Theories and Approaches to Public Policy Making
Foundations of Policy-Making Theories
The study of policy making requires an understanding of different theories or approaches that dictate how policy should be made, whose values and interests receive priority, and the expected outcomes.
These theories act as lenses to view the policy process. While many of them can function together, none are perfectly observed in any specific time period or system within the American government in their pure form.
Pure theory rarely matches the complexity of the real world, but elements of these theories have been evident throughout various stages of American history.
Elite Theory
Elite theory emphasizes the role of the values and preferences of the governing elite in the development of public policy.
Key Assumption: This theory assumes that the general public is less influential in the policy-making process than smaller, organized groups of elites.
Distinction of Values: The values and preferences of the elite may not reflect the values and preferences of the public at large.
Types of Elites:
Economic Elites: Includes wealthy individuals, corporate executives, major oil companies (such as Exxon, BP, or Shell), Wall Street investment bankers, and certain high-level professionals.
Cultural Elites: Celebrated actors, filmmakers, recording artists, and media stars (e.g., the Kardashians).
Political Elites: Elected officials and other influential policy actors.
Focus: The theory focuses primarily on the role of leaders and leadership in policy development.
Subgovernments and Salience:
Elite dominance is often a function of the low salience (public visibility/importance) of policy making within subgovernments, such as congressional committees, the bureaucracy, and issue networks.
Most individuals outside narrow circles have little reason to pay attention to or participate in specific policy decisions.
Example: For policies regarding fuel production, such as deepwater oil drilling or fracking, the general public may not be well-informed or engaged. However, major corporations like Exxon, BP, and Shell will be heavily involved because the policy directly impacts their interests.
Scope: While most obvious at the national level, parallel elite processes exist at state and local levels of government.
Group Theory
Group theory views public policy as the product of a continuous struggle among organized interest groups.
Pluralism: This theory is rooted in the concept of pluralism, where individuals with similar policy ideas form interest groups that compete to influence policy.
Shared Power: Supporters of group theory believe power in the political system is widely shared among these groups, all seeking access to the policy-making process.
Influence Factors: Groups with greater financial resources, higher recognition, better access to policymakers, and more prestige are more likely to exert significant influence.
Special Interests: The concept of "special interests" influencing government is a direct application of group theory.
Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF):
A modern variant of group theory.
Focuses on competing advocacy coalitions within a specific policy subsystem (e.g., the agriculture industry).
Each coalition consists of policy actors from public and private institutions and different levels of government who share specific beliefs about desired government policies.
Criticisms of Group Theory:
It may exaggerate the influence of organized interest groups while underestimating the leadership and discretion of public officials.
It oversimplifies the dynamic by suggesting special interests simply "buy" policy.
Two-Way Influence: Public officials are not just passive tools of interest groups; they have their own agendas and often use interest groups to build support for their initiatives or as an enticement to support other political goals.
Institutional Theory
Institutional theory examines how the arrangement of governments, their legal powers, and their rules for decision-making affect policy.
Components of Institutionalism:
The degree of public access to decision-making.
The availability of information from government agencies.
The sharing of authority between national and state governments under the framework of federalism.
Major Tenet: The specific structures and rules of a system determine which policy processes occur and which actors become influential.
Definition of Institution: Encompasses how individuals within organizations relate to one another and to those in other organizations. It includes individuals, firms, rules, and markets.
Neutrality of Rules: A common axiom is that there is no such thing as a neutral rule. Rules have consequences that help some groups while hurting others, making certain outcomes more likely than others.
Analytical Use: Analysts use this theory to study the performance of different entities and the strategies used by individuals within specific organizational constraints.
Rational Choice Theory
Also referred to as Public Choice Theory or Formal Theory, this approach draws heavily from the field of microeconomics.
Core Premise: Public policies are pursued because they benefit the individuals involved in the policy-making process.
Rational Actors: Individuals are assumed to be rational actors seeking to maximize their personal attainment of resources or further their self-interest.
Analytical Factors: Analysts consider what individuals value, their perception of situations, the information available to them, uncertainties, and how the expectations of others affect their actions.
Criticisms of Rational Choice Theory:
Single-Mindedness: Critics argue humans are not always single-minded pursuers of self-interest and may act in a collective interest even if it harms them personally.
Knowledge Asymmetry: The theory assumes perfect knowledge, but in reality, information is often unequal. Decision-makers (like members of Congress) frequently have much more information than the general public or individual businesses.
Utility: Despite criticisms, this theory is useful for predicting how agency officials and policy targets (the objects of policy) will respond to new initiatives.
Political Systems Theory
Political systems theory is described as the most useful approach due to its comprehensiveness, despite being the most vague.
Contextual Emphasis: It emphasizes the larger social, economic, and cultural context (e.g., preferences for limited government or low taxes) in which decisions are made.
Biological Model: It proposes that government and public officials react to the political climate much like biological organisms respond to environmental stimuli.
The Policy Cycle:
Environment: The social/cultural landscape changes.
Demands and Supports: Groups or individuals make demands on the government based on environmental changes.
Outputs: The political system responds by producing decisions, laws, or policies.
Outcomes: Over time, these outputs create real changes in the original situation.
Feedback Loop: Outputs and outcomes provide feedback that alters the environment, creating new demands or supports, and continuing the circular cycle.
Ubiquity: While theories like rational choice or group theory move in and out of usefulness depending on the problem, systems theory provides a consistently useful and comprehensive lens for looking at public policy.