What work makes policy?
AbstractThe mainstream policy literature identifies a number of activities as part of â€˜policy-makingâ€™: â€˜policy analysisâ€™, â€˜policy adviceâ€™, â€˜decision-makingâ€™, and perhaps also â€˜implementationâ€™ and â€˜evaluationâ€™. Describing policy in these terms is compatible with the Western cultural account, and these terms tend to be applied to positions, organisational segments and official procedures. But policy practitioners tend to find that on the one hand, their experience of their work bears little resemblance to the assumptions in this policy-making model, and on the other, that policy outcomes seem to reflect much broader processes than the work of specialist functionaries. On closer examination, we find that our thinking about policy activity draws on several distinct and potentially conflicting perspectives, and that what is seen as â€˜policy workâ€™ depends on the conceptualisation of the policy process. Framing the question in this way helps to understand the apparent differences between mainstream (American) accounts of policy activity and policy practice in other political systems. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, LLP 2006
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Springer in its journal Policy Sciences.
Volume (Year): 39 (2006)
Issue (Month): 4 (December)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=102982
Policy analysis; Policy practice; Policy knowledge; Interaction in policy; Interpretive policy analysis;
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Koen Bartels, 2013. "Research as Usual: How Researching Public Problems Affects Problem Solving," Working Papers 13002, Bangor Business School, Prifysgol Bangor University (Cymru / Wales).
- Nambiar, Devaki, 2013. "India's “tryst” with universal health coverage: Reflections on ethnography in Indian health policymaking," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 135-142.
- Farhad Mukhtarov & Andrea Gerlak, 2014. "Epistemic forms of integrated water resources management: towards knowledge versatility," Policy Sciences, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 101-120, June.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn) or (Christopher F. Baum).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.