AUSTRALIAN PUBLIC POLICY AND THE PROBLEM OF FRAGMENTATION

Abstract: Politics matters in policy. In particular, the way in which a society organises its structures for bargaining affects the extent to which it is able to solve the general problem of "externalities" resulting from private choice. Two "ideal type" societies, the corporatist and the pluralist, are contrasted. It is suggested that the apparently superior economic performance of corporatist societies may be due to the fact that they have more efficient means of making collective choices than do pluralist societies. It is argued that, as a society which is best described as fragmented rather than pluralist or corporatist, Australia may be missing out on the advantages offered by well-structured bargaining. In particular, it may be possible significantly to improve decision-making practices by means of an Accord between business and government which promotes policy-related trade-offs within an agreed general framework.     

POLITICS, POLICY MAKING AND PRESSURE GROUPS: SOME SUGGESTIONS FOR REFORM OF THE AUSTRALIAN POLITICAL SYSTEM

Abstract: In Australia, current policy making is characterized by immobilism, drift and "pluralistic stagnation". The problem is not lack of technical expertise, but the mobilization of political consent in a polity in which pressure groups have proliferated. In the post-war period, the welfare state/managed economy has transformed the role of government and the potential power of pressure groups. New networks of interdependency have developed. Some of the principal groups are beneficiaries of redistributive programs, producer groups, state and local government agencies and professionals in government. Their potential power has been made actual by a new participative ethic. The post-materialist values of which this is part also result in the growth of groups focusing on quality of life and moral issues. In this context the political parties are losing their central place in the polity and the centralized organs of executive government appear over-secretive and aloof. Reforms are needed to realign institutions with the new cultural and structural realities. Broader interest group involvement is needed. Parliament, through a committee system, could play a major role and its historical function as custodian of the public interest should be revived. Departments must find new ways to involve more groups in policy formulation and implementation. Information must be shared more widely and policy analysts and advisors should work more closely with groups in defining issues, negotiating alternatives and encouraging the development of supportive coalitions. New "intelligence" and "outreach" functions within the public service are required, and the existing approaches of policy units and research bureaux should be remodelled.     

SUBGOVERNMENTS AND THE IMPACT OF POLICY FRAGMENTATION AND ACCOMMODATION

For many years political scientists have utilized the subgovernment model of policy-making to explain certain types of policy output. Recently a number of scholars have argued that the traditional conceptualization of subgovernments was simplistic and incomplete. They view subgovernments as a complex and integral part of the larger policy-making environment. This paper examines this “new” subgovernment by analyzing its role in contemporary public policy-making. If subgovernments have lost their autonomy and been exposed to the complex demands of the larger political system, what impact does this have on policy outputs? Relying upon the literature on subgovernments and their principal components, the paper offers an interpretation of how subgovernments have potentially expanded their influence on public policy as a result of two contemporary developments: policy-making fragmentation, and the accommodation of policy outputs.     

SOCIAL SCIENCE DISCIPLINES AND POLICY RESEARCH: THE CASE OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

It has been argued that social science disciplines influence their members policy research via theoretical focus, methods, norms, and system maintenance mechanisms and that these forces inhibit the usefulness of policy research for policy-making. Political science is found to influence substantially its members policy research output and to decrease its policy usefulness, primarily by promoting explanations of policy, although the extent of influence and lack of usefulness are less than studies of other disciplines suggest. Whereas highly useful outcome analyses are produced less frequently than many advocates of policy research would hope, a sub-stantial body of policy research undertakes objectives that when satisfied, particularly in the area of problem definition, provide moderately useful output to decision makers. In addition, policy research output is remarkably diverse substantively, but less so in terms of the purposes it serves.     

POLICY COMMUNITY,POLICY NETWORKS AND SCIENCE POLICY IN AUSTRALIA

Abstract: The policy community approach to policy analysis has been developed from ideas expressed by Richardson and Jordan in 1979. The approach is increasingly used to identify the key actors and groups of actors who make policy decisions, to analyse the interactions between the groups and to hypothesise about the types of outcomes achieved. The approach aids analysis in policy contexts which cut across the boundaries of individual organisations in the policy process, across the public and private sectors, and beyond national boundaries. This paper evaluates several expositions of the approach with reference to an analysis of science policy in Australia and suggests typological refinements which enhance its explanatory capacity.     

ADVANCES IN THE STUDY OF AUSTRALIAN PUBLIC POLICY

Comparative State Policies. Edited by B. GALLIGAN (Melbourne: Longman Cheshire, 1988, 303pp).
From Fraser to Hawke: Australian Public Policy in the 1980s. Edited by B. HEAD and A. PATIENCE (Melbourne: Longman Cheshire, 1989, 525pp).
Hawke and Australian Public Policy: Consensus and Restructuring. Edited by E. JENNETT and R. STEWART (Melbourne: Macmillan, 1990, 422PP).     

CHANGES IN AUSTRALIAN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICIES: FROM ENDS TO MEANS

Abstract: Growing awareness of the implications of science and technology for a diverse range of public policies has recently focused attention on Australian science policy and administration. In analyzing recent developments in this area, it is useful to distinguish between two main dimensions of science policy, one focusing on science as an end in itself, "policy for science", the other denoting the use of science as a means throughout government, "science in policy". After characterizing key features in Australian science and technology performance, and salient phases in the evolution of science policy machinery over the last twenty years, it is argued that concern has been aroused about the inadequate use of science and technology in pursuing policy objectives. Modification of the imbalanced attention so far devoted to science as an end in itself, and encouragement of its integration as a critical means potentially relevant to the growing demands of changing, complicated policy areas, have been major themes underlying recent reviews and institutional reforms.     

SCIENCE, RISK AND HEALTH POLICY: THE CHANGING OPERATIONAL RELATIONSHIP

Abstract: Scientific research is usually regarded as an impartial contributor to the public policy-making process. However, increasingly, such research in health matters to do with industrial processes, medical intervention and drug therapy is perceived to pose risks and thus produce uncertainty in government and anxiety among consumers of health services. This when the scientific research agenda is about to take increasingly dramatic steps with important implications for applied science. Five select issues intended to depict a lack of research consensus and resulting in perceptions of societal risk-taking are used to illustrate this phenomenon. The growing influence of the "Green" environmental and consumer movement promises increasing resistance to science-based societal risk-taking. Scientists have acknowledged problems and advocate a variety of responses including the adoption of radically different aims and methods in science. The quality of some medical statistics and the dominance of the research methods agenda by epidemiologists is also a cause for concern. The major dilemma, however, is that while both refutation and uncertainty are integral to the Popperian model of puzzle-solving in science, they are factors which pose serious political risks in decision-making for ministers and their advisers.     

SCIENTIFIC‐BUREAUCRATIC MEDICINE AND UK HEALTH POLICY1

One prominent method for controlling health costs is to find measures for the management of demand. Various options exist for this; and many of them have been tried during the fifty years of the UK's National Health Service. Current policy now focuses on what may be called “scientific‐bureaucratic medicine.” This policy is based on the assumptions that valid medical knowledge is derived from accumulated research evidence and that such knowledge should be implemented through clinical guidelines which are enforced to some extent. This UK development has parallels with the US Agency for Health Care Policy and Research whose experience, therefore, raises some policy issues for the UK.