Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

What work makes policy?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Policy Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The mainstream policy literature identifies a number of activities as part of ‘policy-making’: ‘policy analysis’, ‘policy advice’, ‘decision-making’, and perhaps also ‘implementation’ and ‘evaluation’. Describing policy in these terms is compatible with the Western cultural account, and these terms tend to be applied to positions, organisational segments and official procedures. But policy practitioners tend to find that on the one hand, their experience of their work bears little resemblance to the assumptions in this policy-making model, and on the other, that policy outcomes seem to reflect much broader processes than the work of specialist functionaries. On closer examination, we find that our thinking about policy activity draws on several distinct and potentially conflicting perspectives, and that what is seen as ‘policy work’ depends on the conceptualisation of the policy process. Framing the question in this way helps to understand the apparent differences between mainstream (American) accounts of policy activity and policy practice in other political systems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, D. (2005). Review of P. Bridgman and G. Davis. The Australian Policy Handbook, 3rd edn. Sydney: Allen and Unwin.

  • Allison, G.T. (1971). Essence of Decision. Boston, MA: Little Brown.

  • Anderson, G. (2006). Ministerial staff: New players in the policy game. In H.K. Colebatch, (Ed.), Beyond the Policy Cycle: the Policy Process in Australia. Sydney: Allen and Unwin, pp. 166–183.

  • Auer, M.R. (2006). The Policy Sciences in Critical Perspective. In J. Rabin, W.B. Hildreth & G.L. Miller, (Eds.), Handbook of Public Administration. London: Taylor and Francis, pp. 545–562.

  • Bridgman, P., & Davis, G. (2003). What use is a policy cycle? Plenty, if the aim is clear. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 62, 98–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bridgman, P., & Davis, G. (2004). The Australian Policy Handbook, 3rd edn. Sydney: Allen and Unwin.

  • Cabinet Office (1999). Professional Policy-Making for the Twenty-first Century. London: Cabinet Office.

  • Colebatch, H.K. (2006a). Mapping the work of policy. In H. K. Colebatch, (Ed.), Beyond the Policy Cycle: The Policy Process in Australia. Sydney: Allen and Unwin, pp. 1–19.

  • Colebatch, H.K. (Ed.) (2006b). Beyond the Policy Cycle: The Policy Process in Australia. Sydney: Allen and Unwin.

  • Colebatch, H.K. (2006c). The Work of Policy: An International Survey. Latham, MD: Lexington Books.

  • Colebatch, H.K. (2006d). Accounting for policy in Australia. Public Policy 1 37–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colebatch, H.K., & Degeling, P. (1986). Talking and Doing in the Work of Administration. In Apthorpe, R. (Ed.), Institutional Encounters: Bernard Schaffer’s Grammar of Bureaucracy and Official Provision. Wiley.

  • Davies, H., Nutley, S., & Smith, P. (Eds.) (2000). What Works: Evidence-Based Policy and Practice in Public Services. Bristol: Policy Press.

  • Davies, P. (2004). Is Evidence-based Government Possible?. The Jerry Lee Lecture, presented at the 4th Annual Campbell Collaboration Colloquium, Washington, DC.

  • Dean, M. (1999). Governmentality. London: Sage.

  • Dye, T.R. (1972). Understanding Public Policy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

  • Feldman, M.S., & March, J.G. (1981). Information in organizations as signal and symbol. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 171–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoppe, R., & Jeliazkova, M. (2006). How policy workers define their job: A Netherlands Case Study. In: Colebatch, H. K. (Ed.), The Work of Policy: An International Survey. Latham, MD: Lexington Books, pp. 35–60.

  • Howard, C. (2005). The policy cycle: A model of post-machiavellian Policy Making? Australian Journal of Public Administration, 64, 3–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, M., & Hupe, P. (2002). Implementing Public Policy. London: Sage.

  • Kickert, W.J.M., Klijn, E.-H., & Joppenjan, J.F.M. (Eds.) (1997). Managing Complex Networks. London: Sage.

  • Kingdon, J.W. (1984). Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies. Boston, MA: Little Brown.

  • Lasswell, H.D. (1971). A Pre-View of Policy Sciences. New York: American Elsevier.

  • March, J.G., & Olsen, J.P. (1989). Rediscovering Institutions. New York, Free Press.

  • Marston, G., & Watts, R. (2003). Tampering with the evidence: A critical appraisal of evidence-based decision-making. The Drawing Board, 3, 143–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, P., & Halpin, D. (1998). Landcare as a politically relevant new social movement? Journal of Rural Studies, 14, 445–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Metze, T. (2006). No trespassing in the dairy gateway: Boundary Work in Deliberative Cooperation in Wisconsin, USA. paper presented to the Conference on the Interpretive Practitioner, University of Birmingham.

  • Noi, C. (2005). From Westminster to Washington. The Nation (Bangkok).

  • Osman, S. (2005). Jakarta’s Plans for Political Aides Queried. Straits Times (Singapore).

  • Parsons, W. (2004). Not just steering but weaving: Relevant knowledge and the craft of building policy capacity and coherence. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 63, 43–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Radin, B. (2000). Beyond Machiavelli: Policy Analysis Comes of Age. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

  • Radin, B.A. (2006). Professionalization and policy analysis: The Case of the United States. In H.K. Colebatch, (Ed.), The Work of Policy: An International Survey. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, pp. 21–32.

  • Rhodes, R.A.W. (1997). Understanding Governance. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.

  • Rose, N. (1999). Powers of Freedom. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

  • Rose, N., & Miller, P. (1992). Political power beyond the state: Problematics of Government. British Journal of Sociology, 43, 172–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanderson, I. (2002). Evaluation, policy learning and evidence-based decision-making. Public Administration, 80, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D.A. (1971). Beyond the Stable State. New York: Norton.

  • Silverstein, A.M. (1981). Pure Politics and Impure Science. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

  • Stewart-Weeks, M. (2006). From control to networks. In: Colebatch, H.K. (Ed.), Beyond the Policy Cycle: The Policy Process in Australia. Sydney: Allen and Unwin, pp.184–202.

  • Tao, J. (2006). Policy work at the local level in the United States: Whispers of Rationality. In: Colebatch, H.K. (Ed.), The Work of Policy: An International Survey. Latham, MD: Lexington Books, pp. 181–198.

  • Tenbensel, T. (2006). Policy knowledge for policy work. In: Colebatch, H.K. (Ed.), The Work of Policy: An International Survey. Latham, MD: Lexington Books, pp. 199–216.

  • Weiss, C. (1991). Policy research: Data, idea or arguments? In: Wagner, P., Weiss, C.H., Wittrock, B., & Wollmann, H. (Eds.), Social Sciences and Modern States. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 307–332.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hal K. Colebatch.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Colebatch, H.K. What work makes policy?. Policy Sci 39, 309–321 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-006-9025-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-006-9025-4

Keywords

Navigation