Abstract
One of the challenges facing policy analysts is how to improve policy processes in the era of governance. The present article examines how “perceptions analysis,” i.e. the identification of perceptions of different leaders in a specific policy field, may contribute to policy analysis. The article focuses on two questions: What explains leaders’ support for different policy options? Can the examination of leaders’ perceptions help in identifying potential bases for collaboration? Based on mixed methodologies, the study includes interviews with 103 people who influence the policy process and policy discourse in Israel. The findings reveal the importance of the perceptions of causes in explaining leaders’ policy preferences and suggest that identifying their perceptions may help analysts distinguish bases for promoting collaboration and trust among different actors in the policy process, as well as enhancing the legitimacy of the policy process as a whole.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
We adopt Verba’s (Verba et al. 1987) definition of leaders as individuals who influence policy process and policy discourse. This term was chosen because it is broader than “policymakers.” In the era of governance, policy process includes a broad array of individuals and groups.
An additional category of explanations is "fatalistic", i.e. situations attributed to fate, bad luck, and human nature (Smith and Stone 1989). This category is less significant for public policy: if we cannot do anything about poverty, policy alternatives are irrelevant. Therefore, this paper does not address fatalistic explanations.
In recent years, researchers have been studying perceptions among elites in developing countries, including the Philippines, and Brazil (Reis and Moore 2005). Their findings are not reported here, mainly because of their focus on the Third World.
Seventeen of the respondents did not answer this question.
This sector was initially included as a subcategory of the business elite, because of its historical ability to influence labor relations in the Israeli economy (Shalev 1999). However, in light of the differences in the perceptions of the sectors, we decided to treat it as a separate sector.
As noted, half of the interviewees supported left-wing parties, but in the Israeli context, no direct connection necessarily exists between party affiliation on the left–right continuum and perceptions regarding social-economic matters. In most cases, party affiliation is more reflective of state-political perceptions than of social-economic perceptions (Ventura and Shamir 1991).
In the Israeli context, citizens of Asian-African origin are more heavily concentrated in the lower socio-economic echelons than those of European-American origin (Semyonov and Lewin-Epstein 2004).
Based on a public opinion survey conducted by the International Social Survey Program [ISSP].
First, all but one interview were conducted personally by the author. Second, during the interview, the interviewer listened to the responses without reacting, making a point of not voicing judgments. Third, in order to gain trust among the interviewees, the purpose of the research was described, and the anonymity of the respondents was stressed at the very beginning of each interview. Fourth, the questionnaire was deliberately worded to reflect different attitudes and not to dictate a one-dimensional perception. Moreover, some of the items that appeared in the questionnaire included questions that were repeated from different angles.
References
Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration and Theory, 18, 543–571.
Ariely, D. (2008). Predictably irrational. New-York: Harper Collins.
Atkinson, R. C., Atkinson, R. L., Bem, D. J., & Hilgard, E. R. (1990). Social information processing. In R. C. Atkinson, R. L. Atkinson, E. E. Smith, D. J. Bem, S. Nolen-Hoeksema, & C. D. Smith (Eds.), Introduction to psychology (pp. 683–721). Orlando: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Inc.
Barton, A. H. (1974–1975). Consensus and conflict among American leaders. Public Opinion Quarterly, 38(4), 507–530.
Barton, A. H., Denitch, B., & Kadushin, C. (1973). Opinion-making elites in Yugoslavia. London: Praeger.
Beck, U. (1999). World risk society. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Beck, E. L., Whitley, D. M., & Wolk, J. J. (1999). Legislator’s perceptions about poverty: Views from the Georgia general assembly. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 26(2), 87–104.
Bernard, R. H. (2000). Social research methods. California: Sage.
Beyth-Maron, R. (1986). Research methods in the social sciences: Guiding principles and research styles. Tel Aviv: Everyman’s University.
Bochel, H., & Defty, A. (2007). MPs attitudes to welfare: A new consensus? Journal of Social Policy, 36(1), 1–17.
Bradley, C., & Cole, D. (2002). Causal attributions and the significance of self-efficacy in predicting solutions to poverty. Sociological Focus, 35(4), 381–396.
Clarke, G., & Sison, M. (2003). Voices from the top of the pile: Elite perceptions of poverty and the poor in the Philippines. Development and Change, 34(2), 215–242.
Coleman, W. D., & Perl, A. (1999). Internationalized policy environments and policy network analysis. Political Studies, 47, 691–709.
Creswell, J. W. (1994). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. California: Sage.
Czudnowski, M. M. (1987). Interviewing political elites in Taiwan. In G. Moyser & M. Wagstaffe (Eds.), Research methods for elite studies (pp. 232–250). London: Allen and Unwin.
Dery, D. (1984). Problem definition in policy analysis. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.
Doron, A. (2002). Teguvot hamimsad al duah ha’oni beYisra’el [The establishment’s response to the Annual Poverty Report]. Kivunim Hadashim, 7, 177–196. (Hebrew).
Doron, A. (2003). Mishtar harevahah bemedinat Yisra’el: Megamot hashinui vehashlakhotehen hahevratiyot [The Israeli welfare regime: Changing trends and their societal effects]. Israeli Sociology, 5(2), 417–433. (Hebrew).
Feagin, J. R. (1972). When it comes to poverty, it is still “God helps those who help themselves”. Psychology Today, 6, 101–129.
Forma, P. (1999). Welfare state opinions among citizens, MP-candidates and elites: Evidence from Finland. In S. Svallfors & P. Taylor-Gooby (Eds.), The end of the welfare state? Responses to state retrenchment (pp. 87–105). London: Routledge.
Free, L., & Cantril, H. (1967). The political beliefs of Americans: A study of public opinion. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Furnham, A. (1982). Why the poor are always with us? Explanations for poverty in Britain. British Journal of Social Psychology, 21(4), 311–322.
George, V. (1998). Political ideology, globalization and welfare futures in Europe. Journal of Social Policy, 27(1), 17–36.
Gidron, B., Kramer, R. M., & Salamon, L. M. (Eds.). (1992). Government and the third sector. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(3), 255–274.
Gulbrandsen, T. (2005). Ideological integration and variation within the private business elite in Norway. European Sociological Review, 21(4), 329–344.
Hajer, M. (2003). Policy without polity? Policy analysis and the institutional void. Policy Sciences, 36, 175–195.
Hasenfeld, Y., & Rafferty, J. A. (1989). The determinants of public attitudes toward the welfare state. Social Forces, 67(4), 1027–1047.
Hoffmann-Lange, U. (1987). Surveying national elites in the Federal Republic of Germany. In G. Moyser & M. Wagstaffe (Eds.), Research methods for elite studies (pp. 27–47). London: Allen and Unwin.
Howlett, M., & Ramesh, M. (1995). Studying public policy: Policy cycles and policy subsystem. Toronto: Oxford University Press.
Howlett, M., & Ramesh, M. (2003). Studying public policy: Policy cycles and policy subsystem (2nd ed.). Toronto: Oxford University Press.
Kelley, H. H. (1973). The processes of causal attribution. American Psychologist, 28(2), 107–128.
Kluegel, R. J., & Smith, E. R. (1986). Beliefs about inequality. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine De Gruyter.
Koppenjan, J., & Klijn, E. H. (2004). Managing uncertainties in networks: A Network approach to problem solving and decision making. London, New York: Routledge.
Korpi, W., & Palme, J. (1998). The paradox of redistribution and strategies of equality: Welfare state institution, inequality and poverty in the western countries. American Sociological Review, 63(5), 661–668.
Kreidl, M. (2000). Perception of poverty and wealth in western and post-communist countries. Social Justice Research, 13(2), 151–176.
Krumer-Nevo, M. (2006). Nashim be’oni: Sipurei haim [Women in poverty: Life stories]. Tel-Aviv: Hakibbutz Hameuchad (Hebrew).
Lahat, L., & Menahem, G. (2009). Causes and remedies for poverty: Perceptions among local elected leaders in Israel. Journal of Poverty and Public Policy, 1(2), 1–31.
Lasswell, H. D. (1951). The policy orientation. In H. D. Lasswell & D. Lerner (Eds.), The policy sciences. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Lasswell, H. D. (1971). A pre-view of policy sciences. New York: American Elsevier.
Lasswell, H. D., Lerner, D., & Rothwell, C. E. (1952). The comparative study of elites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Latet. (2007). Dokh ha’oni ha’alternativi 2007 [The 2007 Alternative poverty report]. Latet Organization. www.latet.org.il/Index.asp?CategoryID=195&Page=1. Accessed 22 July 2007.
Linder, S., & Peters, G. (1989). Instruments of government: Perceptions and contexts. Journal of Public Policy, 9(1), 35–58.
Lister, R. (2004). Poverty. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Littrell, J., & Diwan, S. (1998). Attitudinal predictors of preferred policy options: Contrasting AFDC with work program. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 25(2), 69–99.
Lord, C. G., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1979). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(11), 2098–2109.
Mau, S., & Veghte, B. (2007). Social justice, legitimacy and the welfare state. Hampshire, UK: Ashgate.
Monnickendam, M., Katz, C., & Monnickendam, M. S. (2009). Social workers serving poor clients: Perceptions of poverty and service policy. British Journal of Social Work, 39(1), 1–17.
Monnickendam, M., Monnickendam, S. M., Katz, C., & Katan, J. (2007). Health care for the poor: An exploration of primary-care physician’s perceptions of poor patients and their helping behaviors. Social Sciences and Medicine, 64(7), 1463–1474.
Moyser, G., & Wagstaffe, M. (1987). Research methods for elite studies. London: Allen and Unwin.
National Insurance Institute of Israel. (2009). Principal findings: Dimensions of poverty and inequality according to income distribution of the economy in 2007/8. A report conducted by the Division of Research and Planning, Jerusalem (Hebrew).
Pereira, J. A., & Van Ryzin, G. (1998). Understanding public support for time limits and other welfare reforms. Policy Studies Journal, 26(3), 398–418.
Pierre, J., & Peters, G. B. (2000). Governance, politics and the state. New York: St. Martins Press.
Pierre, J., & Peters, G. B. (2005). Governing complex societies. Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Putnam, R. D. (1976). The comparative study of political elites. NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Reis, E. P., & Moor, M. (2005). Elite perceptions of poverty and inequality. London: Zed Books.
Rhodes, R. A. W. (1996). The new governance: Governing without government. Political Studies, 44(4), 652–667.
Rhodes, R. A. W. (2000). New Labour’s civil service: Summing-up joining-up. The Political Quarterly, 151(2), 151–166.
Rhodes, R. A. W., & Marsh, D. (1992). New directions in the study of policy network. European Journal of Political Research, 21(1–2), 181–205.
Richards, D., & Smith, M. J. (2002). Governance and public policy in the UK. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Robinson, E. S. (2006). A decade of treating networks seriously. Policy Studies Journal, 34(4), 589–598.
Rochefort, A. D., & Cobb, W. R. (1993). Problem definition, agenda access and policy choice. Policy Studies Journal, 21(1), 56–71.
Sabatier, P. (1988). An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein. Policy Sciences, 21(2–3), 129–168.
Sabatier, P. (1998). The advocacy coalition framework: Revisions and relevance for Europe. Journal of Public Policy, 5, 98–130.
Sabatier, P., & Jenkins-Smith, H. (1993). Policy change and learning: An advocacy coalition approach. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Semyonov, M., & Lewin-Epstein, N. (2004). Introduction: Past insights and future directions: Studies of stratification in Israel. In M. Semyonov & N. Lewin-Epstein (Eds.), Stratification in Israel (pp. 1–13). New Brunswick, NJ, London: Transaction Publishers.
Shalev, M. (1999). Have globalization and liberalization normalized Israel political economy? In D. Levi-Faur, G. Sheffer, & D. Vogel (Eds.), Israel: The dynamics of change and continuity (pp. 121–156). London: Frank Cass.
6, P., Leat, D., Seltzer, K., & Stoker, G. (2002). Towards holistic governance. Hampshire, UK: Palgrave.
Smith, B. K., & Stone, L. H. (1989). Rags, riches and bootstraps: Beliefs about the causes of wealth and poverty. The Sociological Quarterly, 30(1), 93–107.
Stoker, G. (1998). Governance as theory: Five propositions. International Social Science Journal, 155, 17–29.
Stone, D. A. (1989). Causal stories and the formation of policy agendas. Political Science Quarterly, 104(2), 81–301.
Stone, D. A. (2002). Policy paradox. Revised edition. New York, London: W. W. Norton.
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. California: Sage.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Sciences, 211(30), 453–458.
Van Oorschot, W., & Halman, L. (2000). Blame or fate, individual or social? European Societies, 2(1), 1–28.
Van Waarden, F. (1992). Dimensions and types of policy network. European Journal of Political Research, 21, 29–52.
Ventura, R., & Shamir, M. (1991). “Left” and “Right” in Israeli politics. State, Government and International Relations, 35, 21–50.
Verba, S., Kelman, S., Orren, G. R., Miyake, I., Watanuki, J., Kabashima, I., et al. (1987). Elites and the idea of equality. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2009). Building strong nations. Farnham, UK: Ashgate.
Weible, M. C. (2005). Beliefs and perceived influence in a natural resource conflict: An advocacy coalition approach to policy networks. Political Research Quarterly, 58(3), 461–475.
Weible, M. C., & Sabatier, P. A. (2009). Coalitions, science, and belief change: Comparing adversarial and collaborative policy subsystems. The Policy Studies Journal, 37(2), 195–212.
Weiss, I. (2005). Is there a global common core to social work? A cross-national comparative study of BSW graduate students. Social Work, 50(2), 101–110.
Acknowledgments
This study is based on a doctoral dissertation presented to the Department of Public Policy, Tel Aviv University, Israel. The author wishes to thank Prof. Joseph Katan and Dr. Gila Menahem for their guidance. The research was supported by a grant from the Ministry of Science, Israel. The author wishes to thank the Pollack Foundation and the Horowitz Institute for their support of this study. We also thank the reviewers of Policy Sciences, for their illuminating remarks concerning previous versions of this article.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix 1
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lahat, L. How can leaders’ perceptions guide policy analysis in an era of governance?. Policy Sci 44, 135–155 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-010-9119-x
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-010-9119-x