Cause and consequence in legislation: an introduction

Abstract. Legislation has traditionally been studied from different but usually limited perspectives. To analyse the process of law-making as an extended process including the causes as well as the consequences of legislation, the initiation as well as the implemention of legislative decisions, may contribute to a better understanding of the effects and limits of contemporary politics, to the meaning of different policy styles, and to the role of interest groups both before and after formal decision making has taken place. It may also sharpen our awareness of the basic assumptions from which participants in the political process proceed and direct our attention to changes in the prevailing patterns in political decision making and their possible consequences.     

Rational choice theory,public policy and the liberal state

Liberalism requires a high order of responsible behaviour from its citizens in order to be sustainable. Yet when the modern liberal state makes policy, it is the stereotyped economic man, driven by self-interest and influenced only by carrots and sticks, who occupies center stage. This regulatory approach to public policy can be shown theoretically to give rise to a paradox — the greater the need for regulation, the less likely, because of compliance problems, it is to succeed. It is contended that an alternative approach which explicitly focuses on a broader behavioral understanding of citizens' attitudes and motivations provides a rationale for the use of a much wider range of policy instruments than does the regulatory framework, and is also more in keeping with those values necessary to the sustainability of the liberal state.     

Beyond public administration? HIV/AIDS policy networks and the transformation of public administration in Botswana

What impact has HIV/AIDS had on the structure of public administration and what further lessons do these changes hold for other policy sectors in Botswana? For long, Botswana has had the highest prevalence of HIV/AIDS, bringing many developmental challenges. An under‐researched facet of HIV/AIDS is the effect it had on the public administration in Botswana. Whereas classical approaches to public administration suggest that it is ‘civil’ service organisations that lead in health administration, HIV/AIDS spawned a particular type of organisation, the policy network. In mitigating HIV/AIDS, the policy environment became more fragmented with networks for treatment, prevention, advocacy and research emerging. These networks are made up of entities from the public, private for‐profit and not for‐profit sectors. They participate in the agenda setting, formulation, implementation and monitoring and evaluation of HIV/AIDS policy. Traditional public administration theories cease to hold sway; private actors become engaged in ‘public policy’ and the other way round. Policy is carried out in horizontal arrangements; linking government, business and non‐governmental organisations in mutual inter‐dependences. Health care professionals share policy spaces with the media, social scientists and politicians. New challenges face public policy‐making including co‐ordination problems, fragmented accountability and shared policy spaces. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

政策网络:公共政策创新的视角

引入政策网络分析的方法可以真实地认识到公共政策创新过程中的现实图景.我国某些公共政策创新失败的原因正是其忽略了政策网络的存在,忽略了政府对政策网络中个人和组织的依赖属性.我们应当重视政策网络在政策创新过程中的作用,通过培育网络主体的公共理性.构建协商民主与政策网络的良性互动,加强政策网络的学习机制等,从而形成合理、优良的创新政策,保证公共政策创新对社会的持续作用.     

Privatising electric power in Malaysia and Thailand: politics and infrastructure development policy

Electric power development in Asia until recently has been a monopoly of the state, with the power sector's planning, finance, construction and management being a part of government activity. The surge in demand for power, as well as external pressures, induced Asian governments to allow private sector participation in electric power. The Malaysian and Thailand cases represent different patterns of policy‐making regarding privatisation. In Malaysia, the government divested Tenaga Nacional Berhad in 1992 and awarded independent power producers (IPPs) licences to build and sell electricity to Tenaga for transmission and distribution. The IPPs were awarded without tender to friends of the government and the system has enabled the IPPs to make large profits at Tenaga's expense. In the Thai case, privatisation has been a very slow process as successive governments since 1989 have not had the power to initiate extensive divestment of IPP contracting. Privatisation in Thailand is a very contentious political issue and the employees union of the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (Egat) is very powerful. Thus, while Malaysia has had extensive privatisation of the power sector, the system eliminates competition in power supply resulting in a higher price of electricity for consumers. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Graduate education in public policy

Contemporary social transformation and accelerated politicization are inducing and requiring changes in the epistemological structure and the substantive content of the social and political sciences. To accommodate to and to facilitate these changes there is here proposed an interdisciplinary program of graduate education in Public Policy which is designed (1) to aggregate the most relevant materials and usable generalizations of the sociopolitical sciences and (2) to strike a balance between viable theory and tested experience. Although the curriculum is intended to be primarily contemporaneous and futuristic, it incorporates comparative and historical as well as normative and positivistic materials and methods. A variegated and qualified body of students is expected to be recruited for the proposed program as its principal intellectual and creative component.     

Multi-stakeholder public policy and governance in China: an analysis

In this article, public policy is put into a multi-stakeholder rather than adversarial perspective: we argue that there is a role for multi-stakeholder involvement in both the development and implementation of public policy; these are separate processes that can involve different patterns of stakeholder involvement (stakeholders have different skills and levels of interest in public policy) in either one or both the development and implementation phases. We need new models, approaches and examples of such multi-stakeholder public policy, and in this Special Issue, we focus on China, where such research is only slowly emerging. We present and analyse six papers that fall naturally into three categories: (1) corporate social responsiveness and societal relationships; (2) public affairs (particularly reputation management) and citizen involvement; and (3) public-management-oriented, data-based analyses. These articles, taken together, increase our understanding of multi-stakeholder research and practice, but equally as important, they give us insights into how Chinese public policy academics research and report public policy. This window into academic research and thinking offers us an opportunity to expand and deepen our understanding of public policy and its implications for public affairs in China. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Evaluation use and learning in public policy

Policy Sciences - Scientific evidence has become increasingly important for the decision-making processes in contemporary democracies. On the one hand, research dealing with...     

Demand for masters of public policy in public service

This piece was written to assist those who lead schools of public policy and administration in evaluating their pedagogies and examining their curricula. The perspectives contained in this piece reflect those of the author, who has spent the last 35 years practicing and leading public policy research and analysis in the Congressional Research Service (CRS)—the public policy agency created by the U.S. Congress for its exclusive use. The views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of CRS or the Congress.     

Estimates and public policy: The politics of numbers

Abstract

Estimates of the number of homeless persons in the United States are frequently said to range from 250,000 to three million. In fact, the latter number is an invalid guesstimate that developed staying power for political reasons. National estimates of homeless persons based on explainable methodologies actually range from 230,000 to 736,000, with the most likely estimates around the half‐million mark. Despite the confrontational politics surrounding the numbers issue in the 1980s, a consensus is developing in the 1990s among private groups, including some major advocacy organizations, and all levels of government regarding policy direction in assistance programs for the homeless. There is widespread recognition that the goal should be to end homelessness, not simply to provide emergency assistance. Permanent housing solutions for special populations are needed in the context of renewed efforts to combat poverty.

In the public debate about the policy implications of divergent national estimates of the numbers of homeless persons, a common assumption is that the estimates vary widely and inexplicably—anywhere from a few hundred thousand to three million or more. Those who do try to explain the odd discrepancy between the extremes seem to assume that any count is politically motivated. They say that it depends on how one defines homelessness and who is counting. In other words, the implication is that numbers derive from policy and politics, rather than the other way around.

Given such perceptions, it is not surprising that some who have neither the time nor, perhaps, the resources to judge the accuracy of estimates begin to feel that the truth must be somewhere in between, as if a mathematical average were equivalent to a political compromise. Others will believe the message if they like the messenger. In a recent book on homelessness, for example, the author confesses that he trusts estimates “made by people who live where ‘the rubber meets the road’… rather more than the bright theorists tucked away in ivory towers.”¹ Although many statistics are politically controversial, it is probably safe to say that the debate on homelessness during the past decade represents the apogee of political numerology. It is worth reviewing just how this came to pass.     

Advanced technology and public policy: Multinational weapons acquisition

This article's purpose is to examine the role of institutions in the innovation and dissemination of advanced technology in the international policy arena, focusing specifically upon multinational cooperation in the acquisition of advanced technology weapons. The analysis examines interrelationships among different national public policy processes and compares cross-nationally the role of governmental and non-governmental organizations in policy formulation. An analytic framework for comparative analysis of organizational objectives is developed and then applied to four cases of multinational cooperation. Based upon the results of this comparative analysis, the article's conclusion sets forth some observations potentially applicable to a policy aimed at furthering transatlantic cooperation in particular, and more generally, to public policy and technology.This is a revised version of a paper originally prepared for a Technology and Public Policy Workshop held under the auspices of the Technology and Policy Program at MIT on 16–17 February 1979. The sponsorship of the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation is gratefully acknowledged. The author particularly wishes to thank Peter deLeon for his asistance and encouragement. The research was performed under grants from The Brookings Institution, while the author was a Fellow with the Defense Analysis Staff, and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Readers should take careful note of the fact that the views expressed in this paper are those of the author alone and do not reflect official positions of the US Government or its component agencies, nor are these views necessarily shared by The Brookings Institution or the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.     

发展中的政策过程理论——我国政策过程理论发展回顾与展望

政策科学在我国90年代才真正开始兴起,而政策过程理论方面的研究则更加滞后。政策过程理论作为一种中层理论或称为中观理论在整个政策科学中占有着重要地位。这要求我们应重视其理论的引介、探索和建构。在这个过程中,我们既要介绍和借鉴国外政策过程理论,又要更加注重梳理和总结国内主要的政策过程及其理论方面研究的文献成果,从中获得发展我国本土化的政策过程理论的启迪、思路和脉络,从而更好地把握我国政策过程理论的发展趋势和走向。