The Greater Yellowstone policy debate: What is the policy problem?

Yellowstone National Park and the surrounding mountainous region comprise the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE), a 19 million acre area that is one of the few relatively intact ecosystems in the lower 48 states. Conservationists believe that continuation of present land management practices in the region will disrupt the ecological integrity of the GYE. Many authors have identified and described these threats, but as yet there has been no sustained effort to make sense of these threats in the context of the ongoing dynamic policy debate. We develop the foundation for such understanding by examining the implicit problem definitions that have emerged from this debate. They fall into three general categories: 1) a scientific definition, 2) an economic definition, and 3) a bureaucratic definition. This process produces an exploratory definition of the policy problem, which suggests a strategy for better understanding and policy design. We propose several intervention points at which substantive, one-the-ground improvements in the management of the GYE are possible.     

Explaining the Role of Restrictive Rules in the Postreform House

Abstract Four competing explanations have emerged regarding restrictive rules in Congress. Informational theory claims that rules reduce information costs and facilitate committee specialization. The distributional perspective suggests that rules enforce legislative bargains and help members achieve gains‐from‐trade. Another claim is that rules increase the Rules Committee's independent influence over policy. Lastly, partisan theory asserts that rules are used to increase the majority party's influence over policy. Abstract This analysis tests these claims during the 97th, 98th, 104th, and 105th Congresses. The findings demonstrate that theoretical constructs developed in earlier analyses of special rules are not robust over time and across legislative contexts. The results refute majoritarian assertions that rules are used as informational devices. Similarly, little evidence supports the claim that Rules Committee preferences independently affect rule assignment. Instead, a partisan principal‐agent framework emerges as the most useful construct to explain procedural choice in the postreform House.     

Searching for civil society: changing patterns of governance in Britain

To understand governance, we ask who is telling the story from within which tradition. We argue there is no essentialist notion of governance but at least four conceptions each rooted in a distinctive tradition. The first section of the paper describes the relevant traditions: Tory, Liberal, Whig and Socialist. The second section describes the different notions of governance associated with each tradition; intermediate institutions, marketizing public services, reinventing the constitution and trust and negotiation. We explain these distinct conceptions of governance as responses to the dilemmas of inflation and state overload. In the conclusion, we summarize how and why traditions change, concluding, there is no such thing as governance, but only the differing constructions of the several traditions.     

Speaking truth to academics: The wisdom of the practitioners

Abstract: Academic scholars, both as researchers and teachers, need the ideas and insights of reflective practitioners on the real world of the public service. Public servants can “speak truth to academics” in the broad sense of providing information, analysis and counsel concerning the public service and candid commentary on scholarly writings. Conceptualizing the public servant as a theorist involved in research through reflection‐on‐action highlights the importance of the scholarly practitioner as a source of learning. This article profiles several public servants whose contributions to the scholarly literature on public administration have had substantial influence in the academic community. Among the factors limiting such contributions are time constraints, the scarcity of publication outlets and lack of senior‐level support. Incentives to write for publication include personal interest and motivation and invitations to contribute to a conference, book or article or to collaborate with someone else. Practitioner contributions to scholarly writing can be fostered by such means as co‐authorship with academics, communities of practice and senior‐level encouragement. Academic scholars can help foster the systematic accumulation of knowledge in the public service and its transfer beyond government. Sommaire : Les universitaires, qu'ils soient chercheurs ou enseignants, ont besoin des idées et des perspectives de praticiens qui réfléchissent sur le monde concret de la fonction publique. Les fonctionnaires peuvent « révéler la vérité aux universitaires » au sens large du terme en fournissant des informations, des analyses et des conseils sur la fonction publique et des commentaires francs sur les publications savantes. Le fait de concevoir le fonctionnaire comme un théoricien engagé dans la recherche grâce à la réflexion sur l'action souligne l'importance du praticien universitaire comme source d'apprentissage. Cet article dresse le profil de plusieurs fonctionnaires dont les contributions aux publications érudites sur l'administration publique ont eu une influence considérable dans le milieu universitaire. Parmi les facteurs qui restreignent de telles contributions, on note les contraintes de temps, la rareté des débouchés pour les publications, et le manque de soutien de la part de la haute direction. Les motivations qui encouragent la rédaction d'articles en vue de publication comprennent l'intérêt personnel, les invitations à contribuer à une conférence, à un livre ou à un article, ou bien la collaboration avec quelqu'un d'autre. Les praticiens peuvent être incités à contribuer à la recherche si on leur donne la possibilité d'être coauteurs avec des universitaires, de participer à des communautés de praticiens et de recevoir les encouragements de la haute direction. Les universitaires peuvent contribuer à l'accumulation systématique de connaissances dans la fonction publique en les faisant passer au‐delà du gouvernement.