Suchergebnisse

THE EDITOR HAS ASKED ME, AS AN ECONOMIST, TO RESPOND TO PROFESSOR MEAD'S ESSAY ON THE RELATION BETWEEN ECONOMICS AND POLITICAL SCIENCE IN THE STUDY OF PUBLIC POLICY. THIS REQUEST SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN PROMPTED BY PROFESSOR MEAD'S STATEMENT TO THE EDITOR THAT HIS ESSAY HAD NOT BEEN WELL RECEIVED BY THOSE ECONOMISTS WHO HAD READ IT. BUT I HAD NO SUCH NEGATIVE REACTION, SO WHATEVER DUEL THE EDITOR MIGHT HAVE ANTICIPATED WOULD RESULT WILL NOT TAKE PLACE. PROFESSOR MEAD'S CONTENTION THAT THE STUDY OF PUBLIC POLICY "HAS SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE JOINT CONTRIBUTION OF ECONOMICS AND POLITICAL SCIENCE TO THE STUDY OF PUBLIC ISSUES," SEEMS EMINENTLY REASONABLE TO ME. INDEED, THE AUTHOR DO NOT SEE HOW IT COULD BE OTHERWISE, ONCE IT IS RECOGNIZED THAT ECONOMICS AND POLITICAL SCIENCE REST UPON THE SAME FOUNDATION. THIS FOUNDATION IS WHAT ECONOMISTS REFER TO AS SCARCITY, WHICH MEANS THAT THE WANTS PEOPLE HAVE EXCEED THE CAPACITY THAT EXISTS WITHIN A SOCIETY TO FULFILL THOSE WANTS. BECAUSE OF SCARCITY, SOME MEANS OF RESOLVING CONFLICTS AND REPRESSING WANTS ARISE IN ALL SOCIETIES, AS DO PATTERNS OF COOPERATION TO ENHANCE THE EXTENT TO WHICH WANTS CAN BE FULFILLED.

In A Meaning for "Public Policy," Lawrence M. Mead (New York U, New York, NY) discusses public policy as a combination of economics & political science that optimally reflects the analytic strengths of both disciplines. Economics & political science are differentiated: the former is concerned with norms & the results of individual action; whereas the latter focuses on real political issues, groups, & constraints, & is concerned with collectively generated issues. The constructive function of the two disciplines is illustrated with an example from budgeting. In On Economics, Political Science, and Public Policy, Richard E. Wagner (Florida State U, Tallahassee) observes that both economics & political science are based on the fact of scarcity & the inherent conflict among peoples & societies it signifies. A historical review of the application of economic theory to political practice is provided, showing that this procedure has functioned similarly whether in absolutist or republican societies, with the difference that the latter could elect to alter policy directions. It is argued that economics & political science must recognize principles intrinsic to society & try to work within them to create policy. This process is examined in the case of rent control. 22 References. D. Dunseath.

This paper seeks to synthesize some of the main conclusions a of those who have thought about or studied the uses and limitations of social science research for public policy. The paper is designed to provide some background for a discussion of social science and public policy by government officials, social scientists, and others who are interested in policy research. We deal with the following factors which appear to have influenced the utilization of social science research results: (1) the validity of the scientific approach to social questions, (2) the individual researcher and policy maker and their attitudes toward each other, (3) the communication between researcher and policy maker, (4) the type of research conducted, (5) the type of research organizations involved, (6) the motivation for the research effort, and (7) the nature of the topic being studied. ; Ray Marshall Center for the Study of Human Resources

Contents: A meaning for "public policy," by Lawrence M. Mead; On economics, political science, and public policy, by Richard E. Wagner.

Names such as Armor, Pettigrew, Glazer, Jencks, Herrnstein, Clark and Moynihan have not yet appeared in the pages of Ring magazine, but it seems only a matter of time. It is no secret, after all, that these men, all intellectual heavyweights, are engaged in an ongoing, fierce slugging match over a host of issues related to the "limits of social policy." Their verbal fisticuffs have been characterized by a good deal of fancy footwork, plenty of hard hitting, some low blows and inevitable cries of foul. For some time Public Interest was booking the best cards, but with more than 150 pages of its February, 1973, issue devoted to a detailed critique of Jencks's Inequality, it may be assumed that the Harvard Educational Review became, as it was during the Jensen brawl, the main arena of conflict. The bulk of recent attention was focused on the hard punching of Jencks's critics, but it would be a pity if the brilliant footwork of Kenneth Clark went unnoticed. His performance is simply remarkable.

Review of critics of the logical positivist description of scientific method & academic accounts of policy making suggests that analogies & metaphors are central features of the social-scientific enterprise. Critics of metaphorical thinking in social science argue that these "devices" are used uncritically & obscure reality because they are too intuitive & too interpretative to be considered scientific. But this approach is probably dangerous because it assumes that metaphors, analogies, & models have only scientific consequences. As devices of thinking, they also have effects on public life as well. Assessment of analogies & metaphors must depend on their implications for reforming the world. At issue is the question of whether policy sciences use analogies & metaphors in a responsible fashion & whether policy scientists are willing to take responsibility for the world they imagine. 65 References. HA.