The policy sciences as science

The preceding evaluation of the policy sciences by Schneider, Stevens, and Tornatzky is based on a rather narrow conception of science that emphasizes quantitative and rigorous methods. It overlooks the limitations of such methods, as revealed by the results of applications, and certain adjustments to these limitations. The latter include the adoption of more modest but realizable aspirations and the synthesis of diverse methods-qualitative as well as quantitative, exploratory as well as confirmatory. It also overlooks differences and trends in epistemological preconceptions that underlie the conduct of research and the interpretation of research results. This article reviews the relevant literature in the hope that it might eventually contribute to more enlightened evaluations of the emerging discipline.     

Policy analysis,policy practice and political science

Bridgman and Davis have responded to criticism of their widely‐used model of the policy process as a cycle, ‘a series of interlocking steps’ by describing it as ‘pragmatic’, a ‘toolkit’, ‘not a theory’. This article asks what makes for ‘practical knowledge’ of the policy process. It identifies the theoretical basis for the ‘policy cycle’ model, and asks how this model relates to research on policy and to policy practitioners' own knowledge. It argues that we need to recognise the way that underlying theory about policy forms part of policy practice, and to give more attention to the relationship between research, experiential knowledge, and formal maps like the ‘policy cycle’.     

Economic theory and government technology policy

Recent federal proposals and program experiments aimed at improving the innovative performance of American industry have been based on an inappropriate analytic framework. The neoclassical microeconomic analysis upon which these proposals are based emphasizes the undersupply of R & D. However, a more crucial problem in this context is the utilization of complex research results by firms and industries with low levels of in-house research expertise. This problem is a central concern of an alternative approach to the analysis of innovation, termed the information processing framework. This analytic approach, which receives empirical support from an examination of previous cooperative research programs in the United States and Great Britain and an analysis of independent consulting firms' operations, suggests that cooperative or extramural research does not function effectively as a substitute for in-house research. Public policies to encourage innovation should be attentive to the distribution, as well as the supply, of R & D.     

现代政策科学的知识渊源

本文主要考察现代政策科学产生的知识渊源.西方文明、美国的实用主义和工具主义、应用性社会科学对政策科学发展都有着巨大的影响.拉斯维尔搭起政策科学的基本框架.政策科学是知识应用于社会的产物.     

Inter-disciplinary contradictions and the influence of science on policy

Policy conclusions of two or more disciplines often appear to contradict one another, and so cancel out one another's influence on policy. This article investigates the degree to which the contradiction is only apparent, in the sense that the disciplines answer different questions. In many instances the disciplines are complementary; some measure of reconciliation can be obtained by defining more sharply the assumptions and data that lie behind their questions, and hence the theoretical domains over which their answers are valid. By showing that those domains are non-overlapping, disputes can often be understood and opposing views reconciled.For some scholars empathy with the aims and methods of another discipline is possible; for others the advance of their own discipline is too important an objective to allow limiting its applicability. By uncompromising arguments, however, they may harm their own cause. For when different disciplines publicly press for opposite policies they weaken the credibility and influence of science in all fields, including their own.     

莱布尼茨的科学、技术中的哲学思想

莱布尼茨在哲学、科学、技术等很多方面都取得了诸多的成就。本文力图从他的科学、技术方面的成绩入手,试析一下其中所蕴含的他的独特的思想及其伟大的目的。     

The policy science movement (an outsider's view)

An assessment is made of the expanding policy sciences movement—the proliferation of policy science centers, the existence of a specialized journal, and the large number of programmatic books being published. This paper focuses on the role that policy scientists assign to themselves in the whole decision process, i.e., their strategy. Four characteristics of the policy scientist's self-image are discussed: his work should include reassessment of a problem's goals; he represents a new type of professional; he cannot be expected to contribute to the general knowledge of specific academic disciplines; he is concerned with making recommendations that are acceptable to his sponsor. The research style of the policy scientist is examined, and four basic characteristics of this style are identified: a tendency to bypass microsociological data; an interest in futurism; an emphasis on a so-called systems approach; and an identification with interdisciplinarity.     

American state governments as models for national science policy

In the 1980s state governments adopted an entrepreneurial stance and established an extensive array of programs targeted at encouraging university industry research collaboration, the commercial development of new technologies, the start-up of new firms, and the technological modernization of existing firms. Although these state programs are frequently presented as laboratories of democracy, their relevance to national science and technology policy is open to question. State R&D strategies reflect contrasting theories about the linkages among academic research, technological innovation, economic growth, and administrative practices. Evaluations of state technology programs have essentially remained fixed at dead center, as unproven undertakings. State experiences have not been couched in analytical frameworks conducive to assessments of national science and technology policies.     

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.     

Experimentation at the interface of science and policy: a multi-case analysis of how policy experiments influence political decision-makers

For decades now, scholars have grappled with questions about how knowledge producers can enhance the influence of their knowledge on users and improve policy making. However, little attention has been paid to how policy experiments, a flexible and ex ante method of policy appraisal, obtain influence over political decision-making. To address this gap, an exploratory framework has been developed that facilitates systematic analysis of multiple experiments, allowing hypotheses to be tested regarding how an experiment’s institutional design can influence the views of political decision-makers. Cash’s categories of effectiveness are used to describe an experiment’s conceptual influence; being how credible, salient, and legitimate decision-makers perceive an experiment to be. The hypotheses are tested using 14 experiment cases found relevant to climate adaptation in the Netherlands, with complete survey responses from over 70 respondents. The results show that although, in general, the experiments had medium to high influence on decision-makers, institutional design does have a noticeable impact. Organisers should make choices carefully when designing an experiment, particularly in order to maintain relevance during an experiment’s implementation and to build community acceptance. Suggestions for future research include a comparison of experiment effects with the effects of non-experimental forms of appraisal, such as piloting or ex ante impact assessment.     

China's energy policy: new technology and civil nuclear expansion

Having generated most of its electricity from coal-fired plants, China is aggressively seeking to reduce air pollution and carbon dioxide emissions and move towards energy self-sufficiency. It may in fact be on a trajectory to become a major player in a global nuclear-power market traditionally dominated by the West.     

The policy science of democracy: The issues of methodology and citizen participation

There are continuing debates on methodological issues of policy science. On the one hand, the unprecedented advancement in research methods and technology has made it possible to formulate more precise, empirically driven models of scientific inquiries and thus has added credibility on positivist approach of policy science. On the other hand, social systems and subjective values have increasingly been emphasized in policy analyses and have served as impetus to postpositivist approach of policy science. In this essay, I discuss the role of democratization and citizen participation in policy science. While citizen participation is important to ensure democratization of the process of policymaking and to improve the quality of information provided to make appropriate policy decisions, how such citizen participation can be acquired has become another pressing issue. I explore community participation in light of assessing its effectiveness in policymaking and its coherence with the role of policy experts.