Relationality: an alternative framework for analysing policy

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Raul P Lejano
Keyword(s):  
General Condition ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Policy Research ◽  
Relational Model ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
Policy Regimes ◽  
Policy Actors ◽  
Alternative Framework ◽  
Policy Anomalies

Abstract Policy is ostensibly crafted upon an overarching notion of rationality, in the form of rules, roles and designs. However, sometimes policy deviates from formal templates and seems to be guided by a different governing ethic. Rather than categorising these as policy anomalies, we can understand them as the workings of what we will refer to as a relational model of policy. The relational model describes how policy outcomes emerge from the working and reworking of relationships among policy actors. We define relationality and develop its use in policy research. While the relational can be depicted as an alternative model for policy (e.g., Confucian versus Weberian), it is more accurate to understand it as a system that complements conventional policy regimes. To illustrate the concept, we examine examples from policymaking in China. We end with a discussion of how relationality should be a general condition that should be applicable to many, if not all, policy situations.

What do advocates want from policy research? Evidence from elite surveys

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jake Haselswerdt ◽  
Elizabeth Rigby
Keyword(s):  
Policy Research ◽  
State Level ◽  
The United States ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
Policy Debate ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Policy Positions ◽  
Academic Researchers ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
State Context

Background: Policy advocates play a key role linking the separate worlds of research and policymaking – often serving as research brokers who increase the use of research and promoting more informed decision making. Yet this group is often overlooked in studies of research utilisation.Methods: We undertook two surveys of state-level advocates in the United States in order to better understand the views of these ‘research brokers’ on the utility of research and the characteristics of research most needed in the policymaking process.Findings: The advocates we surveyed report that research plays an important, if limited, role in shaping the policy outcomes in their state. They value objective and unbiased research, as evidenced by the credibility of the source, and relevance to their state context. At the same time, advocates were not particularly interested in novel research on unfamiliar outcomes in other policy domains, instead preferring studies that stick to the familiar framing of the issue dominant in the policy community in which they work. Advocates use research findings primarily as justification for their policy positions.Discussion and conclusion: Perceived impartiality and objectivity are a major asset of academic researchers seeking to influence the policy process. Advocates value this credibility and other sources of information that they can use to justify their policy positions. At the same time, their preference for familiar rather than novel findings may limit the degree to which policy advocates can serve as intermediary for such results, hampering the ability of research to reframe policy debate.<br />Key messages<br /><ul><li>Advocates value policy research from objective, unbiased sources like universities.</li><br /><li>Liberal and conservative advocates value research that justifies their (distinct) policy positions.</li><br /><li>Research on novel problems or indicators is less likely to be used by advocates.</li><br /><li>Advocates can serve as effective research brokers, but not equally for all forms of research.</li></ul>

Environmental and Systemic Effects on Prevention Policy

2020 ◽  
pp. 45-63
Author(s):  
Paul Cairney ◽  
Emily St Denny
Keyword(s):  
Central Government ◽  
Policy Instruments ◽  
Complex Problem ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
Systemic Effects ◽  
Prevention Policy ◽  
Policy Actors ◽  
Cognition And Emotion ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Local Levels

Policy actors may combine cognition and emotion to simplify their choices, or turn a complex problem into a small number of issues and objectives. However, they do so in an environment that remains complex and affects the impact of any policy. Policymakers try to deliver policy in environments containing many policymakers and influencers spread across many levels and types of government, operating in many organizations and networks with their own rules and language, and responding in different ways to relevant socio-economic conditions and events. Or, policymaking takes place in a ‘complex system’ that can amplify or dampen policymaker energy, and policy outcomes can ‘emerge’ at local levels, often despite central government attempts to control them. Consequently, it is relatively straightforward to identify central government policies, as collections of statements of intent and policy instruments, but difficult to predict or track their effects. Instead, policy theories and concepts help us understand the impact of choice in a ‘multi-centric’ policymaking environment.

scholarly journals Assumptions About Behavior and Choice in Response to Public Assistance

2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 137-143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Crystal C. Hall ◽  
Martha M. Galvez ◽  
Isaac M. Sederbaum
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Financial Stability ◽  
Policy Design ◽  
Consumer Preferences ◽  
Policy Research ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
Program Outcomes ◽  
Design And Implementation ◽  
Social Service Delivery

Assumptions about decision making and consumer preferences guide programs and products intended to help low-income households achieve healthy outcomes and financial stability. Despite their importance to service design and implementation, these assumptions are rarely stated explicitly, or empirically tested. Some key assumptions may reflect ideas carried over from an earlier era of social-service delivery. Or they may reflect research on decision making by higher income populations that do not hold or have not been tested in a low-income context. This disconnect between assumptions and evidence potentially results in less effective policy design and implementation—at substantial financial and social cost. This piece examines how insights from psychology can help policymakers analyze the core assumptions about behavior that underlie policy outcomes. Three policy areas serve as case studies, to examine some implicit and explicit assumptions about how low-income individuals make decisions under public and nonprofit assistance: banking, nutrition, and housing. Research on preferences and decision making evaluates these foundational assumptions. This perspective provides a unique and under-utilized framework to explain some behavioral puzzles, examine and predict the actions of individuals living in poverty, and understand what are often disappointing program outcomes. Recommendations suggest how psychology and behavioral decision making can impact policy research and design.

scholarly journals Whither the Funnel of Causality?

2016 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 721-741 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matt Wilder
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
Levels Of Abstraction ◽  
Policy Studies ◽  
Feedback Effects ◽  
Policy Regimes ◽  
Policy Communities ◽  
Policy Subsystems

AbstractIf Richard Simeon's “Studying Public Policy” sought to inspire a theory of policy making, however tentative or crude, its conceptual cornerstone was no doubt the “funnel of causality.” Yet references to the funnel of causality have all but disappeared from the policy literature. This article traces the evolution of the thinking that underlies the funnel of causality with the aim of demonstrating its lasting relevance to policy studies. Being a method for understanding how inputs from various levels of abstraction impact policy outcomes, the interaction and feedback effects implicit in the funnel metaphor have been maintained in subsequent neo-institutionalist work that takes seriously the institutional and sociological environment in which policy making takes place, particularly that which is interested in the origins and operation of policy subsystems, policy communities or networks, and policy regimes.

scholarly journals Institutions in Comparative Policy Research

2000 ◽  
Vol 33 (6-7) ◽  
pp. 762-790 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fritz W. Scharpf
Keyword(s):  
Rational Choice ◽  
Causal Effect ◽  
Policy Research ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
Institutional Conditions ◽  
Case Selection ◽  
Theoretical Assumptions ◽  
Rational Choice Institutionalism ◽  
Comparative Case Studies ◽  
Working Hypotheses

The article explores the intersections between the different perspectives of institutional and policy research and discusses the characteristic purposes and conditions of theory-oriented policy research, where the usefulness of statistical analyses is generally constrained by the complexity and contingency of causal influences. Although comparative case studies are better able to deal with these conditions, their capacity to empirically identify the causal effect of differing institutional conditions on policy outcomes depends on a restrictive case selection that would need to hold constant the influence of two other sets of contingent factors—the policy challenges actually faced and the preferences and perceptions of the actors involved. When this is not possible, empirical policy research may usefully resort to a set of institutionalist working hypotheses that are derived from the narrowly specified theoretical assumptions of rational-choice institutionalism. Although these hypotheses will often be wrong, they are useful in guiding the empirical search for factors that are able to explain policy outcomes that deviate from predictions of the rationalist model.

scholarly journals The Age-Orientation of Social Policy Regimes in OECD Countries

2001 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 411-436 ◽  
Author(s):  
JULIA LYNCH
Keyword(s):  
Social Policy ◽  
Social Insurance ◽  
The United States ◽  
Oecd Countries ◽  
Welfare States ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
Social Policies ◽  
Demographic Structure ◽  
Policy Regimes ◽  
Education And Health

This article presents a series of measures of the extent to which social policies in twenty-one OECD countries are oriented towards the support of elderly (over 65 or in formal retirement) and non-elderly (under 65 and not retired) population groups. Employing breakdowns by age in spending on social insurance, education and health, tax expenditures on welfare substituting goods, and housing policy outcomes, this article shows that countries tend to demonstrate a consistent age-orientation across a variety of policy areas and instruments. After correcting for the demographic structure of the population, Greece, Japan, Italy, Spain and the United States have the most elderly-oriented social policy regimes, while the Netherlands, Ireland, Canada and the Nordic countries have a more age-neutral repertoire of social policies. In identifying the age-orientation of social policy as a dimension of distributive politics that is not captured by other welfare state typologies, this article suggests the need to develop new accounts of the development of welfare states that include the dimension of age.

A guide to policy analysis as a research method

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 1032-1044 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Browne ◽  
Brian Coffey ◽  
Kay Cook ◽  
Sarah Meiklejohn ◽  
Claire Palermo
Keyword(s):  
Social Construction ◽  
Policy Analysis ◽  
Public Health Policy ◽  
Research Method ◽  
Research Evidence ◽  
Policy Research ◽  
Policy Actors ◽  
The Social ◽  
Effective Advocacy ◽  
Traditional Approaches

Summary Policy analysis provides a way for understanding how and why governments enact certain policies, and their effects. Public health policy research is limited and lacks theoretical underpinnings. This article aims to describe and critique different approaches to policy analysis thus providing direction for undertaking policy analysis in the field of health promotion. Through the use of an illustrative example in nutrition it aims to illustrate the different approaches. Three broad orientations to policy analysis are outlined: (i) Traditional approaches aim to identify the ‘best’ solution, through undertaking objective analyses of possible solutions. (ii) Mainstream approaches focus on the interaction of policy actors in policymaking. (iii) Interpretive approaches examine the framing and representation of problems and how policies reflect the social construction of ‘problems’. Policy analysis may assist understanding of how and why policies to improve nutrition are enacted (or rejected) and may inform practitioners in their advocacy. As such, policy analysis provides researchers with a powerful tool to understand the use of research evidence in policymaking and generate a heightened understanding of the values, interests and political contexts underpinning policy decisions. Such methods may enable more effective advocacy for policies that can lead to improvements in health.

scholarly journals Does the Conceptualization and Measurement of Democracy Quality Matter in Comparative Climate Policy Research?

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 117-144 ◽  
Author(s):  
Romy Escher ◽  
Melanie Walter-Rogg
Keyword(s):  
Climate Policy ◽  
Policy Research ◽  
Regime Type ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Relative Importance ◽  
Quality Dimensions ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Positive Effect ◽  
Cross National

Previous <em>empirical</em> research on democracy and global warming has mainly questioned whether democracy contributes to climate protection. However, there is no consensus in the <em>theoretical</em> literature on what institutional traits of democracy are crucial for climate policy. Thus, results based on indices that summarize multiple democracy quality dimensions could be misleading, as their effects could balance each other out or hide the relative importance of each institutional trait. This article examines whether the analysis of the effects of democracy quality dimensions, measured by separate indicators, contributes to a better understanding of cross-national variance in climate policy compared to the focus on the regime type difference, measured by democracy quality measures. Compared to earlier research, the results indicate that the positive effect of democracy on commitment to climate cooperation depends on the realization of political rights. We find little to support the claim that democracy quality dimensions matter for climate policy outcomes. The main implication of our findings is that it could be fruitful to use more disaggregated democracy measures for the analysis of substantive research questions.

Making the Law of the Jungle: The Reform of Forest Legislation in Bolivia, Cameroon, Costa Rica, and Indonesia.

2002 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 63-97 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eduardo Silva ◽  
David Kaimowitz ◽  
Alan Bojanic ◽  
Francois Ekoko ◽  
Togu Manurung ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Policy Process ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Forest Policy ◽  
Policy Research ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
Power Resources ◽  
The World Bank ◽  
Research Organizations ◽  
Forest Legislation

In the debate over the forest, policy research organizations have concentrated on uncovering the causes of deforestation and recommending measures to develop them sustainably. This article examines the conditions under which those prescriptions find their way into public policy, specifically, into reforming forest laws. We argue that this is a political rather than technocratic process that requires knowing the principal actors, their interests, and their power resources. The combination of these factors and, therefore forest policy outcomes, varies across our cases. However, similar combinations in other cases should have comparable results. We found that actors who dominated the policy process in the early stages, such as the World Bank, lost significant ground in the later stages, in part because legislatures were an important policy-making arena and legislators had significant impact on outcomes. The latter was surprising because one tends to assume the executive branch is the principal locus of policy-making in developing countries.

scholarly journals Enhancing the use of stakeholder analysis for policy implementation research: towards a novel framing and operationalised measures

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (11) ◽  
pp. e002661
Author(s):  
Marysol Astrea Balane ◽  
Benjamin Palafox ◽  
Lia M Palileo-Villanueva ◽  
Martin McKee ◽  
Dina Balabanova
Keyword(s):  
Health Policy ◽  
Policy Implementation ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Stakeholder Analysis ◽  
Policy Research ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Policy Actors ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Practical Tool ◽  
Framework Development

BackgroundPolicy is shaped and influenced by a diverse set of stakeholders at the global, national and local levels. While stakeholder analysis is a recognised practical tool to assess the positions and engagement of actors relevant to policy, few empirical studies provide details of how complex concepts such as power, interest and position are operationalised and assessed in these types of analyses. This study aims to address this gap by reviewing conceptual approaches underlying stakeholder analyses and by developing a framework that can be applied to policy implementation in low-and-middle income countries.MethodsThe framework was developed through a three-step process: a scoping review, peer review by health policy experts and the conduct of an analysis using key informant interviews and a consensus building exercise. Four characteristics were selected for inclusion: levels of knowledge, interest, power and position of stakeholders related to the policy.ResultThe framework development process highlighted the need to revisit how we assess the power of actors, a key issue in stakeholder analyses, and differentiate an actor’s potential power, based on resources, and whether they exercise it, based on the actions they take for or against a policy. Exploration of the intersections between characteristics of actors and their level of knowledge can determine interest, which in turn can affect stakeholder position on a policy, showing the importance of analysing these characteristics together. Both top-down and bottom-up approaches in implementation must also be incorporated in the analysis of policy actors, as there are differences in the type of knowledge, interest and sources of power among national, local and frontline stakeholders.ConclusionThe developed framework contributes to health policy research by offering a practical tool for analysing the characteristics of policy actors and tackling the intricacies of assessing complex concepts embedded in the conduct of stakeholder analyses.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document