Advertisement

Problem Definition: Multiple ‘Problems’, Different Frames, and False Representations

  • Leanne McCarthy-Cotter
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter focuses on the problem definition stage. It demonstrates that the developments highlighted in Chapter  2 fed into how the ‘problem’ was defined, how the policy was represented, and subsequently, how policy-makers utilised ‘problem representation’ as a power resource to pave the path for successful passage of the policy. In the case of 1991 Child Support Act, there were considerable links between how the problem was defined and the policy’s subsequent failure. This chapter argues that there were numerous actors in the policy-making process, each viewing the policy through a different frame, and thus attaching different definitions of what the problem was that the policy sought to rectify. The chapter highlights that there was an unclear definition of the ‘problem’, which led to ambiguous and incompatible aims and objectives being contained within the Bill. The chapter argues that it is important to view ‘problem representation’ as being different to ‘problem definition’, and indeed how ‘problem representation’ is a tactic used to mask true motives and objectives. The chapter ends by arguing that Thatcher and the Treasury deployed this strategic use of ‘problem representation’ to frame the debate in terms of parental responsibility to children and an attempt to remedy a failing system. It demonstrates that Thatcher and the Treasury hid their definition of the problem under the problem identified by Newton and Mackay, using language and imagery to begin setting the agenda to not only garner popular support, but also limit any potential opposition. It stresses that even before the formal policy-making process had begun, the roots of policy failure had started to spring.

Keywords

Problem definition Problem representation Frames Imagery Problem identification Strategic representation Problems Issues 

References

  1. Bacchi, C. L. (1999). Women, Policy and Problems: The Construction of Policy Problems. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  2. Bosso, C. J. (1994). The Contextual Bases of Problem Definition. In D. A. Rochefort., & R. W. Cobb (Eds.), The Politics of Problem Definition: Shaping the Policy Agenda (pp. 182–203). Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
  3. Bradshaw, J., & Millar, J. (1991). Lone Parent Families in the UK (Department of Social Security Research Report No. 6). London: HMSO.Google Scholar
  4. Critchley, J. in The Times (London), September 29 1987, Tuesday A star for the Nineties?—No 10: John Moore’s Tory Leadership Prospects.Google Scholar
  5. Dahl, R. (1957). The Concept of Power. Behavioural Science, 2(3), 201–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Deakin, N. (1994). The Politics of Welfare: Continuities and Change. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
  7. Dery, D. (1984). Problem Definition in Policy Analysis. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
  8. Dunn, W. N. (1988). Methods of the Second Type: Coping with the Wilderness of Conventional Policy Analysis. Policy Studies Review, 7, 720–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Evans Woolfe Production. (12th, 19th and 26th September 1999). In Association with Brook Lapping for Channel Four, Can’t Pay Won’t Pay. London: Evans Woolfe.Google Scholar
  10. Finlayson, A. (2003). Making Sense of New Labour. London: Lawrence & Wishart.Google Scholar
  11. Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing Public Policy: Discursive Politics and Deliberative Practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin.Google Scholar
  13. Garnham, A., & Knights, E. (1994). Putting the Treasury First: The Truth About Child Support. London: Child Poverty Action Group.Google Scholar
  14. Glendinning, C., & Millar, J. (Eds.). (1992). Women and Poverty in Britain: The 1990s. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
  15. Government White Paper, Children Come First—The Government’s Proposals on the Maintenance of Children, Volume One, Command Paper Cmnd. 1263, HMSO, October 1990a.Google Scholar
  16. Government White Paper, Children Come First—The Government’s Proposals on the Maintenance of Children: The Background, Volume Two, Cmnd. 1264, HMSO, October 1990b.Google Scholar
  17. Hogwood, B. W., & Gunn, L. A. (1984). Policy Analysis for the Real World. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Kingdon, J. W. (1984). Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
  19. Lindblom, C. E., & Cohen, D. K. (1979). Usable Knowledge. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Macaskill, H. (1993). From the Workhouse to the Workplace. London: NCOPF.Google Scholar
  21. Mackay, A., Wilding, P., & George, V. (1972). Stereotypes of Male and Female Roles and Their Influence on People’s Attitudes to One-Parent Families. The Sociological Review, 20(1), 79–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Moore, J. (1988, October 12). Speaking at the Conservative Party Conference. Brighton.Google Scholar
  23. Millar, J. I. (1996). Family Obligations and Social Policy: The Case of Child Support. Policy Studies, 17(3), 181–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Murray, C. (1990). The Emerging British Underclass. London: Institute of Economic Affairs.Google Scholar
  25. National Audit Office. (1990). Department of Social Security: Support for Lone Parent Families. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
  26. National Council for One Parent Families. (1977). On Top of Your Pay: How to Claim Extra Money for Your Family if You Are Low Paid [6pp. leaflet]. London.Google Scholar
  27. Parsons, W. (1995). Public Policy: An Introduction to the Theory and Practice of Policy Analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  28. Rein, M., & Schön, D. A. (1977). Problem Setting in Policy Research. In C. Weiss (Ed.), Using Social Research in Policy Making (pp. 235–250). Lexington: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  29. Ridley, N. (1991). My Style of Government: The Thatcher Years. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
  30. Riker, W. H. (1986). The Art of Political Manipulation. New Haven: CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Rochefort, D. A., & Cobb, R. W. (Eds.). (1994). The Politics of Problem Definition. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
  32. Schön, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  33. Schön, D. A., & Rein, M. (1993). Reframing Policy Discourse. In F. Fischer & J. Forester (Eds.), The Argumentative Turn in Policy Analysis and Planning. London: Duke University Press and UCL Press.Google Scholar
  34. Schön, D. A., & Rein, M. (1994). Frame Reflection: Toward the Resolution of Intractable Policy Controversies. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  35. Spector, M., & Kitsuse, J. I. (1977). Constructing Social Problems. Menlo Park, CA: Cummings.Google Scholar
  36. Stafford, A. (1994, September 18). Families Split and Struggling in the Trap. The Sunday Times.Google Scholar
  37. Thatcher, M. (1990, January 17). George Thomas Society Lecture. London: National Children’s Home. Text accessed from: http://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/107992. Accessed 12 Nov 2013.
  38. Townsend, P. (1979). Poverty in the United Kingdom. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
  39. Weiss, J. A. (1989). The Powers of Problem Definition: The Case of Government Paperwork. Policy Sciences, 22(2), 97–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wildavsky, A. (1979). Speaking the Truth to Power: The Art and Craft of Policy Analysis. Boston: Little, Brown (published in the UK as The Art and Craft of Policy Analysis [1980], London, Macmillan).Google Scholar
  41. Wolman, H. (1981). The Determinants of Program Success and Failure. Journal of Public Policy, 1, 433–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Young, K. (1987). The Space Between Words: Local Authorities and the Concept of Equal Opportunities. In R. Jenkins & J. Solomos (Eds.), Racism and Equal Opportunity Policies in the 1980s. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

House of Lords Debates

  1. House of Lords Debate. (1990–91), Vol. 526, col. 778.Google Scholar
  2. House of Lords Debate. (1990–91), Vol. 526, col. 805.Google Scholar

House of Commons Debate

  1. House of Commons Debate. (1990–1991), Vol. 192, col. 212.Google Scholar

Parliamentary and Government Publications and Records

  1. Child Support Bill. (1991). HL Bill 29. London: HMSO.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leanne McCarthy-Cotter
    • 1
  1. 1.University of SheffieldSheffieldUK

Personalised recommendations