them.”
Policy reception:
takes the point of view of target populations in their social context
Combines effects and appropriations, which have objective and subjective dimensions
Street-level organisations
may be public, private (non-profit and for-profit) or mixed (e.g. public-private partnerships). They operate under diverse structural arrangements, including contracting, fee-for-service, vouchers and philanthropic or government grants.
‘black box’
understanding that federal authority alone could not
assure that the steps necessary for implementation would occur. Shoulder to shoulder in that ‘black box’ were numerous independent (or at least quasi-independent) actors at various levels of government,
each of whose interests, capacities and incentives had a direct bearing on what, if anything, would happen after policies were enacted.
Political participation
is the act of taking part in the formulation, passage or implementation of public policies. However, political participation takes place at very different levels. Citizens have been divided into ‘apathetics’ (who do not engage in formal politics), ‘spectators’ (who rarely participate beyond voting) and ‘gladiators’ (who fight political battles) (Milbrath and Goel, 1977). Conventional participation comprises a number of ‘modes’, notably voting, party campaigning, communal activity and contacting a representative or official about a particular personal matter.
Policy capacity
involves analytical capabilities, such as enhancing “the ability of governments to make intelligent choices”, scanning the environment and setting strategic directions, weighing and assessing the implications of policy alternatives, and making appropriate use of knowledge in policy-making. Others include additional skills and resources such as the acquisition and utilization of policy-relevant knowledge, the ability to frame options, the application of both qualitative and quantitative research methods to policy problems, the effective use of communications, and stakeholder management strategies
Feedback studies
show that the designs of public policies can increase or decrease the political participation of individuals beyond what we would predict from their education, income, and other demographic correlates of behavior. Many such studies examine the effects of social welfare programs, although recent work has branched out into additional areas such as civil rights, regulations, and criminal justice.
policy feedback effects
- politicians, government, institutions
- mass public
- interest groups
policy feedback includes
resource effects (where are resources distributed)
interpretive effects (how we interpret problems sand olutions and perceive different groups)
institutional effects (by creating different institutions, mobilising new state agencies with new routines and practices)
triggered by
- new governments coming to power
- budget cuts
- frameworks that countries already have in place
policy capacity 2
Policy capacity is defined as the set of skills, resources, or competencies and capabilities necessary to perform policy functions.
Here, you need skills and resources to:
- mobilise and coordinate relevant actors/organisations (operational)
- generate, understand and utilize relevant knowledge (analytical)
- attract political support, strengthen legitimacy (political)
it is on the macro (systemic), meso (institutional), micro (individual)
policy feedback affecting behaviour vs policy feedback affecting attitudes
- first one is observed through Voter turnout
Vote choice, political activity beyond voting (running for office, organising boosting/ public programs), Equalising effects, Behavioural feedback beyond Individual Participation (increased volunteering, community work) - Individuals’ attitudes toward political objects arise from preadult socialization; symbolic attachments including partisanship, ideology, and racial sentiment; group attachments; self-interest and material stakes; personal experiences; and elite framing and priming.
Mass politics
refers to political systems or activities characterized by the involvement of large segments of the population, typically through mechanisms like mass political parties, elections, or movements. It emerged prominently in the 19th and 20th centuries with the expansion of suffrage, industrialization, and the rise of communication technologies that allowed broader participation. Mass politics plays a crucial role in shaping democratic governance but can also be influenced by populism, propaganda, or the mobilization of public opinion by elite
positive attitudinal and participatory effects vs negative attitudinal and participatory effects
Positive attitudinal and participatory effects occur when public policies enhance citizens’ trust in government, support for policy programs, and willingness to engage in political activities. For example, welfare policies that visibly improve citizens’ lives can increase trust in institutions, reinforce belief in government responsibility, and encourage voter turnout or civic participation. These effects strengthen democratic legitimacy and create self-reinforcing cycles of support for subsequent policymaking.
Negative attitudinal and participatory effects arise when policies lead to distrust in government, reduce perceived fairness, or discourage political engagement. For instance, policies perceived as discriminatory or poorly implemented, such as inequitable criminal justice practices, can undermine trust in institutions, alienate marginalized groups, and suppress civic engagement. These effects can contribute to cycles of political disengagement and destabilize democratic governance
reasons for policy evaluation
- are entwined with accountability processes and lesson drawings that may have winners and losers.
- However technocratic and seemingly innocuous, every policy program has multiple stakeholders interested in the outcome of the evaluation: decision-makers, executive agencies, clients, and pressure groups. All of them know that apart from (post‐election) political turnovers or crucial court cases, evaluations are virtually the only moments when existing policy trajectories can be reassessed, and historical path dependencies may be broken
- Evaluations hold the promise of a reframing of a program’s rationale and objectives, a recalibration of the mix of policy instruments it relies on, a reorganization of its service delivery mechanisms, and, yes, a redistribution of money and other pivotal resources among the various actors involved in its implementation.
rationalistic tradition
with its strong emphasis on value neutrality and objective assessments of policy performance, tries to save evaluation from the pressures of politics by ignoring or somehow superseding them.
argumentative tradition
sees policy evaluation as a contribution to the informed debate among competing interests and, therefore, explicitly incorporates politics in the ex-post analysis of policy performance.
Rationalistic policy evaluation
- Emphasizes separating facts and values to produce apolitical, value-neutral knowledge.
- Relies on positivist methods using empirical, scientifically valid data to measure policy efficiency and effectiveness.
- Assumes clear policy goals and intersubjective agreement on measurable indicators for evaluation.
- Aims to provide unbiased, factual information to policymakers, focusing on cost-benefit analysis and standardized comparisons.
- isolates gross outcomes from net outcomes
- Criticized for overlooking context and political dynamics, often simplifying complex issues into quantifiable outcomes
Argumentative policy evaluation
- Challenges the separation of facts and values, viewing policy evaluation as inherently normative and value-laden.
- Highlights the role of underlying assumptions, politics, and power in shaping evaluation frameworks and findings.
- Advocates for policy analysts to engage in debates, uncover presuppositions and mediate between diverse belief systems.
- Focuses on consensus-building and the inclusion of marginalized voices in the evaluation process.
- Criticized for its relativism, which can make determining the most relevant perspectives or strongest arguments challenging.
programmatic evaluation
Whether the goals were achieved
but
Goals may be untraceable in policy documents, symbolic rather than substantial, deliberately vaguely worded for political reasons, and contain mutually contradictory components. Goals also often shift during the policy‐making process to such an extent that the original goals bear little relevance for assessing the substance and the rationale of the policy adopted and implemented in the subsequent years.
political dimension of policy evaluation
Refers to how policies and policy makers become represented and evaluated in the political arena. It rightly points at the relevance of the socially and politically constructed nature of assessments about policy success and failure, but it does not offer clear, cogent, and widely accepted evaluation principles and tools for capturing this dimension of policy evaluation.
Why hasn’t political science studied the effect of policy on the citizens?
- First, public policy analysis suffers from an institutional bias. Michener et al. note a “tendency of mainstream political science to explore the welfare
state from the perspective of elite actors and institutions”, a comment generally applies to policy analysis. - Secondly, as illustrated by the development of the field of evaluation, the study of policy consequences indeed benefits from a diversity of disciplinary and methodological inputs; in other words, there
were indeed good methodological reasons for the development of a specific field to address
to this question (among others, since the field of evaluation is not limited to the analysis of
policy consequences). - Finally, with policy analysis insisting on the increased complexity of governance, involving a diversity of actors and scales and often very fuzzily defined goals,
assessing impact was perceived as all the more challenging
policy reception
the processes through which a public policy is appropriated and co-constructed by the individuals it targets, and through which it produces its effects on
them, and thus having direct consequence over future policies
Policy Feedback is about the policy’s long-term influence on the political and societal system.
Policy Reception is about the immediate public and stakeholder response to the policy when it is introduced or implemented.
legality
the meanings, sources of authority, and cultural practices that are commonly recognized as legal, regardless of who employs them or for what ends”
(Ewick and Silbey 1998, p. 22). Legality includes institutionalized legal institutions, texts, and
practices, but is not limited to them: “Every time a person interprets some event in terms of
legal concepts or terminology – whether to applaud or to criticize, whether to appropriate or to
resist – legality is produced”
why is policy reception important
- understand the full picture of the social consequence of a policy
- shift the institutional practices of a policy to the understanding of its targeted population
- more descriptive research on marginalized groups
- enrich the analysis of other stages in the policy cycle, of how anticipation of a policy will affect certain decisions that policy- policymakers do
policy tools for policy formulation
- Private tools often involve minimal government involvement, relying on market, family, or voluntary organizations.
- Public tools include direct measures like taxes, regulations, subsidies, state enterprises, and “nudge” strategies.
- Hybrid tools combine public and private resources, such as co-design and co-management practices.
Screening policy options
involves comparing alternative tools against set objectives to evaluate their effectiveness, costs, and efficiency in addressing identified problems. The primary criterion for evaluation is the option’s ability to resolve the problem’s root cause, complemented by considerations of efficiency, equity, feasibility, and sustainability.
the study of policy reception
- In the sociology of culture, the study of reception combines an analysis of the constraining effects of cultural productions on the receiver with attention to the receiver’s agency.
- the sociology of law: promoted a radical decentering from legal institutions and professional legal practices, the usual object of the sociology of law, toward the relationship ordinary individuals develop to the legal system and the notion of legality
