Policy process perceptions of senior Canadian federal civil servants: a view of the state and its environment

Abstract

Based on interviews with senior civil federal civil servants in Ottawa, perceptions of various actors' influence on public policy are examined. It is hypothesized that perceived influence patterns will change as one moves across the major phases of the policy process. Although it is expected that actors within the state will be of primary importance throughout the process, it is also expected that the relative importance of actors outside the state will increase as one moves from forming a policy agenda and selecting policy towards policy implementation. This should be particularly true of the perceived influence of private companies. Despite this change in perceived levels of influence of state versus non‐state actors, the structure of correlation patterns for perceived influence patterns will probably not change dramatically from one policy process phase to the next.Results are also presented pertaining to the actual interaction patterns of the civil servants who were interviewed, as well as the relation between interaction and perceived influence. It is expected that there will be positive relations between these two types of variables but that direct interaction will not consistently explain the majority of variation in perceived influence variables.Sommaire: À la suite d'entrevues avec des hauts fonctionnaires fédéraux à Ottawa, on examine ici les perceptions quant à l'influence de divers intervenants sur les politiques gouvernementales. On prend pour hypothèse que ces perceptions évolueront à mesure que l'on avance d'une grande étape à l'autre dans le processus de définition des politiques. On s'attend à ce que les intervenants étatiques jouent un rôle primordial tout au long du processus, mais aussi à ce que le rôle relatif des intervenants extérieurs au gouvernement prenne de l'ampleur lorsqu'on passe de l'établissement d'une liste de politiques au choix des politiques elles‐mêmes et, en̄fin, à la mise en oeuvre de ces politiques. Ceci devrait s'appliquer tout particulièrement à la manière dont on perçoit l'influence des sociétés privées. Malgré ce changement du niveau d'influence perçu entre les intervenants gouvernementaux et les nongouvernementaux, la structure corrélative des influences perçues ne changera probablement pas de façon dramatique d'une étape à l'autre du processus d'élaboration des politiques.On présente également des résultats concernant l'interaction effective des fonctionnaires interviewés, ainsi que le rapport entre cette interaction et l'influence perçue. On prévoit des rapports positifs entre ces deux groupes de variables, mais aussi que l'interaction directe ne saurait expliquer de manière cohérente la plupart des variations dans les variables de l'influence perçue.

Policy analytical capacity and evidence‐based policy‐making: Lessons from Canada

“…Studies undertaken by federal government analysts, however, raised doubts about this picture (French 1980; Hartle 1978). Later studies, in the 1990s, also noted the growth and subsequent decline of employment of policy analysts in government and their limited capacity for developing long‐term strategic advice to governments (Bennett and McPhail 1992; Hollander and Prince 1993). Work since the early 1990s has suggested that tasks of policy analysts may be shifting, as in the U.K. and the other countries cited above, towards an increased emphasis on policy process design and network management activities and away from “formal” types of policy analysis (Howlett and Lindquist 2004; Lindquist 1992).…”

Policy formulation, governance shifts and policy influence: location and content in policy advisory systems

“…Recent examinations of components of policy advisory systems such as political parties (Cross, 2007), the media (Murray, 2007) and partisan appointees (OECD, 2011; Connaughton, 2010b, Eichbaum and Shaw, 2010), among others, have underlined the limitations of locational models in being able to provide an exhaustive map of policy advice system types and a clear picture of how the various sources, types and components of policy advice fit together and operate (Mayer, Bots and van Daalen, 2004; Howlett and Lindquist, 2004). What is needed is a better model that links the provision of advice to larger patterns of changes in the behaviour of political decision-makers and knowledge suppliers that condition how policy advice is generated and deployed in different governance arrangements (Peled, 2002; Howlett and Lindquist, 2004; Bevir and Rhodes, 2001; Bevir, Rhodes and Weller, 2003; Aberbach and Rockman, 1989; Bennett and McPhail, 1992). Such a richer understanding of the structure and functioning of policy advisory systems can be obtained through the better specification of the second, “content”, dimension highlighted in Halligan's work and clarification of its relationship to locational considerations of influence.…”

Public Managers as the Missing Variable in Policy Studies: An Empirical Investigation Using Canadian Data

“…Different types of “policy advice systems” exist depending on the nature of knowledge supply and demand in a particular sector or jurisdiction, and what analysts do in brokering information, how they do it, and with what effect, depends in large part on the type of advisory system present in the area in which they work (Noordegraaf, 2010). This helps to explain why different styles of policy analysis can be found in different policy fields (Howlett & Lindquist, 2004; Mayer, Bots, & van Daalen, 2004) since these can be linked to larger patterns of behavior of political actors and knowledge suppliers that condition how policy advice is generated and deployed (Aberbach & Rockman, 1989; Bennett & McPhail, 1992; Bevir & Rhodes, 2001; Bevir, Rhodes, & Weller, 2003; Peled, 2002).…”