Public Policy Textbook

ACADEMIC COMEBACK!!!!!

Politics

It is a collective decision making process that is considered legitimate — the accepted way to manage divided societies without undue violence.

Public policy

a course of action (or inaction) by government to address a public problem, using available instruments, within a specific political and social context.

Governance

the broader system through which societies are steered and managed.

Three justifications for public policy

market failure, public goods, negative externalities

market failure

the market cannot produce socially optimal outcome on its own

public goods

goods that are non rival and non excludable (ex. defende, flood protection, etc.) that the market underprovides

negative externalities

actions that harm third parties (pollution, unsafe water) require regulation

what is a heuristic?

something that helps us analyze policy but real processes/policy creation is more messy, overlapping, and skips stages; a simple rule or method that guides us through complicated situations (ex. the policy cycle)

the policy cycle

agenda setting, policy development, decision-making, implementation, evaluation

agenda setting

Identifying and selecting problems that receive serious political attention

policy development

Designing possible courses of action; assessing alternatives and their effects

Decision-making

Choosing the most appropriate option; giving it political authority

Implementation

Applying the chosen measures through government organizations

Evaluation

assessing whether the policy achieved its goals, and why/why not

Network society, liqud society, risk society, hollow state

societal changes that shape the complex, interdependent, and complex society in which policies are made

Network society

information flows instantly accross boarders, society is driven by decentralized digital information; these processes are no longer bound by geographical limits

Manuel Castells

Network society theory

Liquid society

Social and cultural certainties have become fluid. Individual identities shift, and collective norms dissolve

Zygmunt Bauman

Liquid society theory

Risk society

modernization creates new, manufactured risks. Governments calculate and manage risk, creating a “safety illusion”, citizen expect protection from everything

Ulrich Beck

Risk society theory

Hollow state

the central state has lost its monopoly on governance; services are privatized, outsourced, or co-produced, and the government is only one actor amongst many

R.A.W. Rhodes

Hollow state theory

Knowledge “of” policy =

academic study of how policies work

Knowledge “for” policy =

practical knowledge to improve policy decisions

Laswell’s Distinction

understanding the difference between having knowledge of policies vs having the knowledge for policies, resulting in them being improved

Drivers of rationalism

knowledge and information

rational perspective

policies are developed through evidence-based, sequential steps of identifying the problem, generating alternatives, assessing the situation, and choosing th eoptimal solution

bounded rationality

in reality, actors have limited information and cognitive capacity, so they "satisfice" (find a good enough solution) rather than optimise.

roles of knowledge in rationalism

neutral, objective tools to improve performance

drivers of political perspective

power and interests

Political perspective

policy is shaped by power, interests, and conflict between actors in a policy network

role of knowledge in political perspective

it is not neutral, knowledge is a resource

Kraemer and King - “resource politics”

different actors within organizations use information systems to increase their influence

drivers of culturalism

frames, norms, and language

cultural perspective

problems and solutions are socially constructed through language and frames; how an issue is framed determines who acts, what solutons are considered, and what counts as success

drivers of institutionalism

rules, routines, and structures

institutional perspective

institutions are stable pattersn of rules, norms, roles, and values (formal and informal) that constrain and enable actor behavior (March and Olsen)

Path dependency

past policy choices lock in future options, changing institutions is very slow

logic of appropriateness

actors ask what is the right thing to do given my role and the rules in the situation, rather than doing what maximizes their utility

policy problem

social construction, only become problems once actors define them as such and demand government action

Types of policy problems

Tame/structured, moderately structured, unstructured/wicked

Structured/tame problem

have a clear cause, known solutions, and technical consensus is possible

Moderately structured

have some factual consensus but contested values; these problems are politically sensitive

Unstructed/wicked problem

There are no clear benchmarks, causes of problem are disputed and solutions are contested; this is an area of high confict

Example of structured/tame problem

fixing a specific road hazard

Moderately structured problem example

Euthanasia policy

Unstructured/wicked problems example

climate change

Wicked problems (Rittel & Webber, 1973)

no clear moral benchmarks, no definitive solution, every "solution" changes the problem. The political perspective is most useful here.

Target groups/who policies are aimed at

Advantaged, Contenders, Dependents, and Deviants

Advantaged (powerful + positive)

receive benefits; politicians compete to help them (e.g., homeowners, businesses)

Contenders (powerful + negative)

face subtle, depoliticised regulation — too risky to punish openly.

Dependents (weak + positive)

receive symbolic support and genuine benefits (e.g., the elderly, children).

Deviants (weak + negative)

face punitive, tough policies — politically safe to target (e.g., criminals).

Schneider and Ingram

The social construction of target groups has degenerative effects on democracy, as it causes excluded groups to disengage

The Barrier model (rationalist)

A problem must pass through a series of barriers: it must be articulated, reach the public agenda, then the formal political agenda. Each barrier filters issues based on technical merit and feasibility.

Issue attention cycle (Downs)

Problems spike in attention after "alarmed discovery", peak when costs become clear, then decline to a "post-problem" stage where the issue stays on the policy agenda but leaves the public spotlight.

Kingdon’s Multiple Streams Model

agenda setting is NOT linear, but the combination of three independent streams; the problem steam, policy stream, and politics stream

Problem stream

Conditions that policy makers define as problematic. Brought to attention via indicators (statistics), focusing events(crises), and feedback from existing policies.

Policy stream

A "primeval soup" of ideas, proposals and solutions developed by specialists in policy communities. Solutions float around waiting for a problem to attach to.

Politics stream

National mood, election cycles, interest group campaigns, changes in government. Creates political will or opposition for action.

Policy window

when all three streams align, a window of opportunity opens up when policy may be created. A policy entrepreneur must act quickly to couple them and get an issue on the agenda.

Rationalist agenda setting

Problems reach the agenda based on objective evidence, indicators, and expert assessment. The barrier model.

Political agenda setting

Agenda is shaped by power and interests. Powerful actors can block issues; weak actors struggle to be heard. "Non-decision making" keeps issues off the agenda.

Cultural agenda setting

Framing determines what counts as a problem. Media and political entrepreneurs shape narratives. Focusing events trigger re-framing.

Institutionalist agenda setting

Existing rules and organisational routines filter what reaches the agenda. "Inside-out" policymaking — history shapes what is seen as relevant.

formal authority

when policies are officially adopted

social legitimacy

when key stakeholders must accept policies

Rational policy development

Evidence-based design; Clear goals → identify alternatives → cost-benefit analysis → select optimal solution. Relies on research, expertise, and planning documents.

Political policy development

Network negotiation; Policy emerges through bargaining among stakeholders in a policy network. Each actor has their own frame and resources. Design = managing interdependencies and building coalitions.

Cultural policy development

A policy programme is a story — it must create a convincing narrative about the problem and solution to mobilise support. Frames, metaphors, and symbols matter.

Institutional policy development

Path & context; options are constrained by existing laws, procedures, and organisational routines. "Institutional design" — changing rules to change behaviour.

Steering

how the government influence actors to achieve desired outcomes

Three broad modes of steering

Top-down/hierarchial, horizontal/network steering, structural/institutional design

Top-down / hierarchical steering

government directly commands and controls using law and regulation. Assumes government has clear goals and can enforce compliance.

Horizontal / network steering

government works with and through networks of actors; sets rules of the game and facilitates collaboration.

Structural / institutional design

government changes the positions, roles, and rules of actors to shape outcomes indirectly (e.g., creating a market, public tender).

Four basic resources/policy instruments the government has

Nodality, authority, treasure, organization

Nodality

Being at the centre of information networks (ex. Public information campaigns, monitoring)

Authority

Legal power to command (ex. laws, licenses, bans, standards)

Treasure

Financial resources (ex. subsidies, taxes, grants, fines)

Organizatiom

Control of human and physical capacity (ex. agencies, inspectorates, public services)

Rational-comprehensive model

All alternatives considered; optimal choice selected based on clear goals and evidence

Bounded rationality / Satisficing Model

Choose the first "good enough" option given limited information and cognitive capacity (Simon)

Incrementalism model

Small adjustments to existing policy ("muddling through" — Lindblom). Safe, but slow to adapt.

Garbage can model

Problems, solutions and decision-makers meet by chance in "organised anarchy"

Organizational politics model

Decisions reflect bargaining between agencies with different mandates and interests (Allison)

Implementation

the application of a policy programme by one or more organizations, deploying instruments to achieve the policy’s goals

Top-Down implementation (Forward mapping)

Starts from the central policy decision. Implementation = faithful execution of a programme. Focus: compliance, clear mandates, adequate resources, monitoring. Suits well-defined, structured problems.

Bottom-Up Implementation (Backward mapping)

tarts from the target group and street-level implementers. Recognises that policy objectives are vague and contested. Focus: consultation, negotiation, workable practice. Suits wicked problems.

Matland’s conflict ambiguity

a policy’s implementation outcome is determined by two main factors: the clarity of policy goals (ambiguity) and the level of stakeholder agreement (conflict)

Low conflict - low ambiguity

administrative implementation (top-down works)

Low conflict - high ambiguity

Experimental implementation (local learning)

Low ambiguity - high conflict

Political implementation (power determines outcome)

High ambiguity - high conflict

Symbolic implementation (lots of activity with little change)

Street-level bureaucracy (Lipsky)

Front-line workers (teachers, social workers, police officers, benefits officers) exercise discretion in applying policy to individual cases. They effectively make policy through their daily decisions — they are the "real" policy-makers at the point of delivery.

Monitoring

checking whether implementing agencies comply with their obligations and whether the policy is being applied effectively

Enforcement

taking corrective action when they do not.

Information asymmetry

implementing agencies know more than the political principal about how they operate. Monitoring is the tool to reduce this gap (principal–agent problem).

Street-level

IT plays a supporting role, works in registration only; actions are at full discretion of officials