Search results

This paper examines the gap between seeming progressive public demand for cleaner environment and lagging policy responses of the government. Public attitude toward environmental protection has been analyzed along with four different categories of environmental conflict and problems. There are diverse inconsistency and discrepancy between public attitudes and their behaviors. Key policy outputs are reviewed with special emphasis on environmental investment. Several factors that may explain the passive and conservative government move toward environmental protection have been identified. Those include, inactive public pressure on the government and the industry, ineffective mechanism for transforming people's demand into government decision, the ideology of developmentalism in the policymaking circle, weak local politics and administration, and oligopolitic industrial structure.

An important goal of environmental research is to inform policy and decision making. However, environmental experts working at the interface between science, policy and society face complex challenges, including how to identify sources of disagreement over environmental issues, communicate uncertainties and limitations of knowledge, and tackle controversial topics such as genetic modification and the use of biofuels. This book discusses the problems environmental experts encounter in the interaction between knowledge, society, and policy on both a practical and conceptual level. Key findings from social science research are illustrated with a range of case studies, from fisheries to fracking. The book offers guidance on how to tackle these challenges, equipping readers with tools to better understand the diversity of environmental knowledge and its role in complex environmental issues. Written by leading natural and social scientists, this text provides an essential resource for students, scientists and professionals working at the science-policy interface.

Environmental policy has been the focus of reform efforts for more than a generation. Now policymakers face a new and challenging set of issues: how to develop strategies for attacking new environmental problems, how to develop better strategies for solving the old ones, and how to do both in ways that are more efficient, less taxing, and engender less political opposition. On one level, environmental performance is the problem. On a broader level, the question is how reshaped intergovernmental partnerships will affect how America is governed. This book charts the politics of the next generation of environmental policy: how citizens will sort competing goals and responsibilities, how conflict and collaboration will shape the policy options, and how the nation-s political institutions will respond. These issues raise tough political problems that will define which options are viable and how different options will reshape politics. The contributors outline a path to fresh perspectives on the critical problems that must be addressed. Contributors: Christopher H. Foreman Jr. (University of Maryland, Brookings Institution), Donald F. Kettl (University of Wisconsin-Madison, Brookings Institution), Shelley H. Metzenbaum (University of Maryland), Barry G. Rabe (University of Michigan), Graham K. Wilson (University of Wisconsin-Madison) About the Editor Donald F. Kettl is professor of public affairs and political science at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, Robert M. La Follette School of Public Affairs. He is also a nonresident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. His recent books include The Global Public Management Revolution: A Report on the Transformation of Governance (Brookings, 2000) and The Transformation of Governance: Public Administration for the 21st Century

The aim of this paper is to indicate a diverse nature of the issues investigated in public policy sciences, particularly emphasizing the importance of the health policy in explaining social reality. By resolving public problems, numerous needs of society, inter alia, health needs can be met. One of the sciences which explains social problems and public policy has an interest in is the health policy. Both the health policy and public policy have two dimensions, i.e. applicable and theoretical. In terms of 'applicable' one, active participation of all social life entities affecting awareness of developing health resources is vital. And in the theoretical one, as a science, health policy addresses theoretical problems related to satisfying health needs of individual and collective populations. However, in the existing definitions of the health policy, there is no reference to "health needs". One can only assume that this category is used intuitively as it is hard to imagine numerous activities and decisions taken without identifying the needs, so that the health system could meet them. Reverting to health policy in its practical sense it is crucial to teach the public responsibility for their own behavior towards health. Health education deals with the skills needed to care about health in an accountable and independent way. This kind of education plays an important part in the implementation of public policy since its task is not only to transfer knowledge, but also to develop skills to make informed choices and decisions and thus to shape a democratic society with an independent way of thinking. The applicable role of the health policy is to improve the management of the health sector. In this respect, the organization of the treatment process, which is to provide comprehensive medical care for patients and therefore to improve the existing relations of a public nature, is essential.

AbstractThe paper shows how scientific research intended to identify and evaluate policy options incorporates social constructions of reality which make some assumptions appear plausible and others not. The point is not to argue the relativism of science, but rather to argue that there is a restricted set of social constructions, for example of the nature of the environment, broadly associated with different kinds of social groups. Good policy practice recognizes these plural rationalities.

Behavioral science is playing an increasing role in public policy, and it is raising new questions about fundamental issues - the role of government, freedom of choice, paternalism, and human welfare. In diverse nations, public officials are using behavioral findings to combat serious problems - poverty, air pollution, highway safety, COVID-19, discrimination, employment, climate change, and occupational health. Exploring theory and practice, this Element attempts to provide one-stop shopping for those who are new to the area and for those who are familiar with it. With reference to nudges, taxes, mandates, and bans, it offers concrete examples of behaviorally informed policies. It also engages the fundamental questions, include the proper analysis of human welfare in light of behavioral findings. It offers a plea for respecting freedom of choice - so long as people's choices are adequately informed and free from behavioral biases.

Analyzing survey data from the 2007 Cooperative Congressional Election Study, this article examines citizens' preferences for assigning policy responsibility for environmental problems to different levels of government. I find that the public generally prefers the federal government to take the lead in addressing most issues, particularly those that relate to pollution and those that have a national or global scale. The public, however, prefers to give more responsibility to state and local governments to handle local-level issues. These results suggest a desire among many in the public to match governmental policy assignment with the geographic scale of the problem. The best predictor of individuals choice of government level is political orientation, and to a lesser extent ones general confidence in each level of government. Adapted from the source document.

Studies of "policy" and l'policymakingll have proliferated recently. One reason is the serious policymaking difficulties of American and other Western governments. Earlier political science did not address these problems well because of its concentration on political input processes rather than outputs. Most policy studies either evaluate programs 0′ explain cases of policymaking, The approach proposed here, called public policy, does both. Analyses of preferred options are played off against the limitations of process, and vice versa. This conception is illustrated and the problems posed by it are discussed.