Skip to main content

Part of the book series: International Series on Public Policy ((ISPP))

Abstract

In the first roundtable focusing on contemporary approaches to public policy at the 2013 International Public Policy Conference, one of the participants described the field of policy sciences as populated by “warring tribes.” While the degree of conflict among different approaches to policy can easily be exaggerated, a number of important, and at times contradictory, approaches are commonly used when studying public policy. These approaches offer alternative explanations for policy choices and provide a range of means for understanding the consequences of those policy choices. The approaches have different intellectual backgrounds and epistemological assumptions associated with different ideas about the dynamics of policy, so that the same set of data about policymaking may be perceived in quite different ways.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    For a relatively early discussion of the process approach, see Shipman (1959). We are indebted to Chris Weible for bringing this to our attention. But the earliest and seminal work on the policy process is Harold Lasswell’s analytic description (1956)

  2. 2.

    Although being identified here as political science, a good deal of the evaluation literature actually might be located more appropriately in sociology, using methodologies better developed in that literature and focusing on social problems that are to a great extent the province of sociology.

  3. 3.

    Although Hood’s book has been very influential in political science and public administration, economists actually began to think about this issue somewhat earlier. E. S. Kirschen (1964), for example, identified 64 instruments that were available in economic policy.

References

  • Bell S., and A. Hindmoor. 2009. Rethinking governance: The centrality of the state in modern society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Braybrooke D. 1974. Traffic congestion goes through the issue machine. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carter P. 2012. Policy as palimpset. Policy & Politics 40: 423–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cobb R.W., and C.D. Elder. 1972. Participation in American politics: The dynamics of agenda-building. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dery D. 2000. Agenda-setting and problem definition. Policy Studies 21(1): 37–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elmore R.F. 1985. Forward and backward mapping: Reversible logic in the analysis of public policy. In Policy implementation in federal and unitary states, ed. K. Han and T.A.J. Toonen, 76–98. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer F., and H. Gottweiss. 2012. The argumentative turn revisited: Public policy as communicative practice. Durham: Duke University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes M.T. 2006. Incrementalism and public policy. Lanham: University Press of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heald D. 2013. Why is transparency about public expenditure so elusive? International Review of Administrative Sciences 78: 130–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Héritier A., and M. Rhodes (eds.). 2012. New modes of governance in Europe: Governing in the shadow of hierarchy. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hood C., and H. Margetts. 2007. Tools of government in a digital age. Basingstoke: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones C.O. 1984. An introduction to the study of public policy, 2nd ed. Monterey: Brooks-Cole.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirschen E.S. 1964. Economic policy in our time. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koppenjan j., and E.-H. Klijn. 2004. Managing Uncertainties in network, Routledge, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lasswell H.D. 1956). The decision process; Seven categories of functional analysis. College Park: College of Business and Public Administration, University of Maryland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindblom C.E. 1965. The intelligence of democracy: Decision making through mutual adjustment. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linder S.H., and B.G. Peters. 1989. Implementation as a guide to policy formulation: A question of ‘when’ rather than ‘whether’. International Review of Administrative Sciences 55: 631–652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin L.W., and G. Vanberg. Parliaments and Coalitions: The Role of Legislative Institutions in Multiparty Governance, Oxford University Press, 2011

    Google Scholar 

  • May J.V., and A.B. Wildavsky. 1978. The Policy Cycle. Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payan T. 2006. Cops, soldiers and diplomats: Explaining agency behavior in the war on drugs. Lanham: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters B.G. 2015. An advanced introduction to public policy. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters B.G., and J. Pierre. 2007. The handbook of public policy. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes R.A.W. 1996. The new governance: Governing without government. Political Studies 44: 652–667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rossi P.H., M.W. Lipsey, and H.E. Freeman. 2014. Evaluation: A systematic approach. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Saetren H. 2014. Implementing the third generation research in policy implementation research: An empirical assessment. Public Policy and Administration 29: 84–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salomon L.M. 2001. Introduction. In Handbook of policy instruments, ed. L.M. Salomon. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shipman G.A. 1959. The policy process: An emerging perspective. Western Political Quarterly 12: 535–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon H.A. 1947. Administrative behavior. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein C.R. 2014. Valuing life: Humanizing the regulatory state. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Thalen R.W., and C.R. Sunstein. 2008. Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth and happiness. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torfing J., B.G. Peters, J. Pierre, and E. Sørensen. 2012. Interactive governance: Advancing the paradigm. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Vedung E. 2013. Six models of evaluation. In Routledge handbook of public policy, ed. E. Araral, S. Fritzen, M. Howlett, M. Ramesh, and X. Wu, 387–400. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss C.H. 1972. Evaluation research: Methods for assessing program effectiveness. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wildavsky A., and J.L. Pressman. 1974. Implementation, University of California Press, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zittoun P. 2014. The political process of policymaking. Basingstoke: Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 2016 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Peters, B.G., Zittoun, P. (2016). Introduction. In: Peters, B., Zittoun, P. (eds) Contemporary Approaches to Public Policy. International Series on Public Policy . Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-50494-4_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics