A Model of Muddling Through

1995 ◽  
Vol 89 (4) ◽  
pp. 819-840 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Bendor

As arguments about the effectiveness of “muddling through” have proven frustratingly inconclusive, incrementalism—once a major approach to the study of boundedly rational policy processes—has gone dormant. In an attempt to revitalize the debate, I present a formal model of muddling through. The model, by clarifying the logical structure of the informal theory, presents a clearer target for criticism. More importantly, it establishes numerous deductive results. First, some of Lindblom's less controversial conjectures—about the benefits of seriality (repeated attacks on the same policy problem) and redundancy (multiple decision makers working on the same problem)—turn out to be correct if conflict across policy domains is absent or takes certain specified forms. But given other empirically reasonable types of conflict, even these claims are wrong. Second, the advantages of incremental (local) policy search (Lindblom's best-known and most controversial claim) turn out to be still less well founded: in many empirically plausible contexts the claim is invalid.

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (5) ◽  
pp. 472-480
Author(s):  
Huainian Zhu ◽  
Guangyu Zhang ◽  
Chengke Zhang ◽  
Ying Zhu ◽  
Haiying Zhou

AbstractThis paper discusses linear quadratic Nash game of stochastic singular time-delay systems governed by Itô’s differential equation. Sufficient condition for the existence of Nash strategies is given by means of linear matrix inequality for the first time. Moreover, in order to demonstrate the usefulness of the proposed theory, stochastic H2∕H∞control with multiple decision makers is discussed as an immediate application.


2015 ◽  
Vol 713-715 ◽  
pp. 1769-1772
Author(s):  
Jie Wu ◽  
Lei Na Zheng ◽  
Tie Jun Pan

In order to reflect the decision-making more scientific and democratic, modern decision problems often require the participation of multiple decision makers. In group decision making process,require the use of intuitionistic fuzzy hybrid averaging operator (IFHA) to get the final decision result.


2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 251-262 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory P. Marchildon

AbstractAt present, the professional skills of the historian are rarely relied upon when health policies are being formulated. There are numerous reasons for this, one of which is the natural desire of decision-makers to break with the past when enacting big bang policy change. This article identifies the strengths professional historians bring to bear on policy development using the establishment and subsequent reform of universal health coverage as an example. Historians provide pertinent and historically informed context; isolate the forces that have historically allowed for major reform; and separate the truly novel reforms from those attempted or implemented in the past. In addition, the historian’s use of primary sources allows potentially new and highly salient facts to guide the framing of the policy problem and its solution. This paper argues that historians are critical for constructing a viable narrative of the establishment and evolution of universal health coverage policies. The lack of this narrative makes it difficult to achieve an accurate assessment of systemic gaps in coverage and access, and the design or redesign of universal health coverage that can successfully close these gaps.


2020 ◽  
pp. JOP.19.00608
Author(s):  
Andrew Hantel ◽  
Fay J. Hlubocky ◽  
Mark Siegler ◽  
Christopher K. Daugherty

PURPOSE: Medication shortages in US hospitals are ongoing, widespread, and frequently involve antineoplastic and supportive medications used in cancer care. The ways shortages are managed and the ways provider-patient communication takes place are heterogeneous, but the related preferences of oncology patients are undefined. This study sought to qualitatively evaluate patient preferences. METHODS: A cross-sectional, semi-structured interview study was conducted from January to June 2019. Participants were adult oncology inpatients who received primary cancer care at the University of Chicago, had undergone treatment within 2 years, and had 1 or more previous hospitalizations during that period. Participants (n = 54) were selected consecutively from alternating hematology and oncology services. The primary outcome was thematic saturation across the domains of awareness of medication shortages, principle preferences regarding decision makers, preferences regarding allocation of therapy drugs, and allocation-related communication. RESULTS: Thematic saturation was reached after 39 participants completed the study procedures (mean age, 59.6 years [standard deviation, 14.5 years]; men made up 61.5% of the study population [mean age, 24 years]; response rate, 72.0%). In all, 18% of participants were aware of institutional medication shortages. Patients preferred having multiple decision makers for allocating medications in the event of a shortage. A majority of patients named oncologists (100%), ethicists (92%), non-oncology physicians (77%), and pharmacists (64%) as their preferred decision makers. Participants favored allocation of drugs based on their efficacy (normalized weighted average, 1.3), and they also favored prioritizing people who were already receiving treatment (1.8), younger patients (2.0), sicker patients (3.1), and those presenting first for treatment (5.3). Most participants preferred preferred disclosure of supportive care medication shortages (74%) and antineoplastic medication shortages (79%) for equivalent substitutions. CONCLUSION: In a tertiary-care center with medication shortages, few oncologic inpatients were aware of shortages. Participants preferred having multiple decision makers involved in principle-driven allocation of scarce medications. Disclosure was preferred when their usual medications needed to be substituted with equivalent alternatives. These preliminary data suggest that preferences do not align with current management practices for medication shortages.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document