Competing Theories of the Policy Process

1. Competing Theories of the Policy Process A theory is a set of logically related set of statements, including some law like generalizations, that are empirically testable.

2. How do we know if a theory or model is useful or helpful? Order and simplify reality Models help identify what is significant. Models should be congruent with reality. Models should provide meaningful communication. Models should suggest explanations. Models should direct inquiry and research.

3. Where should we look when studying policy? Theories help us answer this question Day to day decisionmaking Statutory language Policy outcomes/effects Individuals Institutions Groups Elite

4. Different Theories (neo)Institutional Rationalism Incrementalism Punctuated Equilibrium Group/Pluralism Elite Rational Choice/Public Choice Game theory Systems theory Stages Approach

5. Stages of the Policy Process The policy formulation process: The leadership selection process: The Interest Group Process: Opinion Making process: Policy Legitimation process: Policy Implementation: Policy Evaluation Process:

7. Policy Formulation • Who are the major actors? • Who are generating the policy ideas? • Players • Foundations • Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation • Think Tanks • Brookings Institute; American Enterprise Institute • Council on Foreign Relations; Trilateral Commission • Council on Economic Development; Business Roundtable

8. How do these organizations influence the policy process? • By defining social problems • Defining the set of possible solutions • In other words, setting the policy agenda

9. Sabatier • Point of his article? • Inadequacy of the Stages Approach • Policy scholars have uncovered some things that political scientists tend to neglect • Discusses 4 useful theories

10. The importance of policy subsystems involving actors from numerous public and private institutions and from multiple levels of government. b) The importance of substantive policy information: c) The critical role of policy elites vis-a-vis the general public. d) The desirability of longitudinal studies of a decade or more e) Differences in political behavior across policy types

11. Useful Theories 1. The open-systems framework of Richard Hofferbert. 2. An approach involving rational actors within institutions developed by Elinor Ostrom and her colleagues. 3. John Kingdon's "policy streams" framework 4. The "advocacy coalition" frame- work recently developed by Sabatier.

13. Institutional Analysis • Developed by Elinor Ostrom and her colleagues at Indiana University • An elaboration of rational choice/public choice theory • How individual attributes and institutional rules and socioeconomic setting can affect behavior • Several levels of institutional analysis

16. Policy Streams • Problems Stream: events, information, etc. • Policy Stream: researchers, policy entrepreneurs; policy options/alternatives • Politics Stream: elections, leadership • Window of opportunities when these three streams meet

17. Advocacy Coalition Approach • focuses on the interaction of advocacy coalitions (each consisting of actors from a variety of institutions who share a set of policy beliefs). Policy change is a product of the competition and interaction between these coalitions.

18. address the role played by technical information (the role of the media, think tanks, etc.) • the most useful unit of analysis is the policy subsystem rather than any particular political institution or organization. • conception of coalitions needs to break the traditional ideas of iron triangles and include 1) journalists, researchers and policy analysts and 2) actors at all levels of government (local, state, international).

19. OUTSIDE THE POLICY SUBSYSTEM  • 1. Relative Stable Parameters – constitution, sociocultural values, natural resources • 2. External (system) Events – socioeconomic changes, realigning elections, policy decisions from other subsystems. These influence the constraints and resources of subsystem actors

20. INSIDE THE POLICY SUBSYSTEM The belief system made up of three components: • 1. deep core – basic normative beliefs such as the relative valuation of individual freedom versus social equality. • 2. policy core – basic normative commitments and causal perception across an entire domain or subsystem (e.g., relative importance of economic development versus environmental protection). • 3. secondary aspects – a set of narrower beliefs regarding specific attributes of a policy

21. Hypotheses: • lineup of allies and opponents tends to be stable • actors within a coalition will have substantial consensus on issue pertaining to the policy core • Policy remains stable as long as the coalition structure remains the same • Policy core attributes of a governmental program are unlikely to change in the absence of significant external changes. • Policy learning across coalitions will more likely occur if the coalition has the technical resources to engage in an informed debate and if the debate is not simply about deep core beliefs • Learning is more likely if there is a professional forum with both sides participating