Rethinking disproportionate policy making by introducing proportionate politics

Abstract

This article seeks to critique and extend recent work in the policy sciences, by Maor in particular, on disproportionate policy making-including policy overreaction and underreaction. While the disproportionate policy making thesis does help address assumptions that something is amiss in the policy process by capturing an imbalance between policy problems and the interventions to address them, we argue that it does not pay sufficient attention to politics. We present a heuristic which includes political perception of both programme and political threats. Our core argument is that much of what is considered disproportionate policy making, can in fact also be considered proportionate politics. Our analysis paves the way for a more holistic and political understanding of policy dynamics.

Deliberate disproportionate policy outcomes and regulating deforestation in Queensland, Australia

“…Using such a definition of proportionality to evaluate overall performance would need to assess outcomes against the formal goals of a set of policies, gauge the accuracy of information estimates by governments regarding positive or negative events, and consider the associated level of uncertainty of a policy problem and the range of solutions. As Duagbjerg and McConnel (2021) note, given the limitation of using formal goals and objective cost–benefit standards, assessments of proportionality need to accommodate the political values and value‐based perceptions that inform policy choices, which is discussed further below.…”

“…Each sector may attain different levels of engagement and contrasting perspectives on the merits of various policy interventions; what level of response, if any, is required from governments; and whether their expectations have been met (Maor, 2020). These perceptions are highly politicised and deeply embedded within underlying ideological positions and value frames (Daugbjerg & McConnell, 2021). The critical point is how various target audiences perceive the response, and if the steps taken by decision-makers are viewed as necessary given the scale of the problem.…”

“…The deliberate disproportionate policy approach treats the calculated shaping of voter sentiment or public opinion as a strategic objective within the policy‐making process. Critiques of policy disproportionality (Daugjberg & McConnel, 2021) argue that political contestation is an essential part of governing in liberal democracies, and equally that values play an important function in the type of policies pursued by competing interests. Expanding on the disproportionate approach to incorporate both the political as well as programmatic dimensions of policy‐making allows assessment of how well executives are pursuing and implementing policies that are commensurate to the problem at hand (Daugbjerg & McConnel, 2021).…”

“…Critiques of policy disproportionality (Daugjberg & McConnel, 2021) argue that political contestation is an essential part of governing in liberal democracies, and equally that values play an important function in the type of policies pursued by competing interests. Expanding on the disproportionate approach to incorporate both the political as well as programmatic dimensions of policy‐making allows assessment of how well executives are pursuing and implementing policies that are commensurate to the problem at hand (Daugbjerg & McConnel, 2021). Evaluations of programmatic under‐reaction or over‐reaction entail value judgements as to whether governments are either not doing enough or are going overboard in pursuing certain political objectives.…”

“…The (dis)proportionate nature of policies, including the programmatic or political dimensions, needs to consider how such policies resonate with different constituencies. Policy‐making is invariably a process of trade‐offs, with competing interests advancing certain agendas, often with multiple and at times contradictory objectives that may also be regarded as disproportionate (Daugjberg & McConnel, 2021; Howlett, 2019). Whether a policy is considered an over‐reaction or under‐reaction involves value judgements made by different continuances as to how well it aligns with their objectives, the trade‐offs encountered during the policy development process, and whether they achieved the outcomes being sought and its effectiveness once operational.…”