Evidence‐Based Policy‐Making: The Elusive Search for Rational Public Administration

Evidence‐based policy making has been criticised as a revival of the ‘rationality project’ in which democratic politics is regarded as rent‐seeking and a deadweight loss to society. In response, the evidence‐based policy movement has failed to articulate a defence in which the rationality animating the policy process is situational and contextual rather than unique and authoritative. This article traces the movement's motto –‘what works?’– to the American pragmatist movement, whose influence on Harold Lasswell and New Labour in the UK was substantial. This article argues that the ambition for evidence‐based policy‐making should be seen in terms of the transition from a single, unique and universal rationality toward multiple rationalities that vary according to different policy making contexts. Interpreted in such terms, evidence‐based policy making can avoid several of the main criticisms, and offer strong potential to contribute to solving policy problems.     

Politicians,Media Moguls and PayTV: Pay‐TV Policy‐making in Australia 1977‐1995

This article explores the major influences on pay‐TV policy‐making in Australia from the late 1970s, when the issue was first discussed in the context of proposals to establish a domestic communications satellite, up until the introduction of pay‐TV in Australia in 1995, thereby placing current developments in the pay‐TV industry in context. The article argues that among larger broadcasting and telecommunications issues, pay‐TV has never been ‘the main game’. For both Coalition and Labor governments, the expansion of existing free‐to‐air television services in regional Australia and the introduction of competition in telecommunications have been much more important policy priorities than the introduction of pay‐TV. Furthermore, because pay‐TV policy‐making largely took place in this wider policy context, the structure of the broadcasting and telecommunications industries also shaped pay‐TV policy outcomes.     

Brexit: The EU Policy‐Making State Hits the Populist Buffers

There seems to be an emerging conventional wisdom that the Brexit vote resulted from specific domestic factors in Britain, such as divisions within the ruling Conservative party, the rise of UKIP, strong reaction to increased immigration, all set against the backdrop of globalisation and its adverse effects. The end result was a populist revolt. The argument presented here is somewhat different. Whilst accepting that the above factors were certainly very important, it is argued that it is important to examine the key role of the EU itself in the creation of the current crisis within the EU. The construction of an EU policy‐making state has run far ahead of what voters at the national level want, leading to a central paradox within the EU, namely that the European elite which runs the EU has introduced some very beneficial public policies, yet that elite has become increasingly out of touch with its peoples.     

Meeting the Challenges of Policy‐Relevant Science: Bridging Theory and Practice

Ongoing public debate about the role of science in policy making signifies the importance of advancing theory and practice in the field. Indeed, assumptions about the science–policy nexus hold direct implications for how this interface is managed. A useful lens on contemporary themes is offered by the experience of a federal environmental science program that launched an ambitious effort to enhance capacity for policy relevance while protecting a commitment to sound, impartial scientific inquiry. This was achieved by developing an explicit conceptual model and implementing corresponding strategies that addressed critical gaps in capacity for policy‐relevant research, analysis, and communication while supporting existing capacities. This article describes and evaluates the capacity‐building effort from the dual perspectives of deepening an understanding of successful practice in the field and advancing a conceptual understanding of the science–policy nexus. It illustrates the challenges facing practitioners and the need for greater interaction between theory and practice.     

Consultation,Participation and Policy‐Making: Evaluating Australia's Renewable Energy Target

A Review of Australia's Renewable Energy Target is used to contribute to the concept of negative externalities in consultation processes, including wasted investment by stakeholders and reduced investor confidence. The findings indicate that there is a need to establish clear consultation objectives. The paper concludes with a model for consultation agents to consider when initiating a consultation process. The model stresses the need to make objectives of the consultation process transparent to stakeholders, including the extent to which the outcomes of consultation are likely to result in changes to policy. Consultation agents and policy developers should seek to identify potential negative externalities at the outset of any consultation process, and address these within the consultation framework where possible.     

Ministerial Advisers and the Politics of Policy‐Making: Bureaucratic Permanence and Popular Control

The advent of ministerial advisers of the partisan variety – a third element interposing itself into Westminster's bilateral monopoly – has been acknowledged as a significant development in a number of jurisdictions. While there are commonalities across contexts, the New Zealand experience provides an opportunity to explore the extent to which the advent of ministerial advisers is consistent with rational choice accounts of relations between political and administrative actors in executive government. Public administration reform in New Zealand since the mid 1980s – and in particular machinery of government design – was quite explicitly informed by rational choice accounts, and normative Public Choice in particular. This article reflects on the role of ministerial advisers in the policy‐making process and, on the basis of assessments by a variety of political and policy actors, examines the extent to which the institutional and relational aspects of executive government are indeed consistent with rational choice accounts of the ‘politics of policy‐making’. The reader is offered a new perspective through which to view the advent, and the contribution of ministerial advisers to policy‐making in executive government.     

Network Governance and Public Participation in Policy‐Making: Federal Community Cabinets in Australia

The Australian Labor Party's (ALP) 2007 Policy Platform asserted ‘Labor will pursue new and innovative measures designed to foster greater participation and engagement of the Australian population in the political process’ ( Manwaring 2010 ). As such they seemed to have a clear commitment to a more participatory form of democracy. This commitment appeared to be reflected in two initiatives they introduced in power: the 2020 Summit (on this see Fawcett, Manwaring and Marsh 2011 ) and federal community cabinets. More broadly it could be argued that Labor were following a trend identified internationally as a move from government to governance, more specifically to ‘network governance’ (Rhodes 1997) in which governments encouraged greater participation in policy‐making, recognising that governments could at best steer, not row. Indeed, as Marinetto contends ( 2003 : 593), this idea has taken on a ‘semblance of orthodoxy’ in discussions of public policy.     

Political Competition,Agenda Power,and Incentives to Innovate: An Empirical Examination of Vested‐Interest Theory

Technological innovations are by no means Pareto‐improving. I build on the argument that incumbent innovators can use political means to block rival innovations by emphasizing that the competitiveness of political system and some political institutions may diminish their ability to do so. I specify an institutional mechanism of agenda power, which provides newcomers with an improved ability to enter the game. The number of agenda power holders varies significantly among political systems, electoral systems, and administrative structures. With a sample of about 100 countries and across 20 years I show that politically competitive regimes, majoritarian electoral rules, and federal structures supply more holders of agenda power in comparison to their counterparts and, other things being equal, produce more innovations.     

National Policy‐Making in Indigenous Affairs: Blueprint for an Indigenous Review Council

This article examines the dearth of any representative Indigenous role in national Indigenous affairs policy‐making and suggests a remedy. After making the case for a specific Indigenous place in national policy‐making, the article considers the reasons for the failure of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC), the body that filled this brief for a decade and a half. The article then considers three possible ways of ensuring an Indigenous role in the policy‐making process: a replacement for ATSIC with specific policy powers; set seats for Indigenous representatives in federal parliament; and the creation of a new elected body whose role would be to review Indigenous affairs legislation. The article concludes that the latter proposal in particular is worth trialling as it would ensure a significant Indigenous voice in national policy‐making while learning from the mistakes that led to ATSIC's demise.     

Die Agenda 2010 und die soziale Gerechtigkeit

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

Forgotten Outcomes for Rural Areas in Central Policy‐Making: The Case of Blue Gums in Australia

The expansion of private forestry and the partnership between government and private sector timber growers and processors highlights the issues associated with a functionally based rather than a place based approaches to changing patterns of land use in rural areas. Rural development through blue gum forestry was promoted as a means of revitalising rural communities, providing both economic and social gains to regional areas. The purpose of this study is to examine the economic consequences of policies designed to promote plantation forestry at a local level. It concludes that while plantation forestry may bring benefits to the national economy, these benefits may not be apparent at a local level especially if the industry operates in competition with a viable alternative.     

Implementing Joined‐Up Government: Lessons from the Australian Social Inclusion Agenda

‘Joined‐up government’ (JUG) approaches have emerged in many industrialized countries as a means to tackle persistent ‘wicked’ public and social policy problems (Pollit 2003 ). Despite this, limited evidence exists concerning their implementation or effectiveness. ‘JUG’ was popularized by the Blair Government (UK) with its focus on addressing social exclusion. Following in these footsteps, in 2007 the Australian Government launched the Social Inclusion Agenda: a joined‐up approach to improving the wellbeing of all Australians and addressing disadvantage. This paper focuses on findings from a study that examined the SIA as a natural experiment in JUG. Drawing on the implementation experiences of federal policy makers, our findings lend weight to emerging research into JUG that suggests that compatibility and consistency between goals, instruments, and processes is critical to success. We argue that closer attention needs to be given to developing ‘supportive architecture’ around joined‐up initiatives to facilitate implementation.