Ppt science muddling_critique(joseph)

1. GRADUATE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Public Administration Review
( Approaches to Policy Formulation)
Course:
DA 820-Public Policy
Course Director: Prof. Sombat Thamrongthanyaqong
Presented By:
Joseph Ato Forson
(5510131001)
18th September,2012 .

2. Presentation Outlook

3. Case study: Inflation
Option 1 ? Option 2
Set principal objectives
List all related values in
order of priority explicitly
Inquire into values held Outline relatively few policy
alternatives
by members of the society Compare limited alternatives
Systematic comparison
e.g. past policies etc
of multitude of Rely on a body of past record
alternatives to predict the future
Make choice that Consider the risks with each
maximizes values policy alternatives.
Selection: choice value +

4. - Emanating from
current situation, step-
Successive limited by-step and by small
comparison (branch) degrees.
method
Which is more
? appropriate
for complex
problems?
Rational comprehensive -Starting from the
method (root) fundamentals anew each time
-Building on the past only as
experience is embodied in a
theory
-Always prepared to start
completely from the ground up.

5. Characteristics of the 2 approaches in Comparison
a. Clarification of values/objectives
Clarification a) Selection of values/goals
distinct, usually a prerequisite intertwined
b. Means-ends approach: Ends are b. Means & ends not distinct so
isolated means identified means/ends analysis limited
c. Goodness test = most c. Goodness test = consensus
appropriate means to end
d. Analysis is comprehensive d. Analysis ltd: neglects important
outcomes/ alternatives/values
e. Heavy reliance on theory e. Comparison reduces reliance
on theory

6. Merits and Demerits
Advantages
•Knowledge about Successive limited
probable consequence from comparison (branch)
past experience method
Major Weakness
•No need for big jumps to
goals Absence past policies
•Ability to test previous
predictions
hinders effective policy
•Ability to remedy past analysis
error fairly quickly
Hallmarks Rational
Weakness
•Clarity of objectives comprehensi
•Explicitness of evaluation ve method oUnable to address large-scale
•Very comprehensive (root) problem
•Quantification of values oMay not be best for policy
•Best utilized for more simple analysis because of natural
problems due to:
•Necessitation of massive restrictions on:
intellectual capacities oTime
•Necessitation of massive oMoney
sources of information

7. Intertwining evaluation & analysis ( 1b)
Participants disagree on weight of critical values and
even on sub-objectives
Individuals may be unable to rank their own values
when the are conflicting
Social objectives may have different value weights
in different circumstances
One chooses among values and policies
simultaneously
Administrators focus on incremental objectives

8. Non-comprehensive analysis (4b)
Impossible to take all factors into consideration in
any non-simple decision
Available information and human capacity are
limited
Complex problems/decisions must be simplified
Simplification is achieved in 2 ways;
I. limitation of policy comparisons and alternatives to those differing
from the status quo
II. ignoring important consequences of possible policies as well as the
values attached to neglected consequences

9. Succession of Comparisons
“ Policy is not made once and for all; it is made and
remade endlessly.”
Successive approximation to a desired objectives where
the desired objective itself changes and evolves
“Making policy is at best a rough process.” Policies will
only achieve part of what you hope for while creating
unintended consequences you would prefer to avoid.
By proceeding through a succession of changes a policy
maker avoids serious and lasting mistakes

10. Relevance as Well as Realism
In western democracies policy analysts tend to limit
their analysis to marginal differences in policies that
are chosen to differ incrementally.
Democracies tend to change policies incrementally.
By simplifying the policy by limiting the focus to
slight deviations, the most value is made of
available information.
Non-incremental policy proposals are therefore
typically not only politically irrelevant, but
unpredictable.

11. Conclusion
Lindblom’s argument attempts to legitimize the
decision-making processes that were already
frequently in use (1959).
He points out a gap between the theory advocated
by policy academics and the real-world problems
faced by decision-makers.
He explains how and why the current work-around
is legitimate and worthy of acceptance.
By defining the Branch method and its attributes,
Lindblom opens the door for academia to begin
theorizing on this method, as well.

12. DROR: EXCERPTS FROM LINDBLOM
“ Muddling through”,
that is through
incremental change…
- aims at arriving at agreed-
upon policies which are
closely based on past
experience.
Doesn’t the Evaluation of “ incremental
change” and “Muddling through” constitute
a dangerous overreaction?

13. Critical Elements
Basically, “the science of muddling through” examines;
1. Incremental nature of desired changes in policy
2. Agreement on policy as the criterion of its quality.
Basic strategy of incremental change
- To maximize security in making change
All knowledge based on the past;
- Continue in the same direction to avoid risk
- Limiting consideration of policy alternatives to those that differ
Only plausible if certain conditions pertains

14. Inherent Validity of Lindblom’s Article (Critique)
Unless 3 interrelated conditions are concurrently met;
1. Present policy result must be satisfactory to policy makers/social strata
so that marginal changes are enough for achieving acceptable rate of
improvements in policy results.
2. High degree of continuity in the nature of the problems
3. high degree of continuity in the available means to deal with problems.
 Incremental change is impossible if there are no past policies
in respect to a discrete policy-issue.
Conditions likely to prevail in high degree of social stability;
- Routine is often the best policy
- Change is at a slow rate, incremental policy change is at optimal

15. Contd…
Important problems of today are tied up with high speed
changes;
- levels of aspirations,
- available means of action
The science of muddling maybe valid for a larger number
of policy areas in a relatively stable society e.g. USA
Even in the USA, many of the most critical policy
problems involve factors changing at a high rate of speed.

16. The impact of muddling through on actual policy
Strategy cannot but serve as an ideological reinforcement of the pro-
inertia and anti-innovation forces in all human organization, etc.
- It reduces social scientist functions as an innovating social factor
Actual tendency is to;
- Limit the search for alternatives
Doesn’t stimulate administrators to get outside their regular routine
A choice between these 2 models is difficult but reliance on a third
model

17. Dror’s proposal
Normative Optimum Model
…. Is a reprocessing of both the “ comprehensive rationality” and the
“successive limited comparison” models for policy making.
Basic Assumptions
1. Increase rationality content, more explication of goals, extensive search for
new alternatives
2. Extra rational processes play a significant in optimal policy making on
complex issues.
3. Extra rational policy making can be improved by various means
4. Modern policy making follows precedents, most contemporary policy
making practices lag behind and should be improved.

18. Dror’s proposal cont….
cont
Characteristics of Normative optimum model
I. Some clarification of values, obj., and decision criteria.
II. Identification of alternatives, through a conscious effort to consider new
alternatives.
III. Estimation of expected pay-off of various alternatives and decision
IV. Cut-off for considering possible results of alternative policies and expected
results
V. The “test” of this model is based on agreement by various analyst after
discussion
VI. A conscious effort is made to decide if problem is important to make analysis
comprehensive
VII. All theories and experience are relied upon
VIII.improve quality of decision by systematic learning, stimulation of initiative
and creativity, staff development etc.

19. Conclusion
To state the problem of policy making as a choice b/n the “root”
and “branch” methods of problem solving is misleading and
dangerous
There is the need for a model that fits reality while being worked
on to improve it.
The normative optimum policy model is just one of the many
models.
Policy administrators enjoined to enter into inquiry using
Lindblom's theses as a launch-pad to provide alternative models.

20. Lindblom’s Reaction:
“Still Muddling, Not yet Through”
Draws the distinction on the concept of Incrementalism:
 Incremental Politics
 Incremental Analysis;
1. simple incremental Analysis ( one of the elements in disjointed incremental)
2. Disjointed Incrementalism ( several forms of strategic Analysis)
3. Strategic Analysis
To some critics, doing well means to shun
Incrementalism.
Incrementalists: Approach ideal for complex problems.
- Practicing it skillfully
- Turning away from it only rarely.

21. Lindblom’s reaction contd….
 Analysis limited to any calculated or thoughtfully chosen sets of
stratagems to simplify complex problems, that is to short-cut the
conventionally comprehensive “scientific” analysis”- Strategic Analysis
 Analysis marked by mutually supporting set of simplifying and focusing
stratagems- Disjointed Incremental Analysis
 criticized on grounds of failing to consider distant alternatives
 Analysis that is limited to consideration of alternative policies all of which are only
incrementally different from the status quo- Simple incremental Analysis

22. Contd…
Contd
 Incremental Politics: a fast moving sequence of small changes that can
Politics
more speedily accomplish a drastic alteration of the status quo than can an
only infrequent major policy change.
 capable in authoritarian systems
 incapable in democratic dispensation.
 Benefits of incremental politics;
I. Offers the best chance of introducing changes and those change producing intermediate
changes
II. A way of smuggling changes into the political system
 Argues that Partisan Mutual Adjustment isn’t quite the same as
incremental Politics;
 PMA: Takes the form of fragmented or greatly decentralized political decision
making in which the various somewhat autonomous participants mutually
affect one another, with the result that policy making displays certain
interesting characteristics
 However, the two are closely linked in all national systems.

23. Characteristics of PMA
 Policies are resultants of the mutual adjustment; better described
as happening than as decided
 Policies are influenced by a broad range of participants and
interests
 The connection between a policy and good reason for it is
obscure, since many participants will act for diverse reasons.
 Despite the absence of central coordination of the participants,
their mutual adjustments of many kinds will to some degree
coordinate them as decision makers.

24. Criticism : PMA
1. Expressed ordinarily as an objection to pluralism, thus less
representation of interests and values of the population.
2. Naivety on the assumption that the inequalities of PMA are so great
as more central decision making can be seen as important.
3. Though participant are forbidden to initiate on their own a change,
many can veto it.

25. Comments, Contributions and Questions