The Ambitions of Policy Design

Public policy is concerned with solving or ameliorating social problems. Public policy design involves conscious invention, development, and application ofpatterns of action in problem resolution. Contemporary perceptions of widespread (if not wholesale) failure in purposive public policy should warn us that would-be policy designers face no easy task. Certainly, there has been no shortage of cautions against excessive ambition in consciously- pursued public policy. Our contention is that these critics have missed the target. Based on a correction of their aim, we will suggest there is little reason to eschew ambition in policy design, provided only that one attends closely to the conditions of policy formation. This is not to say that ambition should be pursued for its own sake, or that it is always appropriate, merely that fear of ambition should not act as a constraint. We warn the reader in advance that our survey of the critics is brief, in order to provide space for fuller articulation of our own position

Introduction

IN The Curious Enlightenment of Professor Caritat—Steven Lukes' fictionalized round-up of contemporary political theory—the hapless professor has been kidnapped by the resistance movement and sent off to search for grounds for optimism. In Utilitaria, he is asked to give a lecture on “Breaking Free from the Past;” in Communitaria, on “Why the Enlightenment Project Had to Fail.” Neither topic is much to his taste, but it is only when he reaches Libertaria (not, as one of its gloomy inhabitants tells him, a good place to be unlucky, unemployed, or employed by the state) that he is made to recognize the limited purchase of his academic expertise. At the end of the book, the professor still has not found the mythical land of Egalitaria. But he has derived one important lesson from his adventures: in the pursuit of any one ideal, it is disastrous to lose sight of all the others

Does discussion lead to opinion change within Political Science students? A pedagogical exercise of deliberative democracy

While the model of deliberative democracy gives a crucial role to dialog, empirical evidence has not yet established if discussion helps to reach a better understanding of political issues and, above all, if individuals are prepared to change their views. It is still unclear when the deliberative model, and more specifically discussion, could be usefully employed as a teaching tool, to improve students’ knowledge. This article presents an exercise performed within the Department of Political and Social Sciences at the LUISS University of Rome. Students were asked to discuss in the classroom the issues related to the course, and to cast a vote on selected issues before and after deliberation. Although our sample is not representative, we have gathered evidence from the same population on a rather large number of issues. Students changed their view in 24.6% of cases, and they agreed that discussion increased their understanding, while those with strong ex-ante views resulted more reluctant to change their opinions because of discussion. The analysis also showed the presence of individuals that are more likely to be permeable to discussion while others that are more likely to be impermeable

Deliberative Mini-Publics: Core Design Features

This working paper identifies core design features of a deliberative mini-public (DMP). It aims to provide clarity on what distinguishes a DMP from other forms of citizen engagement and participation by characterising its normative foundations and setting out its key features under a series of discrete headings that can be used as a resource by anyone designing, implementing, or studying DMPs. </p

Participation as Post-Fordist Politics: Demos, New Labour, and Science Policy

In recent years, British science policy has seen a significant shift ‘from deficit to dialogue’ in conceptualizing the relationship between science and the public. Academics in the interdisciplinary field of Science and Technology Studies (STS) have been influential as advocates of the new public engagement agenda. However, this participatory agenda has deeper roots in the political ideology of the Third Way. A framing of participation as a politics suited to post-Fordist conditions was put forward in the magazine Marxism Today in the late 1980s, developed in the Demos thinktank in the 1990s, and influenced policy of the New Labour government. The encouragement of public participation and deliberation in relation to science and technology has been part of a broader implementation of participatory mechanisms under New Labour. This participatory program has been explicitly oriented toward producing forms of social consciousness and activity seen as essential to a viable knowledge economy and consumer society. STS arguments for public engagement in science have gained influence insofar as they have intersected with the Third Way politics of post-Fordism

Q methodology and rural research

Traditionally, rural scholarship has been limited in its methodological approach. This has begun to change in recent years as rural researchers have embraced a range of different methodological tools. The aim of this article is to contribute to greater methodological pluralism in rural sociology by introducing readers to a method of research that is rarely engaged in the field, that is, Q methodology. The article describes the defining features of the approach as well as providing examples of its application to argue that it is a method that offers particular opportunities and synergies for rural social science research