Public Policy

A Comprehensive Introduction

Martin Potůček et al.

The original manuscript was reviewed by Prof. PhDr. Ľudmila Malíková, Ph.D. (Faculty of Social Sciences, University of St. Cyril and Methodius in Trnava) and Prof. Douglas J. Besharov (School of Public Policy, University of Maryland)

Published by Charles University

Karolinum Press

www.karolinum.cz

ebooks@karolinum.cz

Cover by Jan Šerých

First English edition

© Karolinum Press, 2017

© Martin Potůček, Part A, Part B editing; Veronika Rudolfová, Part B, 2017

© Translated from Czech by Martin Potůček and Jan Morávek; overall language supervision by Jan Morávek and Kirk Jensen, 2017

ISBN 978-80-246-3556-9

ISBN 978-80-246-3570-5 (pdf)

ISBN 978-80-246-4007-5 (ePub)

ISBN 978-80-246-4006-8 (Kindle)

CONTENTS

Introduction

Overview of the Public Policy Theories Presented

List of Abbreviations

PART A

A1. Public Interest and Public Policy

A2. Values in Public Policy

A3. Governance

A4. Actors and Institutions

A5. Public Policy Instruments

A6. Public Policy Process. The Stage of Problem Delimitation and Problem Recognition

A7. Policy Formulation, Decision-making

A8. Policy Implementation

A9. Policy Evaluation

A10. How to Understand Public Policy

Literature – Part A

Journals and Internet Sources

English-Czech Glossary of Public Policy Terms

List of Tables – Part A

List of Figures – Part A

PART B

Introduction to Part B

Terminology of the Pillars in the Czech Pension System

B1. Historical Overview of Pension Systems in the World and in the Czech Republic

B2. The Role of Politicians and Experts in the Preparation of Czech Pension Reform

B3. Czech Pension Reform: How to Reconcile Equivalence with Fiscal Discipline

B4. Rivalry of Advocacy Coalitions in the Czech Pension Reform

B5. Pensions Basics

Literature – Part B

List of Tables – Part B

List of Figures – Part B

Introduction

The book of public policy in front of you follows in the footsteps of an earlier publication, Public Policy in Central and Eastern Europe: Theories, Methods, Practices.[1] Since it came out, the field went through a relatively rapid development. Today, students of public administration, economics, political science, sociology, social policy, demography, international relations, regional development and other social sciences can avail themselves of a range of other educational texts offering novel insights to public policy. Having more than two decades of experience teaching at Charles University in Prague as well as at other universities in the Czech Republic and abroad, I considered it necessary to provide a new, comprehensive and synoptic account of the state of the art. I placed emphasis on the field’s conceptual foundation, description of the most frequently used theories, and an illustrative account of how these can be applied in policy analysis and policy making – here, in the form of selected case studies.[2]

Should you choose to pursue your interest in public policy by studying this publication, then several avenues towards that end are opening in front of you.

The easiest way forward is to follow the sequence of chapters in Part A. It starts with the most general topics (definition of key terms, value fundamentals, issues of governance) and continues to more specific texts characterizing actors, institutions and instruments of public policy. This is followed by chapters on four stages of the policy process – problem delimitation and recognition, policy formulation and decision-making, implementation, and evaluation. The final chapter of this part brings attention to obstacles in the process of examining public policies and possible methods to overcome them.

At the same time, you may choose a cross-sectional way of studying the most influential public policy theories. They are referred to throughout the textbook in accordance with the focus of the respective chapters. The table “Overview of the public policy theories presented” that immediately follows can help you find where the different theories are presented in Part A and where they are applied in Part B.

Another method will be found useful by those with a preference for narratives and vivid accounts of events. Part B demonstrates the ways selected public policy theories can be applied in telling the story of pension reform in the Czech Republic: repeated attempts to utilize expertise in policy decision-making, executive and legislative responses to a ruling of the Constitutional Court on the unconstitutionality of applicable law, or an attempt to structurally reform the pension system as a whole by establishing a new element, a fully funded, private, so-called “second pillar”, relying in part on mandatory social insurance premiums transferred from the pay-as-you-go first pillar.

The book bears the imprint of the country of its origin, the Czech Republic, and the specific historical legacy of Central Europe. Students of public policy should consider complementing their study with other textbooks of the subject, influenced by other cultural and socio-political traditions, such as Cairney (2011), Howlett, Ramesh (2009) or Peters (2015).[3]

I am much obliged to the co-author of Part B, Veronika Rudolfová, for an inspiring collaboration. I am also thankful to a number of colleagues at the Department of Public and Social Policy, Institute of Sociological Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences, Charles University in Prague, who proved to be important sources of critique and advice in the process of preparing this book: Arnošt Veselý, above all, and also to Martin Nekola and Vilém Novotný – even though we kept different perspectives on some particular topics. Jan Morávek participated in the final draft not only by conducting an excellent translation but also through inspiring comments on the text as such. I am grateful to him as well as to the book’s editor, Hana Märzová. Responsibility for the concept of the textbook and for my chapters is, of course, mine alone.

Prague, November 2017

Prof. Dr. Martin Potůček, PhD.

1 Potůček, M., L. LeLoup, G. Jenei, L. Váradi. 2003. Public Policy in Central and Eastern Europe: Theories, Methods, Practices. Bratislava: NISPAcee.

2 Readers with a command of the language may prefer to consult a Czech version of this textbook: Potůček, M. a kol. 2016. Veřejná politika. Prague: C. H. Beck.

3 Cairney, P. 2011. Understanding public policy: Theories and issues. Palgrave Macmillan; Howlett, M., A. Perl and M. Ramesh, Studying Public Policy. 2009. Toronto: Oxford University Press; Peters, B. G. 2015. Advanced introduction to public policy. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Overview of the public policy theories presented[4]

4 This is the author’s selection of theories which proved to be instrumental in various research contexts. There are of course many other public policy theories applied in specific application fields at different levels of generality. Refer to John (2013) for their overview.

List of Abbreviations

AC

Advocacy Coalition

ACF

Advocacy Coalition Framework

ANO

Ano bude líp (political movement)

ASEAN

Association of Southeast Asian Nations

BBC

British Broadcasting Corporation

CESTA

Center for Social Market Economy and Open Democracy

ČMKOS

Czech-Moravian Confederation of Trade Unions (abbreviation in Czech)

ČNB

Czech National Bank (abbreviation in Czech)

ČR

Czech Republic

ČSSD

Czech Social Democratic Party (political party)

ČSSZ

Czech Social Security Administration (CSSA, abbreviation in Czech)

CZK

Czech Crown (national currency)

DB

Defined Benefit (pension scheme)

DC

Defined Contribution pension scheme

EG

Expert Group (government and opposition party, ČSSD)

EU

European Union

EUR

Euro

FF

Fully Funded pension system

G20

Group of Twenty

G8

Group of Eight

GDP

Gross Domestic Product

GNH

Gross National Happiness

GNI

Gross National Income

HDI

Human Development Index

IADF

Institutional Analysis and Development Framework

ICT

Information and Communication Technologies

ID

Identity Document

ILO

International Labor Organization

KDU-ČSL

Christian and Democratic Union – Czechoslovak People’s Party

KSČM

Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia (political party)

MLG

Multi-level Governance

MP

Member of Parliament

MPSV

Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs of the Czech Republic (abbreviation in Czech)

NDC

Notional Defined Contribution (pension scheme)

NERV

The National Economic Council of the Government, Czech Republic (abbreviation in Czech)

NGO

Non-Governmental Organization

NHS

National Health Service, United Kingdom

ODA

Civic Democratic Alliance (political party)

ODS

Civic Democratic Party (political party)

OECD

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

OK

Expert Committee on Pension Reform, Czech Republic (abbreviation in Czech)

PAYG

Pay-as-you-go (pension system)

PČR

Parliament of the Czech Republic

PES

Expert Advisory Board/Bezděk Commission II (abbreviation in Czech)

PS PČR

Chamber of Deputies of the Parliament of the Czech Republic

RCT

Rational Choice Theory

RHSD

Council of Economic and Social Agreement (abbreviation in Czech)

RIA

Regulatory Impact Assessment

SP ČR

Confederation of Industry of the Czech Republic (abbreviation in Czech)

SZ

Green Party

TOP 09

Tradition. Responsibility. Prosperity (political party)

UK

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

UN

United Nations

ÚS

Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic (abbreviation in Czech)

USA

United States of America

VÚPSV

Research Institute of Labor and Social Affairs (abbreviation in Czech)

VV

Public Affairs (political party)

WB

World Bank

WWII

Second World War (1939–1945)

PART A

A1

Public Interest and Public Policy

What is meant by public interest?

What is meant by public policy?

The emergence and development of public policy as a scientific discipline: A history

Relation of public policy to other disciplines

Defining public policy as a scientific discipline

Polity, policy, politics

Public policy as social practice

Founding fathers and followers

Future perspectives of the discipline

Review questions

Sources

Some time ago, William Dunn (1981: 8–19) argued that “the study of public policy is as old as Plato’s concern for The Republic” (as paraphrased by McCool 1995: 1). But even long before ancient philosophers, people had been trying to solve conflicts between interests and ways of satisfying them intuitively, on the fly. Albeit many armed conflicts arose, other struggles were, fortunately, solved peacefully.

Public policy in practice serves to prevent and solve conflicts, a natural trait of social life which is here to stay. Our lives and deeds depend on the lives and deeds of other people – and not only those. We are confined to societal frameworks that mediate and enable coexistence between people: money, law, organizations, language, culture. . . it is in these complex relations that our individual interests mix and intersect with those of other people, social groups, corporations, and/or states. Such interests are often conflicting, and there are many actors who will lose a lot if their interests fail to be reconciled. Economic and social crises, wars, coups and revolutions are, among other things, manifestations of a conflict of particular interests gone out of control.

Building on the basis of philosophy and other existing social sciences, public policy became established as a new scientific discipline in the second half of the 20th century. Academics did not invent it as their new toy or source of income. The main reason public policy emerged was that the more responsible part of politicians and public officials felt the need to study the nature of these conflicts of particular interests systematically in order to derive recommendations on how to prevent such conflicts, avoid violent escalation, get them under control – and possibly even solve them, at least for the time being. The discipline serves to analyze and formulate policies – such policies that affect people’s lives in specific ways, whether by increasing their quality or by making them more difficult. Examples include transportation, health care, education, sports, housing, monument preservation, protection of nature, and a myriad other concerns.

Every day, politicians and public officials deal with problems that are not easy to solve. Is it reasonable to introduce mandatory vaccination of children against communicable diseases? While children themselves are often unable to express their opinion, many parents oppose such a policy. Should we abolish regulations that prohibit surface mining in defined areas? Such a measure would ensure new jobs and cheaper coal, but also annihilate communities where people have been living for centuries. Is it a good idea to build nuclear power stations? We are not sure how to deposit nuclear waste in a safe and permanent way. Are we better off building more kindergartens, or supporting industrial innovations? Should we devote our limited public resources to providing better pensions to seniors, or better salaries to civil servants? Or should we rather increase welfare benefits for children?

Before attempting to answer questions like these, we need to clarify how public interest can be defined.

WHAT IS MEANT BY PUBLIC INTEREST?

Leading American policy scientist Walter Lippman defines public interest as follows: “Living adults share, we must believe, the same public interest. For them, however, the public interest is mixed with, and is often at odds with, their private and special interests. Put this way, we can say, I suggest, that the public interest may be presumed to be what men would choose if they saw clearly, thought rationally, acted disinterestedly and benevolently” (Lippman 1955: 42). The concept of public interest is undoubtedly of descriptive power but also of a high value loading.

As Lane (1993) notes, there is a constant tension between the term “public” with its relation to the whole and the term “interest” with its individualist connotation. For that reason, some theorists who rely on methodological individualism and philosophical objectivism reject the term “public interests” as misleading (Kinkor 1996).

In defining public interests, one can proceed procedurally or analytically. The procedural approach is typically applied in policy practice and the analytical one in the scientific discipline of public policy.

The procedural approach to formulating public interests in a democratic society conforms to certain rules regarding debating about what the public interest is and what it is not, of reaching a consensus on such a definition, and of pursuing public interests in practice. Community, civil society institutions, law and government provide procedural mechanisms for articulating, aggregating, coordinating and, if possible, also satisfying particular interests in a form in which it starts to be useful to speak of public interests. However, an important complication is caused by competition between the particular interests of the actors who necessarily take part in this process: politicians, officials, and interest group representatives. Formulation and realization of public interest becomes the subject of negotiation and, sometimes, social or political struggle. It is an intense historical, social and political process. Of course, conflicts emerge between competing “public interests” associated with the interests of different communities or social groups.

The analytical approach to formulating public interests relies on their shared characteristics:

• they pertain to the quality of life of a given society’s members, or other values they find important;

• they can be related to the quality or the effects of the function of society as a whole;

• they are embedded historically, in a given stage of civilization development, and may change;

• they enter an arena where they clash with differentiated individual, group and institutional interests and come to be identified, articulated, acknowledged, and satisfied. The decisions adopted affect the ways public goods are produced, distributed and used; the quality of life of large social groups; and the satisfaction of the functional needs of society as a whole;

• they are related to current social problems or possible futures;

• their realization often goes beyond the competencies of a single institution or an entire department of government, or even a nation.

The benefit of the social whole is shaped by the context of competing value orientations or visions of the world. Therefore, people’s place in it comes to be defined in divergent ways. This in turn gives rise to competing values underlying different public policies.

EXAMPLE:

In debates about public finance, parliaments often see a clash between “penny pinchers,” who associate public interest with balanced budgeting, and “investors for the future,” who believe it is in public interest to support education, science and the like, even at the price of a budget deficit, because they will bring a return in future.

Efforts to promote public interests are embraced by certain types of political orientation (as well as individual orientation, as long as such individuals are well-informed) – namely on advancing the community and solving its problems. In this sense, public interests aggregate the interests of individual members of the community – they arise from the individual level. Yet the same public interests may run against conflicting interests of other individuals or groups. Thus, public interests become the subject of frequent negotiation and occasional struggles as well. There are conflicts between competing “public interests” associated with the interests of different communities or social groups. This is the point where they become the domain of public policy, which studies the processes of identifying, formulating, presenting, recognizing and satisfying the public interest.

The End of Preview

Table of Contents

Cover Page

Copyright Page

Contents

Introduction

Overview of the Public Policy Theories Presented

List of Abbreviations

Part A

A1. Public Interest and Public Policy

Part B