Kingdon (1984) Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies

Lubell. (2004). "Collaborative Watershed Management: A View from the Grassroots"

What affects policy effectiveness?
1.) economic considerations
2.) social capital

What is the role of grassroots stakeholders in the development of social capital? "Cooperation entails a behavioral component of participation in a collaborative partnership or other watershed management activity and attitudinal support for a particular set of policies. Cooperative attitudes and behaviors are both necessary, but no sufficient, to produce cooperation in the context of of collaborative management" (355).
"...to the extent the governance institutuins of the Suwannee Partnership and the concept of Best Management Practices is consistent with farmers' core beliefs, they should view the BMP program as effective" (346).

Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF)
Under the ACF our belief system is consistent with a range of social values. "The AFC, drawing from theories of social cognition, argues that people tend to discount information about an attitude object that is inconsistent with their core beliefs, and accept information that is consistent with their core beliefs" (346). Fundamental social values are of the most importance because they are what affect our perceptions of everything else. The two most prominent views of the environment are that either 1.) the extent to which people value environmental amenities and 2.) human activities threaten environmental values.

Findings:
Farmer's actions are driven largely by reciprocity from other farmers, and trust in governments.

Cannon and Riehl. (2004). Presidential Greenspeak: How Presidents Talk About the Environment and What it Means

How is the culture of environmentalism reflected in the rhetoric or speech of our presidents? Is mainstream environmentalism reflected, or are more radical positions addressed?

rhetoric can be important as it becomes an instrument of governance. "presidential speeches and other events that stir public admiration and reassure us that he is in tune with us on important issues are understood as essential to effective governance" (3).

Does the influence of rhetoric undermining democracy, especially its deliberative elements?
No.
1 Rhetoric can aid accountability--the public can punish him/her if he speaks and it dislikes what he says. "presidential rhetoric is one basis for evaluating whether the president is reliably representing our national values, aspiriations and preferred polices" (3).
2 rhetoric provides a standard by which their policies can be judged. Did they really do what they said they were going to do?

what is the affect of presidential rhetoric on our political life?

the authors reject the political science apprach--which assures that presidents act out of political self interest and use rhetoric as a means to produce positive public responses--and instead adopt the humanities approach which "assumes that the world created by presodential rhetoric has significance in and of itself, apart from its political consequences or lack thereof. We take the images, metaphors, stories, ideas, and moral sentiments in the rhetoric as an embodiment of our national culture, an artifact that can yield important insigns about ourselves" (5). the authors proscribe that an understanding of american environmentalism can be drawn from presidential rhetoric.

Hedge, Menzel and Williams. (1988). Regulatory Attitudes and Behavior: The Case of Surface Mining Regulation

Public policies as determined by the INDIVIDUALS in contact with programs (i.e. street level bureaucrats); the attitudes of these individuals ultimately have great influence on public polcies. To test this the authors look at the environmental values of the individuals and see whether or not that those policies which aligns more with the values of the personnel are more likely to see through the policy's enactment.

This article is a good example of the influence individual attitudes have on policy making.

Schneider and Ingram. (1993). Social Construction of Target Populations: Implications for Politics and Policy.

"Our theory contends that the Social Construction of target populations has a powerful influence on public officials and shapes both the policy agenda and the actual design of policy. There are strong pressures for policy officials to provide beneficial policy to powerful, positively constucted target populations and to devise punitive, punishment oriented policy for negatively constructed groups" (334).
Me: is this not just stereotyping, and its derivation? How is this a theory of policy formation? It sounds like just another factor policy officials take into account when making self-interested policy choices... how is this not rational choice? their stereotype, yes, does influence what types of policy they make... but i dont think its a theory?!?

Social construction as it affects the policy agenda, policy tool selection, and the RATIONALITY of the individuals who make policy choices.

Social construction is defined as: cultural characterizations or popular images of the persons or groups whose behavior and well-being are affected by public policy. These characterizations are normative and evaluative, portraying groups in negative or positive terms through sumboic language, metaphors and stories (334).

Targets: those whom policies are directed towards. They can either be construed positively, or negatively. FOUR TYPES: 1.) Advantaged (which are seen positively and have power), 2.) Contenders (seen negatively but have the power--wealthy, minorities, moral majority), 3.) Dependents (seen positively but have little power--children, mothers), and 4.) Deviants (seen negatively and have no power--drug addicts, criminals, gangs). (Fig. page 336).

Policy: a message is sent about what is important and who is important with every piece of legislation; policies signify which citizens are deserving and which are not. Also, depending on the type (means tested or universal) it sends a message about which attitudes are appropriate when addressing the policy beneficiaries.

Policy Tools: "refer to aspects of policy intended to motivate the target population to comply with policy or utilize policy opportunities" (338). According to the authors' theory, policy tool selection will be affected by the social construction of the target population.
ME: DUH? why would a politician not alter their tool selection depending on who they are talking to. why is this novel??

Policy Rationales: "rationales justify the agenda, policy goals, selectiof of target pops and the tools chosen. the kinds of rationales differ depending upon the social construction of the target population and can be used either to perpetuate or to change social constructions" (339).

Which programs are seen as fulfulling a "justice" role as opposed to the role as entitlements? i.e. programs directed at Dependents--powerless yet positive social construction (working women). are these programs/policies seen as justice-serving? or seen as "handouts?"

March and Olsen. (1984). The New Institutionalism: Organizational Factors in Political Life.

new institutionalism emphasizes the relative autonomy of political institutions, possibilities for inefficiency in history, and the importance of symbolic action to an understanding of politics."

What is new institutionalism? institututions are not just the organizations themselves; they asre norms, rules, and laws.

key points:
see things coming our of institutions that you wouldnt see coming about if you just looked at individuals. institutions are contrraints. prefs change.

institutions affect the power of political actors and thereby affect political institutions. the authors conclude that we must move beyond rational choice as a predictor of political action. "political democract depends on the economy and society, just also on the design of political institutions" (739).


POLITICAL OUTCOMES according to new institutionalists: (are a function of...)
-preferences are developed within a society and transmitted through socialization.
-prefs are endogenous/everything is endogenous ("The distribution of politicla resources is also partly determined endogenously. Political institutions affect the distribution of resources, which in tern affects the power of political actors, and thereby affects political institutions. Wealth, social standing...are not easily described as exogenous to the political process and pol instit. HOlding office provides participation rights and alters the distribution of power and accccess...the outcomes of the political process modify reputtions for power, which in turn modify political outcomes" (739-740).
-instability
-interpretation, meaning, education, indoctrination


The traditional view of political outcomes is that they are a function of:
-individual preferences and interests (exogenous)
-resources (power)
-constraints imposed by rules of the game (i.e. the constitution)
-there is stability in politics

Monroe (2001) Paradigm Shift: From Rational Choice to Perspective.

Monroe (2001) is sympathetic to rational choice is a paradigm that is slowly breaking down. BUt if you want a new theory the new theory has to do everything the pld theory did.

Perspective as a theory draws on political psychology and focuses on identity; it shifts from a focus on the preferences to a focus on the individual (163 is a good explanation). this will "encourage analysts to seek to undertsand how external stimuli shift our perceptions of ourselves in relation to others" (160). "Our perceptions of ourselves in relation to others efficiently delineates and sets the domain of notions we find available, not just morally but empirically. THis effectively makes choice a function of identitiy and, more particularly, our self-perceptions" (157).
Group membership (psychology) may lead individuals to make irrational choices.
...as it pertains to political outcomes:
the idea that emotion and human cognition have an impact on political action. Thus, understanding identity is very important to understanding what i do, and the choices i make. Rational choice should not be abandoned, of course. at times, actoris will presond as a self-interested individual; but at other times, when the actor conceives of himself as a part of a collective they will act differently, perhaps (160).

Key Rational Choice Assumptions
1.) actors pursue goals
2.) these goals reflect the actors' percieved self interest
3.) behavior results from a process that actually involves conscious choice (153). 4.) the individual is the basic actor 5.) actors have pref ordings that are constistand and stable 6.) if given options, actors chooce the alt. with the highest expected utility 7.) actors process extensive info on both the available alts and the likely consequences of their choices.

General critique of rat choice:
-ignores limits on freedom to choose evident in some cultures (155)
-the claim that human nature is static
-Western, individualistic bias
-what of altruistic political behavior (green and shapiro 1994; monroe 1996)

Howlett and Ramesh (2003) Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles and Policy Subsystems

Chapter 1
Policy Science and Policy Cycles

Studying the relationship between governments and citizens.
H and R's approach focuses not so much on the structures of government or the behaviour of policital actors or on what govs should or should not do, but on what govs actually do.

Rational Choice--Deductive Theory
Ubit of Analysis:
INDIVIDUAL--huided by self interest. "This conception of the motivation and roles of voters, parties...in the policy process leads to the conclusion that voters will constitantly seek more programs from gov, constrained only by their willingness to pay taxes and that politicians, parties, and bureaucrats will be willing to supply the programs because of their own self interest in power, prestige and popularity. Tje result is a constant increase in the level of state intervention in the economy and society and often in the form of a political business cycle" (24).
Free Riders
Rent Seekers

Hows does Rational Choice Theory predict policy?
self interest drives our actions and it is rational to follow these actions. it is irrational when we do things that result in negative benefits. when there are INCONSISTANCIES in our actions and words people are irrational...
Weakness:
disregards the effects of institutional factors shaping actors' prefs.

"Both actors and institutions play a crucisl role in the policy process" (52).

Baumgartner and Jones. (1993). Agendas and Instablility in American Politics

Baumgartner, Frank R and Bryan D. Jones. 1993. Agendas and Instability in American Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago.

Economic interests v. Political Ideas
Entrenched economic intersts are often on the losing end
Agendas setting process: imploes no single equalibrium coulbe possible in politics and new isea make policy monopolies unstable in the long run.

Punctuated Equalibrium: longterm political stability punctuated by periods of volatile change that is short and rapid.
INCREMENTAL + RAPID CHANGE = PUNCTUATED EQUALIBRIUM

INCREMENTALISM (Lindlom 1959): Incrementalism purports that dramatic changes in the status quo are unlikely.
"When the system veers away from balance it corrects itself, always tending towards an equilibrium between the demands of democratically organized interests and policy outputs of government" (10).

BUT IN FACT, IT IS NOT INCREMENTAL
focusing events
chance occurances
public opinion campaigns
THESE ARE ALL INSTANCES OF PUNCTUATED EQUALIBRIUM




"In sum, the American political system is a mosiac of contiually reshaping systems of limited participation. SOme ares tring, others are weak; some are being created and others are being destroyed at any given moment. These processes ride a longer wave of secular change that favors some idea at some given particular times, and therefore some policy monopolies over others" (6).

FIscher. (2003). Reframing Public Policy

Fischer is really at the forefront of dilliberative democratic studies.

according to Ficsher, evrhthing is subjective and interpretation is fine, if not desireable.

he is also a proponent of ideas as a variable for study--nattatives, etc. ideas constitute interests and reality... reality, says Fischer, is socially constructed.

fischer also rejects empiricism. instead, he embraces contextual explanations and narratives, as just stated, as primary data (qualitative). in order to study people we need to be familiar with their reality, thus more qualitative work is necessary. This is what being a post-positivist policy analyst entails. But he does not say to completely reject quantitative studies.