Policy Making Processes

This book offers an empirically-grounded account of the emergence and political activities of a new collective actor in Berlin’s art field. Investigating the organizational and representative practices of Koalition der Freien Szene (Coalition of the Independent Scene) – a trans-disciplinary action platform assembling a wide variety of cultural producers in Berlin – the author unpacks the political organization of one of the most compelling contemporary art scenes, or ‘creative’ cities, worldwide, analysing both its concrete policy ‘success’ and the means by which it seeks to challenge and rearticulate the meaning of Berlin as a ‘creative’ city from the producers’ point of view. The book thus opens new opportunities for long-term transformations of the cultural political field. Theoretically sophisticated and based on empirical material including interviews with spokespeople and cultural administrators, Agonistic Articulations in the ‘Creative’ City presents a unique conceptualization of new modes of political collectivization, representation and legitimacy that imagine new avenues of political engagement at a time when political institutions, parties and regimes of representation are in crisis. As such, it will appeal to scholars of sociology, political science and urban studies with interests in social movements and cultural activism.

This thesis is a study of post-war British political parties and policymaking, primarily examining the Labour party’s combined policy on immigration, integration and race relations between 1960 and 1980. Limited research has been published on post-war parties and policymaking, and what has often neglects the role of the political party within the process. Existing studies of Labour’s engagement with immigration or race relations focus only on Harold Wilson’s 1964-1970 Governments. Labour were a party of Government in this period, returned as the largest or majority party in four of seven electoral contests between 1959 and 1979. Being in power for almost eleven of the twenty years, it is possible to analyse how the party reacted to a divisive political issue, in power and opposition and, therefore, the relationship between party policymaking, electoral politics and governance. To comprehend these interactive and complicated issues, this thesis engages with approaches traditionally utilised political history, in combination with others gleaned from political studies.
Historical scholarship has long demonstrated that analysis of longer periods permit greater appreciation of change over time. Recent uptake of similar methodologies within political science have likewise accepted their effectiveness for analysing the actions of historic political actors. Blending innovative new interpretative approaches, alongside traditional intellectual examinations of politics informed by the history of ideas, has proved fruitful. Using Peter F. Clarke’s concept of the ‘purchase of ideas’, this thesis attempts to trace the intellectual origins of policy. By further accepting Duncan Tanner’s contention that policy is a complex process, and following his suggested delineation between institutional and electoral purchase of ideas within a political institution, it recognises historic agents’ capacity to shape, redirect and repackage policy to elicit popular appeal. To do this effectively, the study scrutinises the structure and processes of policymaking within the Labour party.
Concentrating on Labour’s political dynamics, the thesis examines the degree to which policy development at the party’s London headquarters reflected the opinions of local parties and voters in constituencies. It surveys Labour’s early engagement with immigration issues before examining its definitive approach under Hugh Gaitskell’s leadership. Afterwards, it considers the role of immigration controls’ local appeal through scrutinising the political cleavage existent between pro-immigration local parties, and pro-control electorates. Enoch Powell’s April 1968 speech reaffirmed existing assumptions and the influence of the National Front and racially charged Powellite politics in the 1970s is analysed through a multi-level study of the party’s responses, to establish the significance of various local, national and international influences and constrictions on the policymaking process. This thesis posits that policymaking is both deliberative and contemporaneous, being a transient manifestation of political priorities and ideas deemed (by the party leadership) to possess institutional and electoral purchase at its time of prospective implementation.

In recent decades, studies carried out in the public policy field have highlighted the central role that policy entrepreneurs play in the production of public policy. Although entrepreneurs are understood differently in these studies, its performance is considered essential for the emergence of a public policy, its continuity or change. To analyze the concept of policy entrepreneurs, their use and contributions to studies in the field of public administration, checking their limits and challenges as explanatory tools, is the main theoretical concerns of this paper. In the first section, we briefly discuss the growing emphasis on entrepreneurial figure in the context of studies related to the policy analysis, highlighting the theoretical model that attribute centrality to this actor in the explanations of the process of changes in public policies: the multiple streams model, formulated by John Kingdon (2003). Then we discuss the contributions of this theoretical model in understanding the importance of entrepreneurs in the production of public policies, mainly through two specific mechanisms: the defense of ideas and innovations (policy advocacy) and change in public policy (policy change). In the following section, we empirically analyze the performance of an entrepreneur whose performance was decisive for the Brazilian public management reform started in the 1990s: the former Minister of Federal Administration and State Reform, Luiz Carlos Bresser Pereira. Our findings show the importance of the concept as an explanatory mechanism of the policy entrepreneur for innovation and change processes within the public administration, highlighting Bresser Pereira's role as the entrepreneur of the Brazilian public administration reform in the 1990s.

Background: Health research is conducted with the expectation that it advances knowledge and eventually translates into improved health systems and population health. However, research findings are often caught in the know-do gap: they are not acted upon in a timely way or not applied at all. Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) is advanced as a way to increase the relevance, applicability and impact of research. With IKT, knowledge users work with researchers throughout the research process, starting with identification of the research question. Knowledge users represent those who would be able to use research results to inform their decisions (e.g. clinicians, managers, policy makers, patients/families and others). Stakeholders are increasingly interested in the idea that IKT generates greater and faster societal impact. Stakeholders are all those who are interested in the use of research results but may not necessarily use them for their own decision-making (e.g. governments, funders, researchers, health system managers and policy makers, patients and clinicians). Although IKT is broadly accepted, the actual research supporting it is limited and there is uncertainty about how best to conduct and support IKT. This paper presents a protocol for a programme of research testing the assumption that engaging the users of research in phases of its production leads to (a) greater appreciation of and capacity to use research; (b) the production of more relevant, useful and applicable research that results in greater impact; and (c) conditions under which it is more likely that research results will influence policy, managerial and clinical decision-making.

Implementation plays a key role in policy success, and as such, a primary concern in the policymaking process is overcoming implementation problems. This can be seen through several past implementation failures, one such example being the US Alcohol Prohibition 1920-1933; which restricted access to alcoholic beverages yet increased consumption of alcohol and propelled an unregulated underground market revolving around more potent alcohols (Thornton, 1991). King and Crewe argue that “awareness of previous failings, and therefore the ability to learn from past mistakes, could radically improve the quality of government” (cited in Loughran, 2017, pp.235).

In the pages that follow, I firstly contribute to awareness of previous failings by offering an overview of this “gulf”. Secondly, I offer a theory as to why this gulf occurs - the way in which issues fall off the Agenda, and the effects that this had on the success of the Government Select Committee’s proposal to reform sex work. Thirdly, I explore another theory, Cultural and Operational Disconnect, and how it contributed to policy failure of the English Baccalaureate (EBacc). Lastly, I draw conclusions. The gulfs specific to these cases are worthy of investigation since problems were ultimately left unsolved – specifically, that of the risks to sex workers and adverse effects experienced by schools implementing the EBacc.

This paper examines the notion that ‘All models of the policy process necessarily misrepresent complex realities’, seeking to establish where the value of models lies if this is true. Parsons (1996, p.58) describes a model as creating order out of that which does not in itself have an objective order. I distinguish between two models of the decision-making process to illuminate where value lies: the ‘Stages’ model and the ‘Incremental’ branch model. I argue firstly that stages offer order and make sense of complexity through a linear approach to policymaking, but that conversely, the real world is not a blank slate ordered in neat stages, hence it misrepresents reality, as policy stages are inseparable. Secondly, I outline how Stages infer logic through division of labour and use of a feedback loop but that alternatively, Stages can be irrational in that dividing stages gives a false picture of the process, which is descriptive but not explicative. Thirdly, I assess the value of Incrementalism’s ‘Muddling Through’ approach to address gaps left by the Stages model, explaining how it allows for small policy changes and makes policy options manageable. Thereafter, I present Lindblom’s rejection of rationality in favour of negotiation, before acknowledging that his emphasis on consensus neglects innovation. I conclude that comparing these models reveals that each is more suitable to specific realities, henceforth different realities warrant different models. This is summarised by John’s notion that ‘it is not necessarily the case that models misrepresent reality, but there is a seemingly impossible list of requirements that successful models must have’ (2003, p.482). Models are flawed in respect of any reality – but they are essential to comprehending the policymaking process.

“We must recognise that government functionaries and other political participants deal at any given time with limited problems, within limited perspectives, and have to make due with limited analytical capabilities” (Lindblom, 1959, 128). This quote excellently sums up the erratic, subjective nature of the public policy process. Contemporary society has seen a rise in issues worthy of political action. This essay asks why some issues get included in the political agenda, while others do not. To explore this, the paper examines three dimensions, although it is prudent to acknowledge now that these are not definitive boundaries – there are many other dimensions involved. The first, and main focus is on constructing social problems, since in order for an issue to get on the agenda, it must be constructed as a social problem. The second dimension is centred on language, of which its value-laden quality is instrumental to this topic. Finally, the role of media in drawing attention to issues is also explored, as it is a means of attracting attention to issues. This paper ultimately aims to provide clarity on why every issue does not make it to the table by examining the mentioned dimensions. The conclusion is that the capacity to encompass every single issue within the agenda simply does not exist, but that actors utilise an array of methods to increase the visibility of issues in attempts to get particular issues included.

Preserving species, in prey–predator, forager–food-supply, and, healthy soils, clean water and air form is very important. A holistic EU-wide Directive is needed, which fosters European collaboration and sets common monitoring standards for conservation of wildlife in a holistic context. A holistic EU-Directive would prevent project implementations which disconnect predator from prey, and both from habitat quality and carrying capacities at local level. Thus, it will prevent the implementation of European projects which foster local environmental desequilibria and create conflicts with local communities under the auspices of conserving a certain species, which at planetary level is seen as very important but the local context doesn't allow its conservation without a holistic assessment of that species needs. Also, an adaptive capacity of EU-legislations to bottom realities, which may vary in time and space, is a requirement for good policy-making. Another issue is preserving the open access to local ecosystems. Open access helps local communities to contribute to habitat quality enhancement and monitoring and enhances local engagement in solving local environmental problems. Locals are the 1 first who notice overabundances of species and other environmental disequilibria, because they are often directly affected by them. Constructive participatory approaches at local level guided by principles from decision-analysis have the capacity to include this knowledge into the legislation implementation process at the bottom, where the local level should be defined as the area where the decision context remains homogeneous. EU-legislations disconnected from local realities terrorize people and invite researchers to remain on false research paths while chasing ghosts. This will sooner or latter create tensions, and turn policy-makers and their consultative researchers against people and other researchers. Do we really want this to happen for the sake of some outdated legislations which protect species preferentially, forgetting about their needs for wild prey, habitat and local engagement? The present paper aims at offering a starting discussion on how conservation policy-making at EU-level can be improved in order to stop this " plague " producing and frustration-accumulating current legislation on conservation.

As a novel method for creatively engaging citizens and stakeholders to find solutions to complex problems, co-design holds great promise for policy-makers. It has been vaunted as a way to generate more innovative ideas, ensure policies and services match the needs of citizens, achieve economic efficiencies by improving responsiveness, foster cooperation and trust between different groups, meaningfully engage the 'hard to reach', and achieve support for change. This article considers how we might determine whether co-design has real potential to dramatically improve policy processes and outcomes. Drawing on relevant literature on participatory design, design thinking and public sector innovation, this review explores the meaning and potential of co-design in the context of public policy. It highlights the philosophical underpinnings and normative implications of participatory design, and questions the feasibility of achieving the promised outcomes in the challenging context of contemporary policy-making.

This broad-ranging text examines the political dynamic of the European Parliament (EP), showing how the EP is a key component of the political system of the EU. It looks at how, and how effectively, the parliament translates citizen demands into policies, and, in so doing, contributes to wider debates around democracy and legitimacy in the EU.

Crowdsourcing is rapidly evolving and applied in situations where ideas, labour, opinion or expertise of large groups of people are used. Crowdsourcing is now used in various policy-making initiatives; however, this use has usually focused on open collaboration platforms and specific stages of the policy process, such as agenda-setting and policy evaluations. Other forms of crowdsourcing have been neglected in policy-making, with a few exceptions. This article examines crowdsourcing as a tool for policy-making, and explores the nuances of the technology and its use and implications for different stages of the policy process. The article addresses questions surrounding the role of crowdsourcing and whether it can be considered as a policy tool or as a technological enabler and investigates the current trends and future directions of crowdsourcing.