Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
61 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
What is policy?
|
"A deliberate, persistent pattern of organized activities directed toward a formal objectives"
Can be pursued directly or through agents Requires Action such as regulation, funding, spending $, hiring people Not "hoping or wishing" Involves choices, outputs (programs), and impacts (influenced by other factors) Involves both Normative and Technical premises |
|
|
Instruments of Policy
|
these are means by which to IMPLEMENT policy
conpulsory, not voluntary Law Services Money Taxes |
|
|
What makes Policy "Public"?
|
Applies to public organizations
Compulsory-not volunteer based Has influence on lives of citizens Can't exclude people (e.g. Environment) |
|
|
What role does the political culture have on the policy process?
|
Foundation of US government of extreme pessimism leaks into how citizens, policy makers, etc. view policy.
Therefore, must be pragmatic and based in experiential knowledge over the abstract. Both pessimism and pragmatism influenced the creation of the policy cycle approach. We are a Heterogenious culture, therefore the nature of pluralistic thinking (group) is designed to protect against errors; but makes it difficult to create comprehensive policies. The process is fragmented; we tend to be process focussed rather than policy foccussed. Abundance refers to the idea that until recently, we had an the idea that we had an abundence of resources, wealth, etc. |
|
|
Stages of Public Policy Cycle (#6)
|
Each stage is its "own world"
Process in NOT Coherant and usually not ancticipatory It is broken up into 6 stages to help protect against errors; a policy must go through ALL stages to be "successful" 1. Problem Definition-->Agenda Building 2. Policy Formulation and Design 3. Enactment 4. Implementation 5. Policy Evaluation 6. Termination or Change |
|
|
Problem Definition
|
First part of Stage 1
Not objective, with little anticipation of problems involves variables (causality, severity, proximity, novelty) |
|
|
Agenda Building
|
Second part of Stage 1
|
|
|
Policy Formulation and Design
|
Stage 2
This is usually based on a technical (factual) premise Can me limited in scope |
|
|
Enactment
|
Stage 3
This is the creation of a law or regulation to address an identified problem Separate from Implementation due the pragmatic and pessimistic nature of our political culture |
|
|
Implementation
|
Stage 4
The act of applying a law or regulatory policy Separate from Enactment |
|
|
Policy Evaluation
|
Stage 5
The positive or negative assessment of an implemented policy Generally is highly politicized Requires a suggestion of what should be done |
|
|
Termination and/or Change
|
6th and final stage
After evaluation of policy, should the policy continue? What changes should be made? |
|
|
Federalism
|
We have a distinct separation between the Federal, state, and local levels of governement a(layer cake)
Used to be clear distinction of this hierarchy, but not many entities are involved INTRICATELY (marble cake) There is more vertical depency through the branches of government |
|
|
Separation of Powers
|
Require Congressional vote to get electoral votes
Legislative, Judicial branches can differ from the Excutive branch Any agency in executive committee can NOT guarantee 100% passing of policy due to the system of check and balances. Contrasts to the Parliamentary system, where the EXEC and Legislative branches are united! |
|
|
Policy Sub-systems
|
This form of policy making has become imbeded into our political culture
Key decisions are resolved in committee structures and often addresses issues at the Macrolevel iron triangles aka triangular alliances issue networks policy communities |
|
|
Triangular Alliances
|
Agency
Interest Group (external analytic committee with economic interest) Congressional committees (provides oversight) form powerful alliances to define the problem, set the agenda, and pass policy Often rooted in experiential expertise and often work autonomously from other triangles Detaches policy making from the public and publicity Issue based (health care vs environment) see to regulatory capture, distributive policies |
|
|
Issues networks
|
Often grounded in research, creation of models, and can be somewhat abstract. those involved generally have an intellectual interest and little to no economic stake
Not as powerful at Triangular alliances Ideal for new problems that are difficult to understand experientially |
|
|
Policy communities
|
Anyone who has an interested in particular policy, such as, those it affects,analysts,congress,interest groups
|
|
|
Perspective on American Policy Making
|
pluralism, elite theory, legal anysis, institutional theory
|
|
|
Pluralsim
|
Group Theory;
Individual is nothing Some say this is reason the US has been stable and successful Rooted in the nature of the US political structure and heterogeneous society Our interest and diversity is high and expressable in groups Government acts as a passive scorekeeper and groups compete with other groups Beneficial becuase it reduces conflict because of the "rules of the game", ruduces violence and keeps the political temp low. Creates a balance of interest Political slack and potential groups--> resources could be used and are not...tries to bring more people to the table |
|
|
Elite Theory (Dominant Elite)
|
Theory that there are few (elite) over the public that define problems and set the policy agendas
They GIVE us the problems in a way they want us to understand; only elite can define what is feasible Elites have discrete interests Communicate with each other and are able to shape and manipulate policy toward their own interests they have "interlocking directives" Role of Freerider? |
|
|
legal analysis
|
old way of thinking that used the courts?
|
|
|
Institutional Theory
|
Government is NOT a passive score keeper
Govt has its own interests and can define its own problem and decides what to do (dictates policy choices) State centric approach |
|
|
Public Choice Theory
|
Influences heavily by economics
States that policy making is like the market where it imposes private preferences onto public choice (e.g. health care) aka distribution of private values instead of public values |
|
|
Tragic Choice Theory
|
In Contrast to Public choice Theory
Believes there are dominant values within political units and society must choose who suffers Value that society hold will be sacrificed; but this neglected value doesn't disappear...it will begin to re-expose itself and demands attention there is an imposition of suffering due to scarcity of goods 1st order scarcity is states that there is lack of available resources to produce goods 2nd order scarcity refers to how the good are distributed; most tragic choices involve tradeoffs between values |
|
|
Problem
|
system of conditions that produce dissatisfaction among differented segments of the community
Problems come out of the culture of dominant society |
|
|
Problem Definition
|
Actionable statement of issue dynamics where expenditures, personnel, rules, procedures and budgets are connected to idea of policy remedy
provides empirical description to something that is problematic Explains reason problem exists causality-what/who causes it severity-Is it life threatening? Incidence-happening in lots of places? Novelty-it is a new problem or existing Proximity-who is affected? how close to home? crisis-urgent? Time sensitive Recommends a course of action which is influenced by how it is defined Persuades to take action Defined by groups whom have interest |
|
|
Well-Structured
Problem Definition |
"Tame" problem
There is a general consensus of the problem addresses one or few disciplines with small range of policy alternatives tolerates errors easier E.g. The Bay Bridge is seismically unsound |
|
|
Ill -Structured
Problem Definition |
Competing problem definitions
multiple disciplines that do not coalesce into ONE single way to assess options Many possible alternatives e.g. Poverty |
|
|
Wicked
Problem Definition |
Proposes that the definition IS the problem
Multipdisciplinary nested problems make it difficult to know when the problem is solved; there are no "stopping rules" Does not tolerate errors well there is No right to be WRONG-->one of two mistakes bring entire solution to an end e.g. education |
|
|
policy types
|
distributive
redistributive regulatory |
|
|
Distributive Policy
|
distribution of specialized goods to specialized interests (pluralists)
low temperature and concentrated on benefit nice formula politicians like to gravitate toward, leading to Triangulation of alliances (iron tirangles) provides concentrated costs and dispersed benefits e.g. tax credit, highways, dams, student loans |
|
|
Redistributive Policy
|
redistribution of benefits from one large group to another
national focus clear winners and clear losers complicates issues make it a high temp issue concentrated costs with concentrated benefits e.g. taking of Native American lands |
|
|
Regulatory Policy
|
Constrain a narrow interest for larger public interest
concentrated costs, dispersed benefits Issue attention cycles and regulatory capture create political instability--> recipe for disaster |
|
|
Issue attention cycle
|
Increase public concern increases over time with rapid amplifications
public concern leads to creation of regulatory policies and agencies; when issue is controlled, attention disappears over time Attention is not sustainable |
|
|
Regulatory capture
|
linkages btw regulatory agencies and special interests groups
interest groups cut deals with regulatory agencies to promote that "regulated' industry Winds up looking more like a distributive policy |
|
|
Idealist public interest
|
Thee is the highest ide of public association
Noble and objectivity exists pro-elites anti-public; anti-group |
|
|
Rationalist public interest
|
There is no SINGLE interest, rather a continuum of "more or less" in the public interest
e.g. parlimentary view must test hypothesis in it entirety e.g. analytic school analyzes policy proposals using Cost -benefit anaysis, cost ratio, risk assessment (U.S) |
|
|
Realist public interest
|
No public interest
The public interest is in the process, but not content there is is imposition of values anti-elites, pro-group (U.S.) |
|
|
Systemic Agenda
|
Public attention, spread of diseas, individual experiences, even media expose issue and identify problem for the agenda
Can appear sporadically becuase of attention cycles |
|
|
Institutional Agenda
|
An insititutional can act or "inact" a policy
1) Initiation comes from outside 2)mobilization around the issues, desires public support 3)inside initiation, bypasses systemic and directly institutionalized *e.g. national seucrity |
|
|
Agenda cycles
|
Expansive
Consolidative Contractive Fiscal |
|
|
Expansive
|
Reach for budgets, movements
|
|
|
Agenda Cycle-Consolidative
|
Less interest in new programs
increase interest in perfecting or promoting current programs, narrowing the focus |
|
|
Agenda Cycle-Contractive
|
Programs become too big or wasteful they want to cut back and longer
does not want to expand the lens any more |
|
|
Agenda cycle-Fiscal
|
Concern regarding money becuase they are stretched too thin by expansive programs, making everyone look at economic problems, then social problems get ignored again
leads cycle back to the beginning of cosolidative cycle |
|
|
Standards of Evidence
|
How do you know something is true?
anecdotes raw #'s mutlivariate experiement conrolled/small experiement Metanalysis large scale experiement |
|
|
Data in Policy
|
a representation or observation of numbers
Can be individualized and specialized IS NOT INFORMATION |
|
|
Information in Policy
|
Relevant data applied to a particular policy
timeliness of information matters: Info can come too late! Too soon-->can be forgotten and goes unused because it is not yet valued.. |
|
|
Knowledge in Policy
|
Conclusions about patterns of relationships gathered from Information available
In reciprocal relationship to information --> the more knowledge you have the less info is needed should shape definition of problems, constrain policy options and lead directly to policy design not objectively true becuase there are many ways to look at it: natural law helps derive, but has limited scope Theories Tendency statements Can often rely on cultural values, beliefs and myths Must be transformed to social beliefs for policy to be effective |
|
|
Cost Benefit Analysis
|
Careful analysis help shape choices in policy options
pursues maximum benefits over costs based on the utilitarian view--> greatest good for greates # individual is the best determinent of benefits; must be demonstrated rather than stated. helps shape choice if benefit/cost ratio >1 it is generally in more of the public interest involves standarized units ($$) to show benefits over costs (pleasure over pain) |
|
|
Cost Benefit Analysis...discount rate
|
discount rate- is a reflection of the reduced value of the dollar.
Must factor in inflation and provide equivalent value of tomorrows dollar today. |
|
|
Cost Benefit Analysis...consumer surplus
|
consider the price that has already been paid for what was received
|
|
|
Cost Benefit Analysis...opportunity costs
|
what was foregone as a result?
Not all opportunity costs can be valuated by a price tag |
|
|
Cost Benefit Analysis...regrets
|
Real value is in retrospect
Prosepective view does not always reflect the full pleasure or pain when you have not had it or experienced it. |
|
|
Critiques of Cost Benefit Analysis
|
Value of $$ varies with individual and time (d/c rate)
Broad instrument must consider sensitivity to errors in the estimation of costs--> estimation involves forecasting -->One can underestimate benefits and causal properties |
|
|
Cost Effectivness Analysis
|
Allows for comparison of similar to cost benefit analysis
differs becuase its domains are fixed Benefit is constant; cost is relative to same benefit and do not have to address other areas can compare cost of transportation per person, etc. Helps eliminate the extremes |
|
|
Critiques of Cost Effectiveness Analysis
|
Bad idea to put things in terms of $ at expense of human lives
How do we identify benefits for individuals that are here yet (intergenerational) Rights claim tends to be the highest cliam against benefits how do you assign value when market prices is in contradiciton to others' values (e.g. buying Indian Land...sacred and irreplaceable) |
|
|
special properties of health care
|
individual is not a public good
health is ambiguous, intanglible it is unstable and always at risk becuase there is no logical stopping point to pursue one's health expertise dependent (passive patients, passive consumers) there is public expectation of continuing improvements Variable health care system traits |
|
|
Issues in health care
|
access-
insureance vs uninsured disparities across the country, rates of hospitalization ability to get types of procudures cost- reciprocal to access american payment of increase technology allows for others to access quality- not regulated no social dread with medical errors mapractice use as substitute to govt regulation health care as a commodity- take away a right or sense of responsibility!! |
|
|
Health care system traits
|
predominately private industry- 3rd larges industry of employment
Bill payers are 3rd party Organization complexity- we have different types of administrative dpt; different categories of health care-government, non-profit, federal cost is high-17.6% of our GDP competition for profession dominance in management for HMO, hospital services, diagnostic related groups regulates payment, lawyers for malpractice, government officials, etc. |
