House, Verne W.

English

Research Papers in Economics

MODELS  OF POLICY MAKING
Verne W  House
Montana State University
For us to be  effective in public policy education,  a working knowl-
edge  of policy  making is more  than helpful.  It is essential.  That  is
why there is a very strong unit on policy making in our new teaching
materials: Education  for Public Decisions. Education  for Public  Deci-
sions  is  a  teaching  module  composed  of  a  Sourcebook,  Learner's
Packet,  Leader's  Guide,  Selected  Readings  and  Instructional  Aids.
Now we will have comprehensive,  tested materials that we can use to
teach extension  educators the philosophy and methods of public pol-
icy education. Ardis Young and I are the developers;  we share author-
ship  with  seventeen  others,  most  of  whom  are  present  at  this
conference.
Many  of you provided peer review last year.  The many suggestions
for improving the unit on policy making models were incorporated by
its authors Craig Infanger  and Mary  Ellen Wolfe.  I thought  it was
good last year; now,  I think it is perfect.
Unit B is "Models of Policy Making:  How Public Policy is Made  in
America."  Most  agents and  specialists  are  not convinced that they
need to know how policy is made.  Tb suggest the topic invites suspi-
cion that they will be asked to do politics.  So, the unit first answers
the question: Why learn how public policy is made? The answer:  Be-
fore we can educate people  about some issue,  we have to know who
needs  to be educated about what and whether the time is right. We
also need to anticipate  resource needs and give ourselves  some time
to choose  a method.  To be an effective  policy educator,  one need not
appreciate politics but one must understand it.
The purpose of Education  for Public  Decisions is to teach extension
agents and specialists  how to do public policy education.  Students of
political science will recognize that there are more  models of policy
making than are useful to include in the module given its purpose. It
was obvious at last year's "rump  session"  that most of us have  our
favorite  models.  Further  review  supports  the  view  that  no  single
model is superior.  Therefore, I think it appropriate that Infanger and
Wolfe  provide  a broad,  but not inclusive,  selection  of models.  They
come with lessons that help learners understand and compare them.
244The models presented  fit into these four categories:  elite, groups,
incremental and process.  The new unit has about the same  ingredi-
ents as the one presented for the critique  last year-beef, peas, corn
and biscuits-but  it was  in a stew.  Now,  we  have served  them on a
divided plate so that they only come together as they are digested in
the brain. I tried this out on my public policy class at the Extension
Winter School and the students consumed it readily with no signs of
indigestion.
Following is a summary of models prepared by Mary Ellen Wolfe. It
appears  that  there  are  five,  not  four,  models,  but  the  "rational-
comprehensive"  model is a "straw-man"  which  Lindblom presented
to draw attention to his "muddling  through"  model.  The  summary
includes the model and its focus,  use and limitations.
Model Focus Use Limitations
Kings and Kingmakers Who has
the power?
(Elites)
Describes the
role  of leaders;
reveals hidden
powerbrokers who
influence public
policy
May overstate the
role of elites;
understate the role
groups  and the multi-
dimensional nature of
policy  making; can be
hard to identify the
elites over time.
Clusters
Iron Triangle
Rational-
Comprehensive
"Muddling Through"
Stages in the
Decision Making Process
Who has
the power?
(Groups)
How are
decisions made?
(Rationally,
comprehensively)
How are
decisions made?
(Incrementally)
What are the
regularly
occurring steps
in the policy-
making process?
(Process)
Describes the
central role of
groups;  allows
for increment-
alism
Describes a
rational,
"scientific"
decision making
process
Highlights the
manner in which
officials make
decisions.
Describes the
process or system;
multiple
decision points,
fragmentation of
power.
May  overstate the
group role and
understate the role
of public officials
and institutions;
may  overlook envir-
onmental factors
May  be unrealistic;
exaggerate  the time,
resources and infor-
mation available to
the decision maker
may  not take group
or elite power into
account
May  overlook the
role of elites,
systematic stages
in the process, and
possibility  of
innovative policy
changes.
May overlook changes
in the social,
political environ-
ment; content of
the process may be
overlooked.
245Education  for Public Decisions will be disseminated in June,  1988.
You  can  get  it  after  that  and  work  your  way through  our  recom-
mended  teaching  methods.  Or,  you  can come to Winter  School  and
see them demonstrated.  This module  will be  used for extension  in-
service education nationwide and I expect that it will also be used to
teach  public policy  in leadership  development  programs,  especially
the new Family Community Leadership programs.
The educator can use Wolfe's comparisons prior to designing public
policy programs  and to inform the participants  about the policy pro-
cess itself.  That this unit is improved  brings credit to those  who of-
fered constructive criticism and to the authors who found ways to use
it.  Next,  it will be up to those of us in this network of public policy
educators  to teach the module to others. The result will  strengthen
and  improve  public  policy  education  and,  ultimately,  public  deci-
sions.
246

MODELS OF POLICY MAKING

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Research Papers in Economics