Analisi delle politiche pubbliche prof Fulvio Venturino Come

Analisi delle politiche pubbliche prof. Fulvio Venturino Come studiare le politiche pubbliche Capitolo 7: Il processo decisionale nelle politiche pubbliche. Oltre il razionalismo, l’incrementalismo e l’irrazionalismo

Decision-making defined • The decision-making stage of the public policy process is the choice among policy alternatives – it is a specific stage rooted firmly in the previous stages of the policy cycle – it may alter the status quo, or it may fall to do so – it is not a technical exercise but an inherently political process

Decision-making: relevant actors • Decision-making involves only those who occupy formal offices in government • Excluded are virtually all non-state actors • Only those politicians, judges, and government officials actually empowered to make authoritative decisions in the area in question can participate at this stage of the policy cycle

Decision-makers’ behaviour • The degree of freedom enjoyed by decisionmakers is in fact circumscribed by a host of rules – at the macro level, constitutional arrangements and different sets of rules constrain the conduct of governmental agencies – at the micro level, different decision-makers operating in similar institutional environments can respond differently when dealing with the same problem

Models of public policy decision-making • Rationalism – perfect – bounded • Incrementalism • Garbage can

The rational model A report 1 • The rational model prescribes procedures for decision-making that will lead to the choice of the most efficient possible means of achieving policy goals

The rational model A report 2 • A goal for solving a problem is established • All alternative strategies of achieving the goal are explored and listed • All significant consequences of each alternative strategy are predicted and the probability of those consequences occurring is estimated • The strategy that most closely solves the problem or solves it at least cost is selected

The rational model Criticisms 1 • It was recognized from very early on that it would not always be possible to achieve full rationality in practice • Due to limitations of information and time, the resulting decisions might not be perfectly rational of error-proof, but would normally be close enough to approximate ‘perfect’ rationality

The rational model Criticisms 2: decision-makers’ limitations • There are cognitive limits to decision-makers’ ability to consider an almost infinite number of possible options • It is rarely the case for decision-makers to know the consequences of each decision in advance • Each policy option entails a bundle of favourable and adverse consequences

The rational model Criticisms 3: bounded rationality • Public decisions would never maximize benefits over costs, but would merely tend to satisfy whatever criteria decision-makers set for themselves in the instance in question

The incremental model A report 1 • The incremental model portrays public policy decision-making as a political process characterized by bargaining and compromise among self-interested decision-makers • The decisions eventually made represent what is politically feasible rather than desirable, and what is possible rather than maximizing

The incremental model A report 2 • Analyses are limited to a few somewhat familiar policy alternatives differing only marginally from the status quo • Analyses of policy goals intertwin with other values • Ills to be remedied are more important than positive goals to be sought • Decision-making entails a sequence of trials, errors, and revised trials • Analyses explore only some, not all, the possible consequences • Participants in policy-making are fragmented

The incremental model Criticisms • Lack of goal orientation • Inherent conservatism, given its suspicion of large-scale change and innovation • Suspect undemocratic, as it confines decisionmaking to bargaining within few selected groups • It promotes short-sighted decisions

Mixing decision-making styles Level of change Level of available knowledge high low Revolutionary Analytic Rational Disjointed incremental

A spectrum model of decision-making styles • The spectrum is arranged according to how systematic the associated decision-making was – Synoptic: similar to rational ideal – Blundering: no real effort at systematic analysis of alternative strategies

Attempts at synthesis Two-stage mixed-scanning models • Optimal decisions would result from a cursory search for alternatives, followed by a detailed probe of the most promising alternatives • This would allow for more innovation than permitted bye the incremental model, without imposing the unrealistic demands prescribed by the rational model

The garbage can model A report • This model denies to the decision-making process even the limited rationality attributed to it by incrementalism • Decision-making is a highly ambiguous and unpredictable process only distantly related to searching for means to achieve goals

The garbage can model Criticisms • Rather than present a general model of decision-making, the garbage can model represents only a type of decision-making characteristic of a particular political or organizational environment • Its main strength was in helping to break a rather sterile debate between rationalism and incrementalism

Basic parameters of decision-making Variables 1. Agent 2. Setting 3. Problem 4. Information 5. Time Dimensions 1. Single vs multiple 2. Single, closed vs multiple, open 3. Well defined vs multiple, vague 4. Perfect vs contested 5. Infinite vs manipulated

Styles of decision-making 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Optimization Satisfycing Search Bargaining Organizational strategy

Mixing decision-making styles Severity of constraints Complexity of the policy subsystem high low high Incremental adjustment Satisfycing search low Optimizing adjustment Rational search