An Overview of Hong Kong’s Social Policy-Making Process

1986 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 166-176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Scott ◽  
Kathleen Cheek-Milby
1981 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 453-475 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Whiteley

ABSTRACTThis article discusses the role of public opinion in the social policy making process. It argues that existing accounts of social policy formation are inadequate in their treatment of public opinion, and inconsistent in their estimation of its importance. It then goes on to examine detailed examples of the role of public opinion in policy making; and finally tests two hypotheses concerning the sources of the demand for social welfare spending on the part of the British electorate.


1979 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 311-334
Author(s):  
Stuart S. Blume

ABSTRACTThe recent debate about the establishment of a ‘British Brookings’ involved a number of fundamental issues which were not brought out. In fact the idea that the British policy-making process should be made more ‘rational’ through the development of what are sometimes called policy studies is not new. It has roots in the Heyworth Report on social studies, which recommended greater use of social research in policy-making, and in the Fulton Report on the civil service, which argued for more policy-planning. These two approaches may now be seen as basically the same, and the problem as one of changing the relationship between social science and (social) policy. However, past analyses of this relationship attribute difficulties to quite different causes and hence yield a variety of prescriptions for reform. It is argued here that the policy studies which are needed must avoid the disciplinary fragmentation of the social sciences as well as that of the current administrative structure, that they must encompass research both for policy and on policy, and that they must seek their own conceptual structure, and in addition that certain organizational requirements follow from this.


2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 261-281 ◽  
Author(s):  
Umut Riza Ozkan

AbstractThis article examines the development of a ‘dualised’ welfare regime –generous earnings-related unemployment compensation for ‘insiders’ andresidualneeds-based social assistance provision for ‘outsiders’ – in China and Brazil, which experienced impressive economic development in recent decades. It argues that such a welfare outcome can partly be accounted for by the ongoing influence of ‘insiders’, which was conditional upon the pace and nature of economic liberalisation reforms and their representation in institutional channels of social policy-making. It also demonstrates that the new social/unemployment assistance schemes for ‘outsiders’ emerged due to both governments’ fear of losing their power in politics; yet, these schemes were designed in a residual way since ‘outsiders’ did not possess the same political resources as ‘insiders’ did. The paper, moreover, draws from the Russian experience (a negative case) to demonstrate that such a dualised welfare outcome did not take place because the ‘insiders’ were weak, owing to a radical and orthodox liberalisation and they did not have access to institutional venues to influence social policy-making process.


2012 ◽  
pp. 83-88
Author(s):  
A. Zolotov ◽  
M. Mukhanov

А new approach to policy-making in the field of economic reforms in modernizing countries (on the sample of SME promotion) is the subject of this article. Based on summarizing the ten-year experience of de-bureaucratization policy implementation to reduce the administrative pressure on SME, the conclusion of its insufficient efficiency and sustainability is made. The alternative possibility is the positive reintegration approach, which provides multiparty policy-making process, special compensation mechanisms for the losing sides, monitoring and enforcement operations. In conclusion matching between positive reintegration principles and socio-cultural factors inherent in modernization process is provided.


2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 135-171
Author(s):  
Jeong Ho Yoo ◽  
Yunju Yang ◽  
Ji Hye Choi ◽  
Seung Taek Lee ◽  
Rosa Minhyo Cho

Author(s):  
Michelle Belco ◽  
Brandon Rottinghaus

The president serves dual roles in the political system: one who “commands” by pursuing his or her agenda using unilateral orders and one who “administers” and who works to continue proper government function, often with the support of Congress. In a reassessment of the literature on unilateral power, this book considers the president’s dual roles during the stages of the policy-making process. Although presidents may appear to act “first and alone,” the reality is often much different. Presidents act in response to their own concerns, as well as assisting Congress on priorities and the need to maintain harmonic government function. The authors find support for both the model of an aggressive president who uses unilateral orders to push his or her agenda, head off unfavorable congressional legislation, and selectively implement legislation, and they find support for a unifying president who is willing to share management of government, support Congressional legislative efforts, and faithfully implement legislation. At the same time, presidents self-check their actions based on the ability of Congress to act to overturn their orders, through a shared sense of responsibility to keep government moving and out of respect for the constitutional balance. The shared nature of unilateral orders does not preclude an active president, as presidents remain strong, central actors in the political system.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document