The policy movement as a policy problem

Abstract

The policy movement is unified by a common interest in the improvement of policy decisions through scientific inquiry. The movement is differentiated, however, because this common interest is highly ambiguous and subject to interpretation from different perspectives. This paper applies a policy sciences perspective to the movement's disappointments over the last few decades, and in particular, the failure to realize earlier aspirations for rational, objective analysis on the more important and controversial policy issues. The paper offers a definition and diagnosis of the underlying problem, and suggests what can be done about it as a matter of individual and collective choice.

Researching community‐based support networks: what policymakers should know

“…Although PAR might defy the type of research that policymakers and funding bodies typically value (Brunner, 1991;Fischer, 1995Fischer, , 1998Heeks & Bailur, 2007;Morc -öl, 2001), it is important that current understandings of evidence be broadened. Akin to other community-based support networks, SHSGs are distinctive social phenomena; they are akin to voluntary grassroots organizations or nascent social movements, rather than rationalised bureaucracies (Davis et al, 2005;Nelson et al, 2004).…”

“…Evaluation and research to inform policy development is typically situated in the positivist paradigm (Brunner, 1991;Fischer, 1995Fischer, , 1998Heeks & Bailur, 2007;Morc -öl, 2001). According to Eisner (1992), Positivismy is a philosophy of science that has an attitude towards metaphysics, that separates value from fact, that embraces methodological monism, that rests upon a foundationalist view of knowledge, that possesses a particular conception of meaning, that regards ethical claims as meaningless utterances, that believes science to be the sole source of knowledge, that seeks to explain ''reality'' through an appeal to universal laws, and that regards measurement as the quintessential means through which reality, whatever it may be, can be represented.…”

Wicked Problems and Applied Economics

“…Further, following the status relationship set forth within the linear model, many in the discipline continue to devalue engagement scholarship. Still, others may adopt a rational analytical method for policy analysis, even when doubting the utility or validity of the approach, because they perceive that it meets the disciplinary and institutional standards for objective science (Brunner 1991), whereas postnormal science draws on such a variety of methods and methodologies that are perceived to be more difficult to defend as well as to undertake. Therefore, not only do research institutions' incentives need to be realigned, so do the discipline's.…”

Should moral sentiments be incorporated into benefit-cost analysis? An example of long-term discounting

“…2 Indeed it has been pointed out to me that inclusion of moral sentiment is consistent with the comprehensiveness criterion for appraisal of the intelligence function and the common-interest recommendation for goal clarification in problem orientation. 3 Because there is an existing procedure and paradigm, it provides a foundation for change (Laswell, 1970;Brunner, 1991).…”