Public Policy Analysis PDF

Q1 - Political sciences | Anna Sonnenschein Part IV – Polity analysis 1. Political parties a. Introduction : why are public policies important? Public policies = all...

Q1 - Political sciences | Anna Sonnenschein Part IV – Polity analysis 1. Political parties a. Introduction : why are public policies important? Public policies = all the actions of the State, of public authorities (public policies can also be outside of the State, there are local and international policies) → all the ways of intervening by the State, that are increasingly sophisticated Why is studying public policy important/relevant? → Public policies are omnipresent in our contemporary societies. o Most of our individual choices are influenced by public policies (ex : we eat based on agricultural/environment policies,…) o ex : almost every article in a newspaper has a link with public policies → Analysing public policies allows to better understand the State, through its concrete achievements (outputs), the State in action → Analysing public policies offers an in-depth look at a large number of current issues at the heart of public debate Studying public action is asking how a society tries to solve its own problems, what are the set of means a society adopts to take charge of the problems that can weaken its coherence and functioning → ex : public policies are there to help tackle problems such as things that prevent people to have a good life, to have access to education,…. Public policies : the intermediary between polity and politics Everything that is implemented by public authority and government agents (= politics) in order to manage, calm or repress the tensions/problems that run through society, thus making it possible to maintain collective leaving together (= polity) → Big importance of policies when thinking of the political order of the world 66  Q1 - Political sciences | Anna Sonnenschein b. What is public policy analysis The genesis of policy analysis = the evolution since the emergence of this discipline Policy analysis = the result of different branches of science that developed a thinking on the State In the 17th and 18th c., in France and Germany, there was the emergence of “cameral sciences” → whose goal is to describe the administration (descriptive knowledge) and to improve the functioning of the bureaucracy → the State must realize the well-being of society (it is what legitimises its existence), and so it must be equipped with the appropriate means to reach this goal → They began to think about the tools of the State (public policies In the 19th c., it was structured as “administrative sciences” (ancestor of policy analysis) : a way of thinking about the functioning of the State and of the administration Appearance of policy analysis as such in the 1960s in the USA, in spheres close to political power (especially after the arrival of JFK in power) : → the experts were asked to support the government action → economic growth makes the State legitimate to intervene directly to solve social problems (poverty, inequalities, … ) relying on the machinery of the Stat → The State was seen as a rational actor that can act efficiently and optimally against social problems Policy analysis in the 60’s was therefore : → a practical discipline → an integral part of the State apparatus → added extra legitimacy to public action, through scientific methods and instruments (statistics) – → it was an experimental conception of public action o ex : experimenting housing policies : neighbourhoods were divided into blocks to which different policies were applied → its goal was to produce a knowledge that could be applied to the solving of social problems, improving the effectiveness of public policies through the rationalization of State action. o It was a science of public action for public action : it wanted to solve social problems following a scientific method the turn of 1970s In the 70’s there was a major change of perspective regarding the previous period. → The nature of public analysis was transformed (also because of a change in the context of public action). → There are 3 main reasons to this change : [1. Practical reasons : Programs implemented were expensive + they encountered some relative failures + the development of the economic crisis led to a decrease of public spending → a more modest conception of public analysis tended to be developed [2. Theoretical reasons : A criticism of the rationality lead to → concept of a more limited rationality of the State, → there was a problem of access and production of information, → and a problem of internal control and functioning of public organisations 67  Q1 - Political sciences | Anna Sonnenschein The sociology of organisation showed that the State should not be considered as a homogeneous entity anymore but rather as a series of actors that happen to be in competition with each other [3. Ideological reasons : Neo-liberal turn (a more liberal conception of the economy and of the role of the State), a new conception that delegitimizes public action : → ideas of de-regulation and privatization become more dominant → and the will to gradually dismantle the State structures gain a lot of importance There was therefore a general redefinition of the role of the State → Policy analysis withdraws from the direct support of political decision and becomes an autonomous academic discipline, part of political science, → there was a change in the nature of the discipline Recent transformation: a new branch of political sciences 3 major evolutions : → Institutionalization as an autonomous sub-discipline of political science → “Sociologisation” : increasing interest for the actors of the public policies and their modes of interaction and intervention o The State is no longer at the center of the analysis o the aim is to seek to understand the interactions between public actors and private actors. o There is an emergence of a sociological approach and methodology → Opening beyond the national framework : change in the boundaries of public action and development of non-state public policies (local policies, international policies, european policies) o The public policies can no longer be restrained to only the national level The aim of public analysis went from a production of public policies by the State to the understanding of a collective construction of public action, on several levels of power c. What is a public policy? How to define a public policy? A public policy is a very difficult object to define. It varies : - → in time: o ex : today, public action covers a much broader area than 30 years ago o ex : in the protection of the environment → in space: o ex : in the US, taxes are much lower than in Europe, because public policies in the US take mainly the form of regulation rather than spending programs How can we find a valid and coherent definition that accounts for this diversity? 68  Q1 - Political sciences | Anna Sonnenschein “Who gets what, when and how?” (Harold D. Lasswell, Politics : Who gets What, When, How, 1936) It was the very first definition of a public policy → The book was written before the emergence of political analysis Interesting elements : → Emphasis on the social dimension of public policies o they constitute resources or constraints for individuals and some actors have interests in the development of public policies → Emphasis of the fact that public policies have an impact, an effect o they represent resources but also constraints for individuals Limitations : → It is a very imprecise definition : who does what? Who are the actors of public policies? What are the specifies compared to other social actions? What are the processes of public policies? Since Lasswell, a lot of other definitions have been elaborated but they are often unsuccessful, unsatisfactory → there is often a missing dimension, it is not accurate “A social construct and a research construct” (Pierre Muller, Yves Surel, L’analyse des politiques publiques, 1998) We all intuitively have an idea of what a public policy may be (ex : environment policy) → BUT the perimeter of a public policy must not be considered as a given (hence the difficulty of defining its content in a single definition) → ex : the ministry of environment does not only make legislative texts, there may be policies in the absence of a specific ministry, different ministries can have impacts on the same policies (ministry of agriculture has an impact on environment policies) ,…. A public policy is simply an analytical category, built by the actors who produce it and by the researcher who studies it So, in this sense, a public policy is both : → A social construct : what the actors do and say about it, a product of social actors and of their interactions o ex : actors talk about urban policy to give coherence to a whole set of measures concerning buildings → A research construct : o understanding how a public policy has become a social construct o there is no evidence ▪ perimeter, explicit and latent meanings (some policies are not what the actors say they are) ▪ difference between budgetary existence and impact o Public policies are constructed and defined by the researcher In order to construct public policies as a research object, there is a necessary preliminary step : the analysis of the constituent elements of a public policy, the different elements that constitute a public policy 69  Q1 - Political sciences | Anna Sonnenschein “The five elements of any public policy are content, a program, a normative orientation, a coercive factor and a social dimension” (Yves Mény, Jean-Claude Thoening, Politiques publiques, 1989) A way of getting around the difficulty of the definition by breaking down/separating policies into their constitutive elements : → A content : concrete acts, material, or symbolic elements of a public policy o legislation, subsidy (= subventions), creation of an organization, speeches, information campaign, … → A program : refers to the general framework of analysis, which includes more or less objective boundaries (ex : ministerial definition) and the social logics that define these boundaries (ex : the policy against drug abuse has sanctions, curative dimension, …) → A normative orientation : there are always objectives behind public policies (implicit or explicit), role of the ideological values, representations, and preferences of the actors → A coercive factor : public action constrains the behaviors of actors, public or private → A social dimension : “all public and private actors who contribute more or less directly to the production and implementation of a public policy”, all actors that participate to the interactions that give rise to public policies o including the “public” of public policies : the beneficiaries, the recipients) A typology of public policies = a way to define and compare public policies The most classic typology is the typology by Theodore Lowi, 1960s : he highlights the large range of public policies and distinguishes 2 parameters → The type of public or recipients of a public policy, the target : individuals or groups → The type of constraint imposed by the State : direct or indirect Coercion operates on Individual behavior The group, the environment of individuals Distributive policies Procedural policies Rely on the granting of specific services or Cases in which the public authority issues INDIRECT authorisations, the individual is the rules on rules, lay procedures that have to The constraint beneficiary of the public action because he be followed by all this involved in public is distant fulfils a number of conditions set by public policies authorities Ex : consultation procedures, public Ex : granting of building permits debates, reform of the administration Redistributive policies Regulatory policies Public authorities decide upon rules that Lay down some mandatory rules that apply concern a group defined by their on criteria DIRECT to every individual in a given situation. The The constraint State condemn certain individual behaviours Ex : social insurance, progressive taxation is immediate in specific circumstances. These policies rely on sanctions Ex : speed limitations 70  Q1 - Political sciences | Anna Sonnenschein This typology therefore emphasizes the diversity of public policies Limitations : → It is not exhaustive : it does not take into account o direct intervention policies : situations in which the relation between the public authority and the target of the public policy is not constraint, situations which no coercion) o or incentive policies : where the public authority uses persuasion (ex : prevention campaigns,…) → It is unidimensional : it does not take into account the multidimensional nature of public policies : o it is almost impossible to reduce one public policy to one of the types identified o for one type of issue several types of public policies often co-exist ( o ex : policy of tobacco control = regulatory (prohibition of smoking in public spaces) + redistributive elements (taxes on cigarettes) + incentive elements Public policies are a series of decisions and interactive effects (dynamic process) d. Analyzing public action through it sequences The policy cycle The sequential analysis model : public action is divided into sequences that can be theoretically separated in order to analyze the action of the State (Charles Jones, An Introduction to the Study of Public Policy, 1970) The sequential grid, the policy process, is divided into 5 sequences : [1. Agenda-setting : identification of a problem, until the State takes charge of this problem Several activities are ensured (guaranteed) during this first sequence : → the definition of social needs by the actors → the collective organisation of these actors to transform these needs into demands and to transmit them to the public authorities → the acknowledgment of these needs by the authorities This takes into account non-State actors who participate in the identification of the problems by → naming the problem → blaming those responsible for the situation → calming demanding for the problem to be taken in charge // Social movements [2. Decision: development of a policy program Public authorities intervene Several activities are ensured during this second sequence : → formulation of a solution, → choice of a proposal for public actio, → the legitimisation of the decision through legal and political means 71  Q1 - Political sciences | Anna Sonnenschein [3. Implementation: implementation of the program The measures decided upon are applied by the public authorities. → The administration comes in and the solution becomes concrete [4. Evaluation: measurement and analysis of the results : the effect of the policy and the reactions to it Sometimes allows for the identification of a new problem who emerges and a reformulation of solutions at the origin of a new cycle [5. Termination: completion of the policy when the problem that led to its implementation has been resolved This rarely happens : there is most often a change in the orientation of a policy rather than its termination According to this policy cycle, public policies are therefore a continuous flow of interdependent sequences, that constitute a permanent cycle Criticism and limitations The sequences can be difficult to identify : → There can be non-decision (rejected choices,…), non-linear sequences, non-existing sequences – → This can happen with the decision sequences : o Ex : Jakob Hacker, “The Divided Welfare State”, 2002 : an analysis on a recurring non-decision that led to the lack of health insurance system in the USA and gave rise to an important private healthcare until the Obamacare reform on the universal healthcare system → This can also happen with the implementation phase : many decisions go unheeded, are not implemented (“paper laws”, laws non applied or blocked) (ex : in the US, Trump’s decision to issue a travel ban was blocked by State-level judges) 72  Q1 - Political sciences | Anna Sonnenschein It can be difficult to clearly mark the division between the sequences → The analysis is often empirically confronted with an entanglement of the sequences → It can be difficult to isolate sequences, especially the decision sequence : public policies can be seen as o a continuous flow of multiple decisions (decision to tackle a problem, restrict the range of possible choices, adopt one solution, interpret a text in a specific sense,….) o a lot of micro decisions rather than one moment on decision, a complex, non-linear and circular decision-making process The succession of sequences is far from being systematic (does not necessarily follow the order of Jone’s grid) → Ex : the implementation of on public policy can lead to the agenda-setting of another problem o ex : the agenda-setting of policy to fight against aids was the result of the contamination of people suffering of haemophilia as part of the blood-transfusion policy → Ex : the formulation of a solution before the agenda-setting of a problem o ex : when a decision is adopted secretly then made public by actors who oppose it The assumptions underlying the grid are problematic → A single, or at least a clearly identifiable, decision-maker is rarely the case : the actors involved in the production of public action are multiple, private, public, … → The target to reach is rarely clear, the goals of a public policy are rarely unique, are most often equivocal and blurred and can appear along the way : there can be several different targets, some of which have vague outlines, are shifting, … → Implementation is not the simple realization of what has been decides previously, there are multiple gaps/distortions between decision and implementation. o So much so that in some situations, the implementation sequence is almost autonomous with regard to the decision → Reality is much more chaotic than the sequential grid suggests Two important dimensions of public action are forgotten in the grid → The multiple constraints that weigh on public policies : o context (social, demographic, economic, international, …) o other policies (in other areas of public action) o availability of instruments (that limit the room of manoeuvre of the new policy) o legacy of the past, … → The symbolic dimension (speeches, communications, …) of a public policy (see Murray Endelman, Political Language : Words that Succeed and Policies that Fail, 1977 : gestures can promise more than, reality) o displaying concern of the public authorities can be the most important part of the policy o importance not in the action actually implemented but in the demonstration of attention to the problem This grid is therefore a stylized representation of reality, but still a useful analytical tool → // Weberian ideal type 73  Q1 - Political sciences | Anna Sonnenschein An illustration: Laurie Boussaguet: the agenda-setting process of child sexual abuse in Europe in the 1980s → This research allows us to understand how and why a public problem will become a public policy. What will lead the State to take up an issue and to decide to intervene? → She focuses on the notion of “agenda-setting”: The agenda is a set of issues perceived as requiring public debate or even intervention by public authorities, it gathers the social problems that are the subject of attention by the authorities → She asks how a problem is placed on the agenda, or what are the factors that lead public authorities to deal with a problem and take action to address it? Agenda-setting is seen as a crucial (and competitive) key to understand the political game and the characteristics of the democratic regime → in our democracies, the competition between actors to be placed on the agenda is extremely important to define the nature of polity Child sexual abuse Child sexual abuse has always existed (it was, for a long time, confined to the silence and the privacy of those who lived it), but it became a public and political problem, promoting major legislative changes, only in the 1980s But, puzzling enough, the actors who first took this problem and made it reach the public and political agenda are not the ones who were expected to in theory : → child protection associations would be the most likely to take on an emerging problem related to this, → but they had more a position of reaction than of anticipation The study shows that the main actors of the emergence of sexual abuse as a public problem are actually feminist activists → They were the first to “discover” the extent of the phenomenon → They were also the first to bring the issue in the public debate Why and how did feminists activists bring out the problem of sexual abuse of children in the 1980’s? The article compared 3 European countries (Belgium, England and France) to study the central role of feminist activists in the emergence process and highlighted the way they discovered it and the extent of the phenomenon of child sexual abuse. It also allowed to analyze the mechanisms that allowed this discovery and how feminists managed to publicize this question as a problem calling for political and policy interpretation → They tried to tackle the problem directly (without politicizing it), with the help of therapy, support groups,… → They developed expertise : they were the first to provide statistics and figure on this phenomenon thanks to their hotline → They publicized the cause via books, conventions, the media,… - They built coalitions to give more weight to their voices (with doctors, psychiatrists, lobby groups, …) With this involvement of feminist activists, the question of child sexual abuse became a public problem recognized by the public authorities as a question that has to be taken into account and by the object of a public policy → end of the agenda-setting phase and beginning of the decision phase 74