From Instrument to Policy: Observing the Meaning Process to Make a Decision (original) (raw)
Related papers
In this article, we intend to take a few steps to mending the disconnect between the academic study of policy processes and the many practices of professional and not-so-professional policy work. We argue, first, that the " toolkit " of academically warranted approaches to the policy process used in the representative mode may be ordered in a family tree with three major branches: policy as reasoned authoritative choice, policy as association in policy networks, and policy as problematization and joint meaning making. But, and this is our second argument, such approaches are not just representations to reflect and understand " reality ". They are also mental maps and discursive vehicles for shaping and sometimes changing policy practices. In other words, they also serve performative functions. The purpose of this article is to contribute to policy theorists' and policy workers' awareness of these often tacit and " underground " selective affinities between the representative and performative roles of policy process theorizing.
Policy Studies Journal, 2009
Understanding the influence of policy knowledge (analysis, evaluation) on policy change represents a long-standing quest in the policy sciences. Despite attempts of Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) scholars, the first to embark systematically on this quest, utilization and policy process literatures still run parallel. Through a critique of ACF and utilization studies, we argue that the inability of policy theory to include how and which information decision makers use is the foundational issue hindering efforts to link process and substance in policy theory. Situating utilization studies in the policy design approach offers an improvement in conceptualizing relationships between policy knowledge, process, and change.
Policy analysis, policy practice and political science
Australian Journal of Public Administration, 2005
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'.
The Political Instrumentalisation of Policy Analysis
In the early stage, Lasswellian policy analysis was overtly value-oriented, stressing that the goal of policy analysis and policy analysts should be to improve the state of human wellbeing, democracy, the rule of law, human rights, the respect for human dignity and individual choice. However, policy analysis has since evolved in many directions. One of them is the instrumentalisation of policy analysis in its broader transnational social and political contexts. This paper will focus on the role of policy analysis in the latest wave of democratisation and the introduction of capitalist economics to post-communist countries, especially those involved in the European integration process.
The Study of Policy Development
Journal of Policy History, 2005
What do we mean by the term “policy history”? In conventional usage, “history” refers to one of two kinds of investigation: the study of something that happened at some point in the past, or the study of how something came to be what it is. It is this second usage—the idea of policy history as an unfolding story of policy development—that I want to examine in this essay. Understanding the sources of policy often requires that we pay attention to processes that play out over considerable periods of time.