有限理性还是政策失误?议会和行政部门共同制定公共政策

G. Kristinsson
{"title":"有限理性还是政策失误?议会和行政部门共同制定公共政策","authors":"G. Kristinsson","doi":"10.13177/IRPA.A.2013.9.2.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The theory of bounded rationality regards rational policy making as a process which fulfils certain requirements with regard to agenda setting, fact finding and analysis and decision making which fulfils minimum requirements. This perspective is here applied to the preparatory stage of public policy in four states, i.e. Iceland and the three Scandinavian states. An interesting pattern emerges. With regard to agenda setting Iceland deviates from the other countries in that coordination and the setting of priorities is less the responsibility of the cabinet and more that of individual ministers and parliament. The development and analysis of policy alternatives is also less systematic in Iceland as may be seen among other things in a smaller volume of research. The premises on which policy is based are therefore generally not as clear as in the other cases. At the decision stage departures from the conclusions reached during the preparatory phase are much more common in Iceland than in the other states. The main conclusion is that policy making in Iceland deviates more from the premises of the theory of bounded rationality than in Scandinavia.","PeriodicalId":294103,"journal":{"name":"Icelandic Review of Politics and Administration","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bounded rationality or policy fumble? Parliament and executive in the preparation of public policy\",\"authors\":\"G. Kristinsson\",\"doi\":\"10.13177/IRPA.A.2013.9.2.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The theory of bounded rationality regards rational policy making as a process which fulfils certain requirements with regard to agenda setting, fact finding and analysis and decision making which fulfils minimum requirements. This perspective is here applied to the preparatory stage of public policy in four states, i.e. Iceland and the three Scandinavian states. An interesting pattern emerges. With regard to agenda setting Iceland deviates from the other countries in that coordination and the setting of priorities is less the responsibility of the cabinet and more that of individual ministers and parliament. The development and analysis of policy alternatives is also less systematic in Iceland as may be seen among other things in a smaller volume of research. The premises on which policy is based are therefore generally not as clear as in the other cases. At the decision stage departures from the conclusions reached during the preparatory phase are much more common in Iceland than in the other states. The main conclusion is that policy making in Iceland deviates more from the premises of the theory of bounded rationality than in Scandinavia.\",\"PeriodicalId\":294103,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Icelandic Review of Politics and Administration\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-12-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Icelandic Review of Politics and Administration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.13177/IRPA.A.2013.9.2.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Icelandic Review of Politics and Administration","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13177/IRPA.A.2013.9.2.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

有限理性理论认为,理性的政策制定是在议程设置、事实发现和分析以及决策制定等方面满足一定要求的过程,是满足最低要求的过程。这一观点在这里适用于四个国家,即冰岛和三个斯堪的纳维亚国家的公共政策的准备阶段。一个有趣的模式出现了。在确定议程方面,冰岛在协调方面与其他国家不同,确定优先事项与其说是内阁的责任,不如说是个别部长和议会的责任。在冰岛,备选政策的制定和分析也不太有系统,这一点可以从研究数量较少的其他方面看出。因此,政策所依据的前提通常不像其他情况那样明确。在决策阶段,与筹备阶段达成的结论相背离的情况在冰岛比在其他国家更为普遍。主要结论是,冰岛的政策制定比斯堪的纳维亚更偏离有限理性理论的前提。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Bounded rationality or policy fumble? Parliament and executive in the preparation of public policy
The theory of bounded rationality regards rational policy making as a process which fulfils certain requirements with regard to agenda setting, fact finding and analysis and decision making which fulfils minimum requirements. This perspective is here applied to the preparatory stage of public policy in four states, i.e. Iceland and the three Scandinavian states. An interesting pattern emerges. With regard to agenda setting Iceland deviates from the other countries in that coordination and the setting of priorities is less the responsibility of the cabinet and more that of individual ministers and parliament. The development and analysis of policy alternatives is also less systematic in Iceland as may be seen among other things in a smaller volume of research. The premises on which policy is based are therefore generally not as clear as in the other cases. At the decision stage departures from the conclusions reached during the preparatory phase are much more common in Iceland than in the other states. The main conclusion is that policy making in Iceland deviates more from the premises of the theory of bounded rationality than in Scandinavia.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信