Policy Sciences

, Volume 50, Issue 3, pp 383–398 | Cite as

The implications of the emerging disproportionate policy perspective for the new policy design studies

  • Moshe MaorEmail author
Research Article


This paper articulates the disproportionate policy perspective and uses it to mount four challenges for the new policy design orientation. First, in contrast to the new policy design thinking, disproportionate policy options may be systematically designed, and at times, successfully implemented. Second, in contrast to the new policy design thinking, there are certain conditions under which policymakers may tend to develop effective response, with cost considerations becoming only secondary in importance if at all (read, policy overreaction), or cost-conscious response, with effectiveness considerations becoming only secondary in importance if at all (read, policy underreaction). Third, in contrast to the new policy design thinking, disproportionate policy options may be designed for purposes other than implementation (e.g., to be used as signaling devices or as context-setters). Fourth, in contrast to new policy design thinking, there are certain conditions under which the emotional arena of policy may be equally, if not more, important than the substantive one. The paper concludes that so far the literature on new policy design has not responded to the emergence of the disproportionate policy perspective, but a robust research agenda awaits those answering this paper’s call for action.


Disproportionate policy Policy design Policy overreaction Policy underreaction Emotions 


  1. Adams, K. (2003). The effectiveness of juvenile curfews at crime prevention. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 587, 136–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bagehot, W. (1873). Lombard street: A description of the money market. London: Henry S. King.Google Scholar
  3. Baumgartner, F. B., & Jones, B. D. (2002). Policy dynamics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bernanke, B. (2014a). Central banking after the great recession: Lessons learned and challenges ahead: A discussion with Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke on the Fed’s 100th anniversary. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  5. Bernanke, B. (2014b). The federal reserve: Looking back, looking forward. Accessed 5 July 2016.
  6. Bobrow, D. (2006). Policy design: Ubiquitous, necessary and difficult. In B. G. Peters & J. Pierre (Eds.), Handbook of public policy (pp. 75–96). Thousand Oak: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bobrow, D. B., & Dryzek, J. S. (1987). Policy analysis by design. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
  8. Brown, C. M., Aranas, A. E., Benenson, G. A., et al. (2014). Airport exit and entry screening for Ebola—August–November 10, 2014. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.Google Scholar
  9. Commission, Financial Crisis Inquiry. (2011). The financial crisis: Inquiry report. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  10. Committee on Climate Change. (2014). Managing climate risks to well-being and the economy Adaptation Sub-Committee; Progress Report 2014. London: Committee on Climate Change. Accessed 5 July 2016.
  11. deLeon, P. (1999). The missing link revisited: Contemporary implementation research. Policy Studies Review, 16, 311–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Durr, R. H. (1993). What moves policy sentiment? American Political Science Review, 87, 158–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC). (2008). Meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee on October 28–29, Washington, DC.
  14. Finucane, M. L. (2008). Emotion, affect, and risk communication with older adults: Challenges and opportunities. Journal of Risk Research, 11, 983–997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fishman, A., & Ringel-Hoffman, A. (2008). I have enormous power, I will have no excuses. Yedioth Achronot, 3(10), 2008.Google Scholar
  16. Ford, R. T. (1994). Juvenile curfews and gang violence: Exiled on main street. Harvard Law Review, 107, 1693–1710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Forgas, J. P. (1992). Affect in social judgments and decisions: A multiprocess model. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 227–275). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  18. Geithner, T. F. (2014). Stress test: Reflections on financial crises. New York: Crown Publishers.Google Scholar
  19. Gorton, G. (2015). Stress for success: A review of Timothy Geithner’s financial crisis memoir. Journal of Economic Literature, 53, 975–995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hajer, M. A. (1995). The Politics of environmental discourse: Ecological modernization and the policy process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Hall, P. A. (1993). Policy paradigms, social learning and the state: The case of economic policy making in Britain. Comparative Politics, 25, 275–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hilgartner, S. (2000). Science on stage: Expert advice as public drama. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Hoffmann, M. J. (2011). Climate governance at the crossroads: Experimenting with a global response after Kyoto. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Howlett, M. (2014). From the ‘old’ to the ‘new’ policy design: Design thinking beyond markets and collaborative governance. Policy Sciences, 47, 187–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Howlett, M., & 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, 33–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Howlett, M., & Lejano, R. P. (2013). Tales from the crypt: The rise and fall (and re-birth?) of policy design studies. Administration & Society, 45, 356–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Howlett, M., Mukherjee, I., & Woo, J. J. (2015). From tools to toolkits in policy design studies: The new design orientation towards policy formulation research. Policy & Politics, 43, 291–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Israel Security Agency. (2010). Annual summary: Data and trends in terrorism. Tel Aviv: Israel Security Agency.Google Scholar
  29. Janis, I. L. (1982). Victims of groupthink: A psychological study of foreign-policy decisions and fiascos (2nd ed.) Boston: Houghton Miflin. First published in 1972.Google Scholar
  30. Jones, B. D., & Baumgartner, F. R. (2005). The politics of attention. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  31. Jones, B. D., Thomas, H. F, I. I. I., & Wolfe, M. (2014). Policy bubbles. Policy Studies Journal, 42, 146–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kingdon, J. W. (1995). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies (2nd ed.). New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  33. Kober, A. (2008). The IDF in the second Lebanon War. Journal of Strategic Studies, 31, 3–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Laish, G. (2011). The second Lebanon war—A strategic reappraisal. Infinity Journal, 4, 22–25.Google Scholar
  35. Lappin, Y. (2009). IDF releases cast lead casualty numbers. Jerusalem Post, 26(3), 2009.Google Scholar
  36. Lasswell, H. D. (1971). A pre-view of policy sciences. New York: American Elsevier.Google Scholar
  37. Leggett, W. (2014). The politics of behaviour change: Nudge, neoliberalism and the state. Policy & Politics, 42, 3–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Linder, S. H., & Peters, B. G. (1988). The analysis of design or the design of analysis? Policy Studies Review, 7, 738–750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lodge, M., & Taber, C. S. (2013). The rationalizing voter. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Loewenstein, G. F., Weber, E. U., Hsee, C. K., & Welch, N. (2001). Risk as feelings. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 267–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Malka, A. (2008). Israel and asymmetrical deterrence. Comparative Strategy, 27, 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Maor, M. (2012). Policy overreaction. Journal of Public Policy, 32, 231–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Maor, M. (2014a). Policy persistence, risk estimation and policy underreaction. Policy Sciences, 47, 425–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Maor, M. (2014b). Policy bubbles: Policy overreaction and positive feedback. Governance, 27, 469–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Maor, M. (2015). Emotion-driven negative policy bubbles. Policy Sciences, 49(2), 191–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Maor, M. (2016a). Rhetoric and doctrines of policy over- and underreactions in times of crisis. In Paper prepared forpresentation at the HKU-USC-IPPA Conference on Public Policy, Hong Kong, China, June 10–11.Google Scholar
  47. Maor, M. (2016b). Disproportionate policy responses. Working Paper. Jerusalem: Hebrew University.
  48. Maor, M. (2016c). The emergence of preference- and institution-driven policy bubbles: Conceptual foundations. In Paper prepared for presentation at the HKU-USC-IPPA Conference on Public Policy, June 10–11, Hong Kong, China.Google Scholar
  49. Maor, M. (2016d). Policy entrepreneurs in policy valuation processes: The case of the coalition for environmentallyresponsible economies. In Paper presented at the INOGOV (Innovations in Climate Governance) workshop on NovelApproaches to Climate Governance and the Role of Entrepreneurship, Amsterdam, 18–19 May 2015.Google Scholar
  50. Maor, M. (forthcoming). Policy overreaction doctrine: From ideal-type to context-sensitive solution in times of crisis. In: M. Howlett & I. Mukherjee (Eds.), Handbook of Policy Formulation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  51. Maor, M., & Gross, G. (2015). Emotion regulation by emotional entrepreneurs: Implications for political science and international relations. In Paper presented at the 73rd Annual Conference of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, April 16–19, 2015.Google Scholar
  52. McConnell, A., & ‘t Hart, P. (2014). Public policy as inaction: The Politics of doing nothing. Paper presented to Australian Political Studies Association annual conference, University of Sydney, September 28–October 1.Google Scholar
  53. McDowall, D. (2000). Juvenile curfiew laws and their influence on crime. Federal Probation, 64, 58–63.Google Scholar
  54. Mears, D. P., Shollenberger, T. L., Willison, J. B., Owen, C. E., & Butts, J. A. (2010). Practitioner views of priorities, policies, and practices in juvenile justice. Crime and Delinquency, 56, 535–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Mintz, A., & Wayne, C. (2016). The ploythink syndrome: U.S. foriegn policy decisions on 9/11, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and ISIS. Stanford: Staford University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Montpetit, E. (2003). Misplaced distrust: Policy networks and the environment in France, the United States, and Canada. Vancouver: UBC Press.Google Scholar
  57. Nahmias, R. (2008). Israel warns Hizbullah war would invite destruction. Ynet News.,7340,L-3604893,00.html. Accessed 5 July 2016.
  58. Ostertag, K. (2002). No-Regret potentials in energy conservation: An analysis of their relevance, size and determinants. Heidelberg: Physica.Google Scholar
  59. Peters, G. B., Pierre, J., & King, D. S. (2005). The politics of path dependence: Political conflict in historical institutionalism. Journal of Politics, 67, 1275–1300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Potoski, M. (2002). Designing bureaucratic responsiveness: Administrative procedures and agency choice in state environmental policy. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 2, 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Rosenberg D. A. (1978). American postwar air doctrine and organization: The navy experience’, In A. F. Hurley & R. C. Ehrhart (Eds.), Air power and warfare. The Proceedings of the 8th Military Symposium, U.S. Air force Academy, October 18–20, 1978.Google Scholar
  62. Ruefle, W., & Reynolds, K. M. (1995). Curfiews and delinquency in major American cities. Crime and Delinquency, 41, 347–363.Google Scholar
  63. Ruefle, W., & Reynolds, K. M. (1996). Keep them at home: Juvenile Curfiew ordinances in 200 American cities. American Journal of Police, 15, 63–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Sabatier, P., & Jenkins-Smith, H. (1993). Policy change and learning: An advocacy coalition approach. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  65. Schneider, A. L., & Ingram, H. (1997). Policy design for democracy. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas Press.Google Scholar
  66. Schön, D., & Rein, M. (1994). Frame reflection. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  67. Selvey, L. A., Antão, C., & Hall, R. (2015). Evaluation of border entry screening for infectious diseases in humans. Emerging Infectious Diseases, 21, 197–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Siegrist, M., Keller, C., & Cousin, M. E. (2006). Implicit attitudes toward nuclear power and mobile phone base stations: Support for the affect heuristic. Risk Analysis, 26, 1021–1029.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Sjoberg, L. (2007). Emotions and risk perception. Risk Management, 9, 223–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. Science, 236, 280–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Slovic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2002). The affect heuristic. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (pp. 397–420). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Smith, N., & Leiserowitz, A. (2012). The rise of global warming scepticism: Exploring affective image associations in the United States over time. Risk Analysis, 32, 1021–1032.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Smith, N., & Leiserowitz, A. (2014). The role of emotion in global warming policy support and opposition. Risk Analysis, 34, 937–948.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Soroka, S. N. (2014). Negativity in democratic politics: Causes and consequencies. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Spence, M. (1973). Market signaling: Information transfer in hiring and related screening processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  76. Stedman, R. C. (2004). Risk and climate change: Perceptions of key policy actors in Canada. Risk Analysis, 24, 1395–1406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Stimson, J. A. (1991). Public opinion in America: Moods cycles and swings. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  78. Stimson, J. A., Mackuen, M. B., & Erikson, R. S. (1995). Dynamic representation. American Political Science Review, 89, 543–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Stone, D. A. (1989). Causal stories and the formation of policy agendas. Political Science Quarterly, 104, 281–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Suzuki, M. (1992). Political business cycles in the public mind. American Political Science Review, 86, 989–996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Thaler, R., & Sunstein, C. (2008). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth and happiness. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  82. U.K. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). (2005). Adaptation policy framework: A consultation by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. PB11431. DEFRA, London.Google Scholar
  83. van Wijk, J. & Fischhendler, I. (2015). The construction of urgency discourse around mega-projects: The Israeli case. Working Paper. Jerusalem: Hebrew University.Google Scholar
  84. Walker, S. G., & Malici, A. (2011). U.S. presidents and foreign policy mistakes. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  85. Walker, W. E., Marchau, V. A. W. J., & Swanson, D. (2010). Addressing deep uncertainty using adaptive policies: Introduction to section 2. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 77(6), 917–923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Weimer, D. L. (1993). The current state of design craft: Borrowing, tinkering, and problem solving. Public Administration Review, 53, 110–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. World Health Organization. (2003). Update 11—WHO recommends new measures to prevent travel-related spread of SARS. Mar 27. Accessed 7 July 2016.
  88. World Health Organization. (2014). Ebola response roadmap. Geneva. Accessed 30 May 2016.
  89. World Health Organization. (2015). WHO publishes list of top emerging diseases likely to cause major epidemics. WHO Updates. Accessed 5 July 2016.
  90. Yadlin, A. (2015). How Israel created deterrence in the Second Lebanon War. Ynet, May 22.,7340,L-4660200,00.html. Accessed 5 July 2016.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceHebrew University of JerusalemJerusalemIsrael

Personalised recommendations