Abstract
This chapter presents the policy design framework which provided the theoretical background of our research. It builds on a typology of the foreground theories of policy design, based on different philosophical and scientific ontologies (Jackson, The conduct of inquiry in international relations: Philosophy of science and its implications for the study of world politics. (London: Routledge), 2016). Section 2 compares these four methodologies (coined neo-positivism, realism, analyticism and reflexivism) and their implications for the research on policy design. Section 3 explains how the four models that we coin “instrumentation”, “institutionalization”, “framing” and “emancipation” are related both to these methodologies and to middle-range theories of the policy design.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Araral, E. (2014). “Policy and regulatory design for developing countries: A mechanism design and transaction cost approach”. Policy Sciences, 47: 289–303.
Beach, D. (2018). “Multi-method research in the social sciences—A review of recent frameworks and a way forward”. ms 29 p.
Beach, D., and Pedersen, R. B. (2016). Causal case study methods: Foundations and guidelines for comparing, matching and tracing. (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press).
Béland, D., and Cox, R. (2013). “Introduction to special issue: The politics of policy paradigms”. Governance, 26(2): 193–195.
Bhaskar Roy (2008/1978). A realist theory of science. (London: Routledge).
Bobrow, D. (2006). “Policy design: Ubiquitous, necessary and difficult”. In: Handbook of public policy. Edited by B. G. Peters and J. Pierre. (London: Sage), pp. 75–138.
Bobrow, D., and Dryzek, J. (1987). Policy analysis by design. (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press).
Boushey, G. (2013). “The punctuated equilibrium theory of agenda-setting and policy change”. In: Routledge handbook of public policy. Edited by E. Araral, S. Frizen, M. Howlett, M. Ramesh, and X. Wu. (London and New York: Routledge), pp. 138–152.
Bresser, H., and Klok, P.-J. (1988). “Fundamentals for a theory of policy instruments”. International Journal of Social Economics, 15(3–4): 22–41.
Breuning, C., and Ahlqvist, J. S. (2014). “Quantitative methodologies in public policy”. In: Comparative policy studies: Conceptual and methodological challenges. Edited by I. Engeli, and C. Rothmayr Allison. (London: Palgrave Macmillan), pp. 109–129.
Chindarkar, N., Howlett, M., and Ramesh, M. (2017). “Introduction to the special issue: “Conceptualizing effective social policy design: Design spaces and capacity challenges””. Public Administration and Development, 37:3–14.
Colebatch, H. K. (2017). “The idea of policy design: Intention, process, outcome, meaning and validity”. Policy and Administration, Special Issue: Questioning Policy Design. On-line version. https://doi.org/10.1177/0952076717709525
Considine, M. (2002). “The end of the line? Accountable governance in the age of networks, partnerships, and joined-up services”. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, 15(1): 21–40.
Considine, M., Damon, A., and Lewis, J. (2014). “Policy design as craft: Teasing out policy design expertise using a semi-experimental approach”. Policy Sciences, 47: 209–225.
Daigneault, P.-M. (2014). “Reassessing the concept of policy paradigm: Aligning ontology and methodology in policy studies”. Journal of European Public Policy, 21(3): 453–469.
Del Río, P., and Cerdá, E. (2017). “The missing link: The influence of instruments and design features on the interactions between climate and renewable electricity policies”. Energy Research and Social Science, 33: 49–58.
Del Río, P., and Howlett, M. (2013). “Beyond the “Tinbergen Rule” in policy design: Matching tools and goals in policy portfolios”. SSRN Electronic Journal. Working Paper LKYSPP13-01.
Eliadis, P., Hill, M., and Howlett, M. (2005). “Introduction”. In: Designing government: From instruments to governance. Edited by P. Eliadis, M. Hill, and M. Howlett. (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press), pp. 3–18.
Falleti, T., and Lynch, J. (2009). “Context and causal mechanisms in political analysis”. Comparative Political Studies, 42(9): 1143–1166.
Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing public policy: Discursive politics and deliberative practices. (New York: Oxford University Press).
Fischer, F. (2004). “Beyond empiricism: Policy analysis as deliberative practice”. In: Deliberative policy analysis: Understanding governance in the network society. Edited by M. Hajer Maarten, and H. Wagenaar. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 209–227.
Fischer, F. (2007). “Deliberative policy analysis as practical reason: Integrating empirical and normative arguments”. In: Handbook of public policy analysis: Theory, politics, and methods. Edited by F. Fischer, G. Miller, and M. Sidney. (Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis), pp. 223–236.
Fischer, F., and Forester, J. (1993). “Editors’ introduction”. In: The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning. Edited by F. Fischer and J. Forester. (London: University College London), pp. 1–21.
Fontaine, G., Fuentes, J. L., and Narváez, I. (2018). “Policy mixes against oil dependence: Resource nationalism, layering and contradictions in Ecuador’s energy transition”. Energy Research and Social Science, 47: 56–68.
Forester, J. (1993). Critical theory, public policy, and planning practice: Toward a critical pragmatism. (Albany: State University of New York Press).
Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action. (Frankfurt: Beacon Press).
Hall, P. (1993). “Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: The case of economic policymaking in Britain”. Comparative Politics, 25(3): 275–296.
Hall, P. (2003). “Aligning ontology and methodology in comparative politics”. In: Comparative historical analysis in the social sciences. Edited by J. Mahoney and D. Rueschemeyer. (New York: Cambridge University Press), pp. 373–404.
Hogan, J., and Howlett, M. (2015). “Reflections on our understanding of policy paradigms and policy change”. In: Policy paradigms in theory and practice: Discourses, ideas and anomalies in public policy dynamics. Edited by M. Howlett, and J. Hogan. (London: Palgrave Macmillan), pp. 3–18.
Hood, C. (1986). The tools of government. (London: Macmillan Press Ltd).
Hood, C. (2007). “Intellectual obsolescence and intellectual makeovers: Reflections on the tools of government after two decades”. Governance, 20(1): 127–144.
Hood, C., and Margetts, H. (2007). The tools of government in the digital age. (New York: Palgrave Macmillan).
Hoppe, R. (2014). “Problems and policy design: Towards argumentative policy analysis”. Paper prepared for IPSA 23rd World Congress, Montreal, 19–24 July 2014.
Hoppe, R. (2017). “Heuristics for practitioners of policy design: Rules-of thumb for structuring unstructured problems”. Policy and Administration, Special Issue: Questioning Policy Design. On-line version available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0952076717709338
Hoppe, R., van de Graaf, H., and van Dijk, A. (1987). “Implementation research and policy design: Problem tractability, policy theory, and feasibility testing”. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 53: 581–604.
Howlett, M. (2004). “Beyond good and evil in policy implementation: Instrument mixes, implementation styles, and second generation theories of policy instrument choice”. Policy and Society, 23(2): 1–17.
Howlett, M. (2005). “What is a policy instrument?: Policy tools, policy mixes, and policy-implementation styles”. In: Designing government: From instruments to governance. Edited by P. Eliadis, M. Hill, and M. Howlett. (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press), pp. 31–50.
Howlett, M. (2009a). “Governance modes, policy regimes and operational plans: A multi-level nested model of policy instrument choice and policy design”. Political Sciences, 42: 73–89.
Howlett, M. (2009b). “Process sequencing policy dynamics: Beyond homeostasis and path dependency”. Journal of Public Policy, 29(3): 241–262.
Howlett, M. (2011). Designing public policies. Principles and instruments. (Oxon: Routledge).
Howlett, M., and Cashore, B. (2009). “The dependent variable problem in the study of policy change: Understanding policy change as a methodological problem”. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis, 11(1): 33–46.
Howlett, M., and Lejano, R. (2012). “Tales from the crypt: The rise and fall (and rebirth?) of policy design”. Administration and Society, 45(3): 357–381.
Howlett, M., and Mukherjee, I. (2018). “The contribution of comparative policy analysis to policy design: Articulating principles of effectiveness and clarify design spaces”. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis, 20(1): 72–87.
Howlett, M., Mukherjee, I., and Woo, J. J. (2014). “From tools to toolkits in policy design studies: The new design orientation towards policy formulation research”. Policy and Politics, 43(2): 291–311.
Howlett, M., Ramesh, M., and Perl, A. (2009). Studying public policy: policy cycles and policy subsystems. (Oxford: Oxford University Press). (3rd edition)
Howlett, M., and Rayner, J. (2007). “Design principles for policy mixes: Cohesion and coherence in ‘new governance arrangements’ ”. Policy and Society, 26(4): 1–14.
Howlett, M., and Rayner, J. (2013). “Patching vs packaging in policy formulation: Assessing policy portfolio design”. Politics and Governance, 1(2): 170–182.
Ingram, H., and Schneider, A. (2008). “Policy analysis for democracy”. In: The Oxford handbook of public policy. Edited by M. Moran, M. Rein, and R. E. Goodin. (Oxford: Oxford University Press), pp. 169–189.
Jackson, P. T. (2016). The conduct of inquiry in international relations: Philosophy of science and its implications for the study of world politics. (London: Routledge). (2nd edition).
John, P. (2003). “Is there life after policy streams, advocacy coalitions, and punctuations: Using evolutionary theory to explain policy change?”. Policy Studies Journal, 31(4): 481–498.
John, P. (2012). Analyzing public policy (London and New York: Routledge). (2nd edition).
Jones, C. O. (1984). An introduction to the study of public policy. (New York: Harcourt).
Jones, B., and Baumgartner, F. (2004). “A model of choice for public policy”. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15(3): 325–351.
Kern, F., Kuzemko, C., and Mitchell, C. (2014). “Measuring and explaining policy paradigm change: The case of UK energy policy”. Policy and Politics, 42 (4): 513–530.
King, G., Keohane, R., and Verba, S. (1994). Designing social inquiry: Scientific inference in qualitative research. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).
Kuhn, T. (2012). The structure of scientific revolutions: 50th anniversary edition. (Chicago: Chicago University Press).
Landry, R., and Varone, F. (2005). “Choice of policy instruments: Confronting the deductive and the interactive approaches”. In: Designing government: From instruments to governance. Edited by P. Eliadis, M. Hill, and M. Howlett. (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press), pp. 106–131.
Lascoumes, P., and Le Galès, P. (2007). “Introduction: Understanding public policy through its instruments: From the nature of instruments to the sociology of public policy instrumentation”. Governance, 20(1): 1–21.
Le Galès, P. (2010). “Policy instruments and governance”. In: The Sage handbook of governance. Edited by M. Bevir. (London: Sage), pp. 142–159.
Linder, S., and Peters, B. G. (1984). “From social theory to policy design”. Journal of Public Policy, 4(3): 237–259.
Linder, S., and Peters, B. G. (1987). “A design perspective on policy implementation: The fallacies of misplaced prescription”. Policy Studies Review, 6(3): 459–475.
Linder, S., and Peters, B. G. (1989). “Instruments of government: Perceptions and context”. Journal of Public Policy, 9(1): 35–58.
Linder, S., and Peters, B. G. (1990a). “Policy formulation and the challenge of conscious design”. Evaluation and Program Planning, 13: 303–311.
Linder, S., and Peters, B. G. (1990b). “An institutional approach to the theory of policy making: The role of guidance mechanisms in policy formulation”. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 2(1): 59–83.
Linder, S., and Peters, B. G. (1991). “The logic of public policy design: Linking policy actors and plausible instruments”. Knowledge and Policy, 4(1–2): 125–151.
Linquist, E. (2006). “Organizing for policy implementation: The emergence and role of implementation units in policy design and oversight”. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis, 8(4): 311–324.
Mackie, J. L. (1965). “Causes and conditions”. American Philosophical Quarterly, 2(4): 245–264.
March, J., and Olsen, J. P. (2006). “The logic of appropriateness”. In: The Oxford handbook of public policy. Edited by M. Moran, M. Rein, and R. E. Goodin. (New York: Oxford University Press), pp. 689–708.
Marsh, D., and Furlong, P. (2010). “A skin, not a sweater: Ontology and epistemology in political science”. In: Theory and methods in political science. Edited by G. Stoker and D. Marsh. (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan), pp. 184–211.
May, P. (2005). “Policy design and implementation”. In: Handbook of public administration. Edited by B.G. Peters and J. Pierre. (London: Sage), pp. 279–291.
Mill, J. S. (1843). A system of logic, ratiocinative and inductive: Being a connected view of the principles of evidence and the methods of scientific investigation, Volume 1. (London: Harrison & Co Printers).
Olsen, J. (2010). “Change and continuity: An institutional approach to institutions of democratic government”. In: Comparative administrative change and reform: Lessons learned. Edited by J. Pierre and P. Ingraham. (McGill-Queen’s University Press), pp. 15–50.
Ostrom, E. (2011). “Background on the institutional analysis and development framework”. Policy Studies Journal, 39(1): 7–27.
Pahl-Wostl, C. (2002). “Participative and stakeholder-based policy design, evaluation and modeling processes”. Integrated Assessment, 3(1): 3–14.
Peters, B. G. (2000). “Policy instruments and public management: Bridging the gaps”. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(1): 35–47.
Peters, B. G. (2018). Policy problems and policy design. (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar).
Peters, B. G., and Van Nispen, F. (Eds.) (1998). Public policy instruments. Evaluating the tools of public administration. (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar).
Pierce, J., Diddiki, S., Jones, M., Schumacher, D., Pattison, A., and Peterson, H. (2014). “Social construction and policy design: A review of past applications”. Policy Studies Journal, 42(1): 1–29.
Pierre, J. (2012). “Governance and institutional flexibility”. In: The Oxford handbook of governance. Edited by D. Levi-Faur. (London: Oxford University Press), pp. 187–200.
Pierre, J., Peters, B. G. (2000). Governance, politics and the state. (London: Macmillan Press).
Przeworski, A., and Teune, H. (1970). The logic of comparative social inquiry. (Malabar: Kriegeri).
Rayner, J. (2009). “Understanding policy change as a historical problem”. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis, 11(1): 83–96.
Rihoux, B., Rezöhazy, I., and Bol, D. (2011). “Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) in public policy analysis: An extensive review”. German Policy Studies Journal, 7(3): 9–82.
Roe, E. (1994). Narrative policy analysis: Theory and practice. (Durham and London: Duke University Press).
Rogge, K., Kern, F., and Howlett, M. (2017). “Conceptual and empirical advances in analysing policy mixes for energy transition”. Energy Research and Social Science, 33: 1–10.
Rosenow, J., Kern, F., and Rogge, K. (2017). “The need for comprehensive and well targeted instrument mixes to stimulate energy transitions: The case of energy efficiency policy”. Energy Research and Social Science, 33: 95–104.
Salamon, L. (2000). “The new governance and the tools of public action: An introduction”. Fordham Urban Law Journal, 28(5): 1609–1674.
Salamon, L. (Ed.) (2005). The tools of the government: a guide to the new governance. (New York: Oxford University Press).
Sartori, G. (1970). “Concept mis-formation in comparative politics”. The American Political Science Review, 64(4): 1033–1053.
Sayer, A. (1992). Method in social science: A realist approach. (London: Routledge). (2nd edition).
Schneider, A., and Ingram, H. (1988). “Systematically pinching ideas: A comparative approach to policy design”. Journal of Public Policy, 8(1): 61–80.
Schneider, A., and Ingram, H. (1990). “Behavioral assumptions of policy tools”. The Journal of Politics, 52(2): 510–529.
Schneider, A., and Ingram, H. (1993). “Social construction of target populations: Implications for politics and policy”. The American Political Science Review, 87(2): 334–347.
Schneider, A., and Ingram, H. (1997). Policy design for democracy. (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas).
Schneider, C., and Rohlfing, I. (2013). “Combining QCA and process tracing in set-theoretic multi-method research”. Sociological Methods and Research, 42(4): 559–597.
Tosun, J., and Treib, O. (2018). “Linking policy design and implementation styles”. In: The Routledge handbook of policy design. Edited by M. Howlett and I. Mukherjee. (London: Routledge), pp. 316–330.
Turnbull, N. (2017). “Policy design: Its enduring appeal in a complex world and how to think differently”. Public Policy and Administration. On-line version available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0952076717709522
Varone, F., and Aebischer, B. (2001). “Energy efficiency: The challenges of policy design”. Energy Policy, 29: 615–629.
Weimer, D. (1992). “The craft of policy design: Can it be more than art?”. Policy Studies Review, 11(3–4): 370–388.
Weimer, D., and Vining, A. (2004). Policy analysis: Concepts and practice. (New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall).
Wilder, M. (2015). “What is a policy paradigm? Overcoming epistemological hurdles in cross-disciplinary conceptual adaptation”. In: Policy paradigms in theory and practice: Discourses, ideas and anomalies in public policy dynamics. Edited by M. Howlett and J. Hogan. (London: Palgrave Macmillan), pp. 19–42.
Yanow, D. (2013). “Interpretive analysis and comparative research”. In: Comparative policy studies: Conceptual and methodological challenges. Edited by I. Engeli and C. Rothmayr Allison. (London: Palgrave Macmillan), pp. 131–159.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Fontaine, G., Medrano Caviedes, C., Narváez, I. (2020). The Policy Design Framework. In: The Politics of Public Accountability. International Series on Public Policy . Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28995-9_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28995-9_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-28994-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-28995-9
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)