MODELS FOR POLICY ANALYSIS Uses of Models.

The models we shall use in studying p

olicy are conceptual models. Simplify and clarify our thinking about politics an
d public policy
Identify important aspects of policy problems
Suggest explanations for public policy and predict its consequences
Selected Policy Models. INSTITUTIONALISM: POLICY AS INSTITUTIONAL OUTPUT Governm
ent institutions have long been a central focus of political science. Public pol
icy is authoritatively determined, implemented, and enforced by these institutio
ns. The relationship between public policy and government institutions is very c
lose. Strictly speaking, a policy does not become a public policy until it is ad
opted, implemented, and enforced by some government institution. Government inst
itutions give public policy three distinctive characteristics. • First, government
lendsleg itimac y to policies. Government policies are generally regarded as le
gal obligations that command the loyalty of citizens. • Second, government policie
s involveuniv ersal ity. Only government policies extend toall people in a socie
ty; the policies of other groups or organizations reach only a part of the socie
ty. • Finally, government monopolizescoercion in society, only government can legi
timately imprison violators of its policies. The impact of institutional arrange
ments on public policy is an empirical question that deserves investigation. Fed
eralism recognizes that both the national government and the state governments d
erive independent legal authority from their own citizens. PROCESS: POLICY AS PO
LITICAL ACTIVITY Today political processes and behaviors are a central focus of
political science. Political scientists with an interest in policy have grouped
various activities according to their relationship with public policy. The resul
t is a Policy process, which outlines • Problem Identification: The identification
of policy problems through demands for government action. • Policy Formulation: T
he development of policy proposals by interest groups, White House staff, congre
ssional committees, and think tanks. • Policy Legitimation: The selection and endo
rsement of policies through political actions by Congress, the president, and th
e courts.
• Policy Implementation: The implementation of policies through organized bureaucr
acies, public expenditures, and the activities of executive agencies. • Policy Eva
luation: The evaluation of policies by government agencies them selves, outside
consultants, the press, and the public. It has been argued that political scient
ists should limit their studies of public policy to theseprocesses and avoid ana
lyses of thesubstance of policies. It is not thecontent of public policy that is
to be studied but rather theprocesses by which public policy is developed, imple
mented, and changed. RATIONALISM: POLICY AS MAXIMUM SOCIAL GAIN A rational polic
y is one that achieves "maximum social gain"; that is, governments should choose
policies resulting in gains to society that exceed costs by the greatest amount
, and governments should refrain from policies if costs are not exceeded by gain
s. First, no policy should be adopted if its costs exceed its benefits. Second,
among policy alternatives, decision makers should choose the policy that produce
s the greatest benefit over cost. To select a rational policy, policymakers must
(1) Know all the preferences and their relative weights,
(2) know all the policy alternatives available,
(3) Know all the consequences of each policy alternative,
(4) Calculate the ratio of benefits to costs for each policy alternative, and
(5) Select the most efficient policy alternative.
Rational policymaking also requiresinformation about alternative policies, thepr
edictive capacity to foresee accurately the consequences of alternate policies,
and the intelligenceto calculate correctly the ratio of costs to benefits. Final
ly, rational policymaking requires a decision-making system that facilitates rat
ionality in policy formation. Large investments in existing programs and policie
s (sunk costs) prevent policymakers from reconsidering alternatives foreclosed b
y previous decisions. INCREMENTALISM: POLICY AS VARIATIONS ON THE PAST Increment
alism views public policy as a continuation of past government activities with o
nly incremental modifications. On the contrary, constraints of time, information
, and cost prevent policymakers from identifying the full range of policy altern
atives and their consequences. Incrementalism is conservative in that existing p
rograms; policies, and expenditures are considered as a base, and attention is c
oncentrated on new programs and policies and on increases, decreases, or modific
ations of current programs. Policymakers generally accept the legitimacy of esta
blished programs and tacitly agree to continue previous policies. Second, policy
makers accept the legitimacy of previous policies because of the uncertainty abo
ut the consequences of completely new or different policies known programs when
the consequences of new programs cannot be predicted. Conflict is heightened whe
n decision making focuses on major policy shifts involving great gains or losses
, or "all-or-nothing," "yes-or-no" policy decisions. This search
usually begins with the familiar-that is, with policy alternatives close to curr
ent policies. Only if these alternatives appear to be unsatisfactory will the po
licy-maker venture out toward more radical policy innovation. 5. GROUP THEORY: P
OLICY AS GROUP EQUILIBRIUM Politics is really the struggle among groups to influ
ence public policy. The task of the political system is to manage group conflict
by
(1) establishing rules of the game in the group struggle,
(2) arranging compromises and balancing interests,
(3) enacting. According to group theorists, public policy at any given time is t
he equilibrium reached in the group struggle. This equilibrium is determined by
the relative influence of any interest groups. Group theory purports to describe
all meaningful, political activity in terms of the group struggle. Policymakers
are viewed as constantly responding to group pressures bargaining, negotiating,
and compromising among competing demands of influential groups. Politicians att
empt to form a majority coalition of groups. Parties are viewed as coalitions of
groups. Second,overlapping group membership helps to maintain the equilibrium b
y preventing anyone group from moving too far from prevailing values. Individual
s who belong to anyone group also belong to other groups, and this fact moderate
s the demands of groups who must avoid offending their members who have other gr
oup affiliations. No single group constitutes a majority in American society. Th
e power of each group is checked by the power of competing groups. 6. ELITE THEO
RY: POLICY AS ELITE PREFERENCE Public policy may also be viewed as the preferenc
es and values of governing elite? Elite theory
suggests that the people are apathetic and ill informed about public policy, tha
t elites actually
shape mass opinion on policy questions more than masses shape elite opinion. Thu
s, public policy
really turns out to be the preferences of elites. Policies flow downward from el
ites to masses; they
do not arise from mass demands.
Only non-elites who have accepted the basic elite consensus can be admitted to g
overning circles. • Elites share consensus in behalf of the basic values of the so
cial system and the preservation of the system.
• Public policy does not reflect the demands of masses but rather the prevailing v
alues of the elite.
• Active elites are subject to relatively little direct influence from apathetic m
asses. Elites
influence masses more than masses influence elites.