Diffusion milieus as a focus of research on innovation in the public sector

Public policies to increase the efficiency of state and local governments through fostering the use of new technologies are based, implicitly at least, on theories of diffusion. Existing theories of diffusion have been found to be deficient. This paper presents an approach to the diffusion of technological innovations in state and local governments organized around the concept of diffusion milieus.A diffusion milieu contains those elements external to the organization which bring pressure to bear on the organization to alter its existing practices, which define the range of feasible alternatives to these practices, and which condition the information flow on the performance characteristics of the proposed innovation(s). These milieu components are then filtered through the internal decision-making process(es) of the organization to produce a decision to accept or reject the innovation(s). More specifically, the milieu contains (1) the specific nature of the demands upon the agency to change behavior (performance gaps), (2) the supply of alternatives to existing practices (technological change), (3) agency-executive relationships, (4) the activities of suppliers in marketing innovations, (5) the resources available to the agency to acquire new techniques, (6) the characteristics of the knowledge infrastructure which affect the search behavior and the degree of uncertainty associated with adopting new techniques, (7) the impact of intergovernmental relationships, and (8) citizen demands. The components of the diffusion milieu are then (9) related to a set of agency decision-rules concerning the adoption of new techniques.The rate of diffusion in each field will depend upon themagnitude of the components and on thelinkages between them.Functional fields differ in both respects.Research for this paper was supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation, Office of R & D Assessment. We have benefited from the helpful comments of Professor Marvin Rozen, an anonymous referee and the research assistance of Ms. Lee Ann Kozak. The views expressed in this paper are the sole responsibility of the authors. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 1975 American Political Science Association meetings.     

Give Us Your Tired, Your Poor, ... But Make Sure They Have a Green Card: The Effects of Documented and Undocumented Migrant Context on Anglo Opinion Toward Immigration

Although few controversies in our political environment are as contentious as the current debate over immigration policy, the research on public opinion toward immigration is quite limited. In particular, we know relatively little about the contextual determinants of opinions on immigration issues. We address this issue by investigating the impact of migrant context on Anglo opinions toward immigration. We find that Anglo support for increased immigration is directly related to the size of the documented migrant population. Conversely, as the relative size of the undocumented migrant population increases, Anglo support for increased immigration decreases. We conclude with a discussion of the relevance of our findings for the study of immigration opinion, in particular, and the study of intergroup relations more generally.     

The influence of business associations on legislation: The case of Kenya

Interest groups seek to influence public policy. Business associations specifically seek to influence policy related to the environment in which their members operate, with the intention of making it easier for the members, and the wider private sector, to “do business.” Scholars question whether interest groups are influential and, if so, the degree to which their activity influences public policy. Even if they do influence public policy at the margins, it is questionable how effective they are in influencing legislation. As a result, there is little exploration of the factors that may determine whether business membership organizations (BMOs) are likely to be successful. This paper explores the efforts of two BMOs in Kenya to influence legislation: In one case, the BMO persuaded the government to introduce legislation to regulate an activity that had previously not been subject to legislation; in the other, a BMO sought to persuade the government to amend its own proposals to replace existing legislation with new legislation. In both cases, we find evidence that the BMO was successful, though one BMO was significantly more successful than the other. We review the factors perceived by the BMOs to have led to their success. Neither was in a position to rely on economic or other power to strong‐arm the government. Both followed a predominantly insider strategy though with occasional media back‐up. Both were successful on the more “technical” issues. Key factors include the use of a champion, engaging across government, supplying information, and providing evidence and good argumentation.