The choice of governing instrument

Trebilcock, Michael J.; Hartle, Douglas G.

doi:10.1016/0144-8188(82)90012-6

Cited by 34 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In his study of EU environmental policy (2010), 2 Our distinction between specialized and generic instruments echoes the more traditional one between substitutable and non-substitutable policy instruments (Trebilcock and Hartle 1982;Doern and Phidd 1988;Howlett 2004;Landry and Varone 2005). We try to overcome the limits of this literature from two points of view.…”

Section: Instrumentality: Policy Instrument Selection Meets the Percementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Their activity in choosing instruments is not completely intentional or predetermined, but can be conceived as a combination of technically substitutable tools albeit with differing forms of political economy (Trebilcock and Hartle 1982;Landry and Varone 2005), potentially contradictory rationales, unclear ideas and goals, and potentially conflicting interests.…”

Section: The Drivers Of Instrument Selection: Legitimacy and Instrumementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How policy instruments are chosen: patterns of decision makers’ choices

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Policy instruments are a fundamental component of public policies. Policy instruments are often a result of mediation within the policy design process, whenever decision makers reshape existing instruments without introducing any real innovation. This results in imitation, layering and ambiguity in tool choice selection, and raises the theoretical problem of the logic according to which decision makers choose certain specific policy instruments rather than others. Decision makers may have different reasons for choosing certain specific instruments, although these reasons should be connected to the two main purposes of decision-making, that is, the search for effectiveness and the construction of a shared sense, a common acceptance. Thus, the choice of instruments is a question of potentially conflicting drivers that decision makers have to cope with within a specific decisional situation, when asked to solve those problems that have arisen. This paper examines this question and offers an analytical framework based on the two main factors in terms of which the selection of instruments is channelled and assessed: legitimacy and instrumentality. The boundaries created by how decision makers perceive these two dimensions mean that only four selection patterns can be chosen by decision makers: hybridization, stratification, contamination or routinization.

show abstract

Section: Instrumentality: Policy Instrument Selection Meets the Percementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Drivers Of Instrument Selection: Legitimacy and Instrumementioning

confidence: 99%

How policy instruments are chosen: patterns of decision makers’ choices

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…5 In general it was believed 4 Students of public policy making were joined in this effort by scholars of economics and law who studied the evaluation of policy outputs in terms of their impacts on outcomes as well as the role of law and legislation in effecting policy tool choices and designs (Bobrow & Dryzek, 1987;Keyes, 1996;Stokey & Zeckhauser, 1978). And studies in management and administration at the time also sought to explore the linkages between politics, administration and implementation in the effort to better understand policy tool choices and patterns of use (Trebilcock & Hartle, 1982). Researchers also looked at how policy instrument choices tended to shift over time (Lowi, 1966(Lowi, , 1972(Lowi, , 1985, examples of which during this period included the rise of privatization and deregulation (Howlett & Ramesh, 1993) and the first wave of governance thinking advocating the use of network management or nongovernmental tools (Peters & Pierre, 1998).…”

Section: What Is Policy Design?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…4 By the early 1980s, this tools literature had merged with the policy design orientation and emerged as a body of policy design literature in its own right. Students of policy design consequently embarked upon theory building, developing more and better typologies of policy instruments that sought to aid the conceptualization of these instruments and their similarities and differences, and attempting to provide a greater understanding of the motivations and reasons underlying their use (Bressers & Honigh, 1986;Bressers & Klok, 1988;Hood, 1986;Salamon, 1981;Trebilcock & Hartle, 1982;Tupper & Doern, 1981). Other scholarly work during this period continued to further elucidate the nature and use of specific policy tools, especially tools such as "command-and-control" regulations and financial inducements such as tax incentives but also many others (Hood, 1986;Howlett, 1991;Landry, Varone, & Goggin, 1998;Tupper & Doern, 1981;Vedung, Bemelmans-Videc, & Rist, 1997).…”

Section: What Is Policy Design?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Policy Design and Non-Design: Towards a Spectrum of Policy Formulation Types

Howlett

Mukherjee

2014

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public policies are the result of efforts made by governments to alter aspects of behaviour-both that of their own agents and of society at large-in order to carry out some end or purpose. They are comprised of arrangements of policy goals and policy means matched through some decision-making process. These policy-making efforts can be more, or less, systematic in attempting to match ends and means in a logical fashion or can result from much less systematic processes. "Policy design" implies a knowledge-based process in which the choice of means or mechanisms through which policy goals are given effect follows a logical process of inference from known or learned relationships between means and outcomes. This includes both design in which means are selected in accordance with experience and knowledge and that in which principles and relationships are incorrectly or only partially articulated or understood. Policy decisions can be careful and deliberate in attempting to best resolve a problem or can be highly contingent and driven by situational logics. Decisions stemming from bargaining or opportunism can also be distinguished from those which result from careful analysis and assessment. This article considers both modes and formulates a spectrum of policy formulation types between "design" and "non-design" which helps clarify the nature of each type and the likelihood of each unfolding.

show abstract

“…Such a Hobbesian notion of rationality (Ramos 1981) presumes that public policy is connected consciously and meaningfully to knowledge about goals and future outcomes and it completely ignores both the extraordinary complexity of the interrelated games (electorate, politicians, bureaucrats, special interest groups, media) that generates public policy and the dynamics of unintended consequences that often takes over (Trebilcock et al 1982). Moreover, it endows public policy decisions with "a certain deliberate quality, a relative permanence... an objective character which decisions do not possess" (Majone 1980).…”

Section: Econocrats Versus Situationologistsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Governance Through Social Learning

Paquet¹

1999

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Governance is about guiding: it is the process whereby an organization steers itself. Studying governance means probing the distribution of rights, obligations, and power that underpins organizations and social systems; understanding how they co-ordinate their parallel activities and maintain their coherence; exploring the sources of dysfunction and lacklustre performance; and suggesting ways to redesign organizations whose governance is in need of repair. Governance also has to do with the complex ways in which the private, public, and civic sectors co-ordinate their activities, with the manner in which citizens produce governance through their active participation in a democratic society, and with the instruments and processes required to ensure good and effective stewardship.This series welcomes a range of contributions -from conceptual and theoretical reflections, ethnographic and case studies, and proceedings of conferences and symposia to works of a very practical nature -that deal with particular problems or nexus of issues on the governance front. DirectorGilles Paquet Over the past 10 years, I have worked on the problems raised by the governing, the governance, and the governability of complex organizations and socio-economic-political systems. This terrain has been explored by many researchers. Indeed, over the last 10 years, these themes have become the centre of important debates on every continent (Kumon 1992; Kooiman 1993;Castells 1996). However, governance studies are still in their infancy. Although many interesting approaches and perspectives have been proposed, there is still no consensus on the best way to handle these issues, nor is there agreement on a lexicon or vocabulary for formulating these questions. Editorial CommitteeThis compendium of papers is a progress report on work that strives to generate new responses to these problems. These studies are unified by the choice of a particular strategy for dealing with governance problems. It is not intended to be le dernier mot on these matters, but only a premier effort to clarify the issues, using a method that has proved useful -the social learning approach. CHANCE EVENTS AND INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORTThe research program on which this volume is based originated in 1988-89 during a sabbatical leave from the University of Ottawa, but the original plans evolved as a consequence of many chance events and help from friends and colleagues at certain junctures. GOVERNANCE THROUGH SOCIAL LEARNINGAt the time, the Institute was very much a forum interested in exploratory thinking. My work there was entirely curiosity-oriented, but I had an opportunity to discuss the results of my first analyses with Peter Dobell, Rod Dobell, Jeffrey Holmes, Steven Rosell, and Walter Stewart. Each of these colleagues forced different perspectives on these issues of governance on me, and they all had an impact on the reflections that stemmed from my sojourn at the Institute.The second chance event was David Zussman's invitation to present a paper on these issues at the A...

show abstract

The choice of governing instrument

Cited by 34 publications

References 13 publications

How policy instruments are chosen: patterns of decision makers’ choices

How policy instruments are chosen: patterns of decision makers’ choices

Policy Design and Non-Design: Towards a Spectrum of Policy Formulation Types

Governance Through Social Learning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About