IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/anname/v685y2019i1p30-46.html

Making What Government Does Apparent to Citizens: Policy Feedback Effects, Their Limitations, and How They Might Be Facilitated

Author

Listed:
  • Suzanne Mettler

Abstract

Public policies sometimes generate “policy feedback effects,†reshaping public opinion and political participation among beneficiaries or the public generally, often with the effects of generating supportive constituencies that help to sustain the program. Yet such effects do not always occur; in fact, despite that Americans use more social policies than ever, antipathy to government runs high—evidence of a seeming “government-citizen disconnect.†Policy design and delivery matters for policy feedback, as policies that make government’s role more visible may make more of an impression on beneficiaries; yet political polarization and distrust in government can interfere with such effects. In addition, those who are most aware of the government’s role in social provision often participate least in politics, and vice versa. This article considers strategies that public officials and other civic and political leaders can use to facilitate policy feedback effects.

Suggested Citation

  • Suzanne Mettler, 2019. "Making What Government Does Apparent to Citizens: Policy Feedback Effects, Their Limitations, and How They Might Be Facilitated," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 685(1), pages 30-46, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:anname:v:685:y:2019:i:1:p:30-46
    DOI: 10.1177/0002716219860108
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0002716219860108
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0002716219860108?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schneider, Anne & Ingram, Helen, 1993. "Social Construction of Target Populations: Implications for Politics and Policy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(2), pages 334-347, June.
    2. Morgan, Kimberly J. & Campbell, Andrea Louise, 2011. "The Delegated Welfare State: Medicare, Markets, and the Governance of Social Policy," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199730353.
    3. Charles S. Taber & Milton Lodge, 2006. "Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(3), pages 755-769, July.
    4. Lerman, Amy E. & Sadin, Meredith L. & Trachtman, Samuel, 2017. "Policy Uptake as Political Behavior: Evidence from the Affordable Care Act," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 111(4), pages 755-770, November.
    5. Soss, Joe, 1999. "Lessons of Welfare: Policy Design, Political Learning, and Political Action," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 93(2), pages 363-380, June.
    6. Soss, Joe & Schram, Sanford F., 2007. "A Public Transformed? Welfare Reform as Policy Feedback," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 101(1), pages 111-127, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Guang Yang & Yu Zhang, 2026. "Who tells the policy story? Exploring the citizen policy narrative framework and feedback mechanisms in China’s healthcare reform," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 59(1), pages 101-130, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Avi Ben-Bassat & Momi Dahan, 2016. "Biased Policy and Political Behavior," CESifo Working Paper Series 6269, CESifo.
    2. H. Abbie Erler, 2012. "A New Face of Poverty? Economic Crises and Poverty Discourses," Poverty & Public Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(4), pages 183-204, December.
    3. repec:osf:socarx:9khds_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Momi Dahan, 2023. "Social Construction And The Progressivity Of Local Tax Relief," Israel Economic Review, Bank of Israel, vol. 21(1), pages 1-33, March.
    5. Matt Guardino & Suzanne Mettler, 2020. "Revealing the “Hidden welfare state†: How policy information influences public attitudes about tax expenditures," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 3(1).
    6. Megan M. Reynolds & Ashley M. Fox & Yvette Young, 2021. "State‐level social safety nets for families coping with job loss," Poverty & Public Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(2), pages 121-138, June.
    7. Melissa K. Merry & Rodger A. Payne, 2024. "Climate fatalism, partisan cues, and support for the Inflation Reduction Act," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 57(2), pages 379-402, June.
    8. Eric Chyn & Kareem Haggag, 2023. "Moved to Vote: The Long-Run Effects of Neighborhoods on Political Participation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 105(6), pages 1596-1605, November.
    9. Jacqueline Chattopadhyay, 2017. "Is the ACA's Dependent Coverage Provision Generating Positive Feedback Effects Among Young Adults?," Poverty & Public Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(1), pages 42-70, March.
    10. Samuel Trachtman, 2019. "Building Climate Policy in the States," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 685(1), pages 96-114, September.
    11. Heather Millar & Matthew Lesch & Linda A. White, 2019. "Connecting models of the individual and policy change processes: a research agenda," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 52(1), pages 97-118, March.
    12. repec:osf:osfxxx:26xdj_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Yue Guo & Lei Zhou & Jidong Chen, 2023. "The persuasive role of the past: Policy feedback and citizens' acceptance of information communication technologies during the COVID‐19 pandemic in China," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 40(4), pages 573-588, July.
    14. Jingjing Zeng & Meng Yuan & Richard Feiock, 2019. "What Drives People to Complain about Environmental Issues? An Analysis Based on Panel Data Crossing Provinces of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-18, February.
    15. Jamila Michener, 2019. "Medicaid and the Policy Feedback Foundations for Universal Healthcare," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 685(1), pages 116-134, September.
    16. Opalo, Ken Ochieng' & Habyarimana, James & Schipper, Youdi, 2021. "The Contingent Electoral Impacts of Programmatic Policies: Evidence From Education Reforms in Tanzania," OSF Preprints utpqn, Center for Open Science.
    17. Plutzer, Eric, 2010. "Do highly exclusive social welfare programs increase political inequality? A comparative analysis of the 50 US states," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Inequality and Social Integration SP I 2010-201, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    18. Eivind Hoff-Elimari & Anat Bardi & Simon Matti & Kristina Östman, 2014. "Collective action problems: Disentangling possible feedback loops between government policies and the public’s value-change," European Journal of Government and Economics, Europa Grande, vol. 3(1), pages 24-46, June.
    19. Srinivas Yerramsetti & Manish Anand & Adrian Ritz, 2022. "Digitalized Welfare for Sustainable Energy Transitions: Examining the Policy Design Aspects of the Cooking Gas Cash Transfers in India," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-20, August.
    20. Maria Husmann, 2015. "Social constructions of obesity target population: an empirical look at obesity policy narratives," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(4), pages 415-442, December.
    21. Eric M. Patashnik, 2019. "Limiting Policy Backlash: Strategies for Taming Countercoalitions in an Era of Polarization," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 685(1), pages 47-63, September.
    22. Pfaff, Steven & Crabtree, Charles & Kern, Holger L. & Holbein, John B., 2018. "Does religious bias shape access to public services? A large-scale audit experiment among street-level bureaucrats," SocArXiv 9khds, Center for Open Science.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:anname:v:685:y:2019:i:1:p:30-46. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.