Policy Analysis: courses
Policy Analysis les 1: 12/02
SESSION 1
this course is about analysis of public policies
public policy
Governments make Public Policy (not the same as politics, polity)
Studying public policy:
- why are certain decision taken at certain times and not others? How do policy decisions
add up into policy regimes or mixes? Are those decisions in contrast incompatible or
contradictory? Do decisions result in recognizable patterns, or can we merely discern
(quasi)random accumulations of multiple decisions in the past? What actors are involved
in public policies, what do these policy actors do, why and what difference do they make?
examples? Any area in society is affected by public policies, they’re anywhere,
touch upon every aspect of our daily life
studying this means we ask particular questions, with a theoretical background,
which allows us to develop concepts and theories about pp
Public policy Analysis means two things:
Study of public policies! Look at policies and analyse them.
analysis of policy: theoretical study = academic discipline + descriptive,
theoretical, policy sciences
analysis for policy: applied practice, to make better policies, in support of
policy making (a profession, what people do, they conduct this analysis
and contribute to policy making) + applied, and prescriptive approach,
suggestions, advice on what to do, policy analysis
policy studies: relatively new academic discipline, around the 50’s and 60’s, not
really a history going way back
developed after world war 2, role of governments in society became more
extensive then, with this intensified role: academics paid more attention to what
the government was doing
had a more active role in shaping societies, economic and social plans after world
war 2
Lasswell and Lerner
Daniel Lerner & Harold Lasswell: The Policy Sciences (1951)The "policy sciences" are
defined as "the disciplines concerned with explaining the policy making and policy
executing process, and with locating data and providing interpretations which are
relevant to the policy problems of a given period"
“The term "policy“ is used "to designate the most important choices made either
inorganized or private life"
Lasswell: founder of academic discipline, he observed that something was going
on in the government, some people were doing something different than what
people were doing in the past, gathering collective information, analytical
activities, writing certain programs, drawing on different disciplines, different
methods to make policies
academics drew on scientific disciplines to explain what these people were doing
he described this academic discipline and what it should entail, multi-methods
(that already existed), multi-disciplinary AND problem-oriented: tailored toward
making better policies!, mapping of contexts, alternatives and effects
Policies have subdisciplines/specialities
1
,According to L and L: the term policy is used to designate the most important
choices made either in organised or private life – governments try to shape it to a
certain degree, policy refers to the actions that governments take
‘Policy’ is not easy to define (it’s a challenge!):
definitions of policy
different authors have different definitions, with each a different importance
1- Thomas Dye (1972)
Public policy is ‘anything a government chooses to do or not to do’
Emphasizes the central role of the government in policy making: the public
sphere/the government is a central actor/agent in policy making
Thé government doesn’t really exist
anything? a bit too broad, would include: paying wages for the hired in policy
making, that’s not it! + ignoring climate change and don’t take measures,
negative decisions: not to support them
and ‘chooses’ = consciously making decisions
so they have the authority to do so! Private companies can’t do this, make
legitimate decisions etc.
2- William Jenkins (1978)
Public policy as “a set of interrelated decisions taken by a political actor or group of actors
concerning the selection of goals and the means of achieving them within a specified
situation where those decisions should, in principle, be within the power of those actors to
achieve.”
Public policy as a set of interrelated decisions taken by a political actor or group
of actors concerning the selection of goals and the means of achieving them
within a specified situation where those decisions should, in principle, be within
the power of those actors to achieve
governments are agents, but he defines them as political with diversity within
this group and beyond (does not exclude involvement of other actors in policy
making like businesses)
similar to Dye: he refers to a problem-oriented process: initiated to achieve a
particular aim
for Dye it’s implicit, for Jenkins it’s explicit
decisions should be within the power of those actors to achieve: decisions on
policy are made in a context whether they’re feasible: so some options are more
feasible e.g. financial constraints
Dye doesn’t mention this: for him any option is equally feasible, but doesn’t
really say it - Jenkins is very specific
(nature of) restraints: financial, legal, incomplete information etc. - normative
restraints: e.g. they’re prejudiced => governments can’t do whatever they want,
need to apply to certain rules…
distinction between positivist and post-positivist approaches: information can be
analysed and reconstructed VS. importance of ideas, arguments, ideologies
= these approaches are visible in the next definition
3- James Anderson (1975):
“A purposive course of action followed by an actor or set of actors in dealing with
aproblem or matter of concern for the population.”
problem and matter of concern: can be observed => creation of narratives is
most important vs. positivist: side element, objective reality can be know
(but for post-positivist these things are conceived as a problem, not really a
problem)
not to suffice to look at laws etc. but also talk to policy makers!
2
,equally important to talk to policy makers, the context in which policies are
made, and find out arguments, to try to explain what has been going on
Actors and Institutions (divers)
organisation of the state
private actors within society
and international actors
!and depending on the situation/issue, the
actor composition will be different! = not
monolithic group, is a diverse set of
institutions and actors
e.g. agricultural policies => supranational ((and not the public actors:
commission and parliament) but the policy actors), and the boerenbond: defends
a particular group of farmers
individual citizens are also part in this group
e.g. education: public organisations above the schools in general: ministry of
education and minister of education
e.g. mobility/public transportation: all sort of unions representing individual
public transportation users + governmental/public level (in some countries it’s
totally privatized)
Actors
(elected politicians, administrative officials, political parties, and their study
centers, interest groups, ngo’s, research organisation, academic institutes, think
tanks, mass media, (voters/citizens/individuals))
Not all of them have the power to make decisions, not equally powerful, varied in
numbers but also in their role in policy making
policies: individual farmer has a role to play in agricultural policies, but probably
only minimal in comparison to others
power to make policy VS role as policy adviser/analyst/worker
societal actors:
academics are also advisers
decision makers can take their own decisions and don’t need to follow it
not all people giving advice have an interest
the policy cycle model
policy formulation -> decision making -> policy implementation -> monitoring
and evaluation -> agenda setting -> etc.
sequence of stages that follow on another, in a comprehensive set of steps that
need to be taken =>
agenda: recognized as a problem (objectively or perceived, as something that
deserves attention)
formulation: formulation of different alternatives, solutions to the problem,
frameworks that limit our consideration like financial/legal
constraints/agreements/preferences etc.
3
, then one solution is chosen in decision making stages
this solution is implemented, this is put into practice (other stages are
theoretical)
does it work, is the problem solved = evaluation is made, if needed problem is
back on the agenda and the cycle continues
= reduction of what happens in real life
advantages:
helps to reduce complexity
useful for looking at particular actors and institutions and considerations
that are present in each stage! (different in every stage, each stage has
become its own subdiscipline with their concepts etc.) = mapping and
clarifying the roles of actors, institutions, ideas/interests
disadvantages:
policy is non-systematic, non-linear
idiosyncratic problem solving: each policy made in a very specific context
= context related
stages compressed or skipped
realities reduced to simple scheme, this scheme is not nearly sufficient to
capture this complexity, it’s just an analytical framework
often: ideas remain ideas and are never implemented, e.g. already
deciding before considering other alternatives etc.
causes and effects are unclear: the stages imply sequence and imply that
they’re following on one another, causation is not part
of this model
Stages of the policy cycle (don’t need to know them, but the
now model comes from other models)
Lasswell (1965)
Intelligence, Promotion, Prescription, Invocation…
Brewer (1983)
Invention/Initiation, Estimation, Adoption…
Studying the public policy process
Combines three elements, model is about studying reality, trying to capture
policy as an applied problem solving exercise: activities that governments take,
captures by academics through this framework AND different Key actors are
present
different composition of actors
the number of actors in first and last stages of the cycle are very broad
4
Policy Analysis les 1: 12/02
SESSION 1
this course is about analysis of public policies
public policy
Governments make Public Policy (not the same as politics, polity)
Studying public policy:
- why are certain decision taken at certain times and not others? How do policy decisions
add up into policy regimes or mixes? Are those decisions in contrast incompatible or
contradictory? Do decisions result in recognizable patterns, or can we merely discern
(quasi)random accumulations of multiple decisions in the past? What actors are involved
in public policies, what do these policy actors do, why and what difference do they make?
examples? Any area in society is affected by public policies, they’re anywhere,
touch upon every aspect of our daily life
studying this means we ask particular questions, with a theoretical background,
which allows us to develop concepts and theories about pp
Public policy Analysis means two things:
Study of public policies! Look at policies and analyse them.
analysis of policy: theoretical study = academic discipline + descriptive,
theoretical, policy sciences
analysis for policy: applied practice, to make better policies, in support of
policy making (a profession, what people do, they conduct this analysis
and contribute to policy making) + applied, and prescriptive approach,
suggestions, advice on what to do, policy analysis
policy studies: relatively new academic discipline, around the 50’s and 60’s, not
really a history going way back
developed after world war 2, role of governments in society became more
extensive then, with this intensified role: academics paid more attention to what
the government was doing
had a more active role in shaping societies, economic and social plans after world
war 2
Lasswell and Lerner
Daniel Lerner & Harold Lasswell: The Policy Sciences (1951)The "policy sciences" are
defined as "the disciplines concerned with explaining the policy making and policy
executing process, and with locating data and providing interpretations which are
relevant to the policy problems of a given period"
“The term "policy“ is used "to designate the most important choices made either
inorganized or private life"
Lasswell: founder of academic discipline, he observed that something was going
on in the government, some people were doing something different than what
people were doing in the past, gathering collective information, analytical
activities, writing certain programs, drawing on different disciplines, different
methods to make policies
academics drew on scientific disciplines to explain what these people were doing
he described this academic discipline and what it should entail, multi-methods
(that already existed), multi-disciplinary AND problem-oriented: tailored toward
making better policies!, mapping of contexts, alternatives and effects
Policies have subdisciplines/specialities
1
,According to L and L: the term policy is used to designate the most important
choices made either in organised or private life – governments try to shape it to a
certain degree, policy refers to the actions that governments take
‘Policy’ is not easy to define (it’s a challenge!):
definitions of policy
different authors have different definitions, with each a different importance
1- Thomas Dye (1972)
Public policy is ‘anything a government chooses to do or not to do’
Emphasizes the central role of the government in policy making: the public
sphere/the government is a central actor/agent in policy making
Thé government doesn’t really exist
anything? a bit too broad, would include: paying wages for the hired in policy
making, that’s not it! + ignoring climate change and don’t take measures,
negative decisions: not to support them
and ‘chooses’ = consciously making decisions
so they have the authority to do so! Private companies can’t do this, make
legitimate decisions etc.
2- William Jenkins (1978)
Public policy as “a set of interrelated decisions taken by a political actor or group of actors
concerning the selection of goals and the means of achieving them within a specified
situation where those decisions should, in principle, be within the power of those actors to
achieve.”
Public policy as a set of interrelated decisions taken by a political actor or group
of actors concerning the selection of goals and the means of achieving them
within a specified situation where those decisions should, in principle, be within
the power of those actors to achieve
governments are agents, but he defines them as political with diversity within
this group and beyond (does not exclude involvement of other actors in policy
making like businesses)
similar to Dye: he refers to a problem-oriented process: initiated to achieve a
particular aim
for Dye it’s implicit, for Jenkins it’s explicit
decisions should be within the power of those actors to achieve: decisions on
policy are made in a context whether they’re feasible: so some options are more
feasible e.g. financial constraints
Dye doesn’t mention this: for him any option is equally feasible, but doesn’t
really say it - Jenkins is very specific
(nature of) restraints: financial, legal, incomplete information etc. - normative
restraints: e.g. they’re prejudiced => governments can’t do whatever they want,
need to apply to certain rules…
distinction between positivist and post-positivist approaches: information can be
analysed and reconstructed VS. importance of ideas, arguments, ideologies
= these approaches are visible in the next definition
3- James Anderson (1975):
“A purposive course of action followed by an actor or set of actors in dealing with
aproblem or matter of concern for the population.”
problem and matter of concern: can be observed => creation of narratives is
most important vs. positivist: side element, objective reality can be know
(but for post-positivist these things are conceived as a problem, not really a
problem)
not to suffice to look at laws etc. but also talk to policy makers!
2
,equally important to talk to policy makers, the context in which policies are
made, and find out arguments, to try to explain what has been going on
Actors and Institutions (divers)
organisation of the state
private actors within society
and international actors
!and depending on the situation/issue, the
actor composition will be different! = not
monolithic group, is a diverse set of
institutions and actors
e.g. agricultural policies => supranational ((and not the public actors:
commission and parliament) but the policy actors), and the boerenbond: defends
a particular group of farmers
individual citizens are also part in this group
e.g. education: public organisations above the schools in general: ministry of
education and minister of education
e.g. mobility/public transportation: all sort of unions representing individual
public transportation users + governmental/public level (in some countries it’s
totally privatized)
Actors
(elected politicians, administrative officials, political parties, and their study
centers, interest groups, ngo’s, research organisation, academic institutes, think
tanks, mass media, (voters/citizens/individuals))
Not all of them have the power to make decisions, not equally powerful, varied in
numbers but also in their role in policy making
policies: individual farmer has a role to play in agricultural policies, but probably
only minimal in comparison to others
power to make policy VS role as policy adviser/analyst/worker
societal actors:
academics are also advisers
decision makers can take their own decisions and don’t need to follow it
not all people giving advice have an interest
the policy cycle model
policy formulation -> decision making -> policy implementation -> monitoring
and evaluation -> agenda setting -> etc.
sequence of stages that follow on another, in a comprehensive set of steps that
need to be taken =>
agenda: recognized as a problem (objectively or perceived, as something that
deserves attention)
formulation: formulation of different alternatives, solutions to the problem,
frameworks that limit our consideration like financial/legal
constraints/agreements/preferences etc.
3
, then one solution is chosen in decision making stages
this solution is implemented, this is put into practice (other stages are
theoretical)
does it work, is the problem solved = evaluation is made, if needed problem is
back on the agenda and the cycle continues
= reduction of what happens in real life
advantages:
helps to reduce complexity
useful for looking at particular actors and institutions and considerations
that are present in each stage! (different in every stage, each stage has
become its own subdiscipline with their concepts etc.) = mapping and
clarifying the roles of actors, institutions, ideas/interests
disadvantages:
policy is non-systematic, non-linear
idiosyncratic problem solving: each policy made in a very specific context
= context related
stages compressed or skipped
realities reduced to simple scheme, this scheme is not nearly sufficient to
capture this complexity, it’s just an analytical framework
often: ideas remain ideas and are never implemented, e.g. already
deciding before considering other alternatives etc.
causes and effects are unclear: the stages imply sequence and imply that
they’re following on one another, causation is not part
of this model
Stages of the policy cycle (don’t need to know them, but the
now model comes from other models)
Lasswell (1965)
Intelligence, Promotion, Prescription, Invocation…
Brewer (1983)
Invention/Initiation, Estimation, Adoption…
Studying the public policy process
Combines three elements, model is about studying reality, trying to capture
policy as an applied problem solving exercise: activities that governments take,
captures by academics through this framework AND different Key actors are
present
different composition of actors
the number of actors in first and last stages of the cycle are very broad
4
