Science and public policy: journal of the Science Policy Foundation
ISSN: 1471-5430
1066288 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
ISSN: 1471-5430
In: Journal of public policy, Band 18, Heft 3, S. 283-310
ISSN: 1469-7815
The article deals with the questions of the emergence, persistence and change of policy paradigms. It focuses on the role that policy networks play in this process and draws on the literature of problem definition to explain this role. The paper investigates water policy in Israel in the years 1948–1997. The paper distinguishes among two water policy paradigms that have prevailed: the earlier paradigm was one of expanding water resources and agricultural production, followed by a paradigm of priority of agricultural expansion over water conservation. The paper also distinguishes among periods of anticipatory and reactive water policy and highlights the role of policy networks in formulating public policies.
In: New perspectives in policy & politics
First published as a special issue of Policy & Politics, this updated volume explores policy failures and the valuable opportunities for learning that they offer. Policy successes and failures offer important lessons for public officials, but often they do not learn from these experiences. The studies in this volume investigate this broken link. The book defines policy learning and failure and organises the main studies in these fields along the key dimensions of processes, products and analytical levels. Drawing together a range of experts in the field, the volume sketches a research agenda linking policy scholars with policy practice.
In: Policy analysis: publ. quarterly for the Graduate School of Public Policy, University of California, Band 7, Heft 2, S. 199-226
ISSN: 0098-2067
THE POLICY ANALYST IS CONCERNED WITH EFFICIENCY AND OUTPUTS, & IGNORES SUNK COSTS; THE POLICY POLITICIAN IS CONCERNED WITH DISTRIBUTION & INPUTS, & SEEKS TO JUSTIFY SUNK COSTS. THESE DIFFERENCES CAN BE DERIVED FROM THE ANALYST'S INDIFFERENCE TO CONSTITUENCIES & THE POLITICIAN'S DEVOTION TO THEM, SAYS THE AUTHOR, WHO SUGGESTS WAYS FOR POLICY ANALYSIS TO INCREASE THEIR POLITICAL INFLUENCE.
In: Journal of public policy, Band 20, Heft 3, S. 247-274
ISSN: 0143-814X
The evolution of public policies in the US has been characterized as a process involving long periods of stability followed by abrupt episodes of substantial change. In this project, we identify strands in the literature & synthesize policy theories into a policy regime model useful in explaining both stability & change. This model focuses on power arrangements, policy paradigms, & organization factors that operate to maintain long periods of stability. We demonstrate how stressors -- catastrophic events, economic crises, demographic changes, shifts in modes of production, & others -- impact policy regimes & create pressures for change. We argue that the process of policy regime change -- the abrupt episodes of substantial change -- occurs with changes in the policy paradigm, alterations in patterns of power & shifts in organizational arrangements. The old policy regime disintegrates & the new one emerges with a new policy paradigm, new patterns of power & new organizational arrangements that operate to maintain long periods of stability. 68 References. Adapted from the source document.
In: Policy sciences: integrating knowledge and practice to advance human dignity ; the journal of the Society of Policy Scientists, Band 4, Heft 3, S. 297-307
ISSN: 0032-2687
An empirical analysis of individuals in policy formulating & policy implementing roles is presented. The data are generated by interviews with a random sample of 119 middle-level public administrators working in the home offices of 27 New Zealand government dept's. Interviews of about 1.5 hours in length were conducted in mid-1972. Those interviewed were in the generalist Executive Occupational Class & were in the grades from Class 04 through Class 10. The individuals in the policy formulating roles were slightly younger; although those in the formulating & implementing roles varied little from each other in terms of social background, educational attainment & career patterns. Few differences were noted in regard to job satisfaction, decisional authority, & hierarchical relations. Significant differences between policy formulators & policy implementors were discovered in terms of work load, career aspirations, & awareness of political influences in governmental policymaking. The results show that the New Zealand administrative system does not allocate policy formulating roles to individuals different from those who implement policies. Differences between formulators & implementors in the New Zealand administrative system seem to stem from the nature of work of the 2 policy roles. 9 Tables. Modified HA.