advance a theory

be inclined to sth

Incline sb to sth

channel the energy into sth

shed light on sth

View of sth

bridge the gap

I dismiss the idea

JJfORDS AND WORD COMBINATIONS

выдвинуть теорию склоняться к ч-л склонять к-л к ч-л направить энергию куда-либо пролить свет на что-либо с точки зрения чего-либо преодолеть разногласия; вос­полнить пробел; сблизить отказаться

от/проигнорировать, про­гнать мысль в первую очередь придать значение/вес ч-л

Work in pairs: Do you think the following statements are true or false?

The making of decisions and reaching of conclusions are seen as the key feature of policy process. It is easy to establish how and why decisions are made. Economic theories contribute to decision- making models. Politicians are inclined to portray their actions as both goal-oriented and the product of careful thought and deliberation. Organisations may be said to make rational decisions if they are highly centralised.

Policy makers have to adjust their position in the light of feedback.

Concern with day-to-day problems is more vital than the long-term visionary thinking.

Any decisions are influenced by values, assumptions and regular

pattern of behaviour.

Decisions arise from an arena of contest.

All decisions are shaped by organisational pressure and

perceptions.

Political actors hold views that are based on their own position and on the interests of the organisations in which they work.

• Social and political values may act as a powerful filter in decision-making.

• Common beliefs provide the 'glue' of politics, binding together people on the basis of shared values and preferences.

• Discuss/check your considerations with the rest of t" class.

SCAN reading: look through the text to find the answers the true/false statements

Text 1: theories of decision-making

The making of decisions, and specifically of bundles of decisio is clearly central to the policy process. Although policy making a relates to the acts of initiation and implementation, the making decisions and reaching of conclusions is usually seen as its k feature. However, it may be difficult to establish how and w* decisions are made. Decisions are undoubtedly made in different wa by individuals and by groups, within small bodies and within la organisations, and within democratic and authoritarian structu Nevertheless, a number of general theories of political decisio making have been advanced.

Rational actor models

Decision-making models that emphasise human rationality lia generally been constructed on the basis of economic theories whi have themselves been derived from utilitarianism. At the heart of su theories lies the notion of so-called 'economic man', a model human nature that stresses the self-interested pursuit of mate ' satisfaction, calculated in terms of utility. In this light, decisions be seen to be reached using the following procedures:

• The nature of the problem is identified. ■ An objective or goal is selected on the basis of an ordering

individual preferences,

• The available means of achieving this objective are evaluated terms of their effectiveness, reliability, costs and so on.

• A decision is made through the selection of the means m likely to secure the desired end.

I lie best example of such an approach to decision-making is nl in (he use of cost-benefit analysis in the making of business

IsioilS.

( eitainly, politicians and others are inclined to portray their ■i> t:iins as both goal-oriented and the product of careful thought and ili-liberation. When examined more closely, however, rational (.filiation may not appear to be a particularly convincing model of tli-i ^ion-making. In the first place, the model is more easily applied |i> individuals, who may have an ordered set of preferences, than it is In jvoiips, within which there are likely to be a number of conflicting odiectives. Organisations may therefore only be said to make rational d«'i as ions if they are highly centralised and possess a strict command Dnieiure.

A second problem is that, in practice, decisions are often made on In- basis of inadequate and sometimes inaccurate information, and V benefits of various actions may in any case not be comparable, u* final drawback of rational actor models is that they ignore the >le of perception, that is, the degree to which actions are shaped by liet ;ind assumptions about reality, rather than by reality itself.

tuivmental models

Inciementalism is usually portrayed as the principal alternative to (tonal decision-making. This position holds that policy making is a niiinuous, exploratory process; lacking overriding goals and clear-ii ends, policy makers tend to operate within an existing pattern or iiiework, adjusting their position in the light of feedback in the mi of information about the impact of earlier decisions. Indeed, taiientalism may suggest a strategy of avoidance or evasion, policy .ikers being inclined to move away from problems, rather than uif, to solve them.

I lowever, the model has also been criticised as profoundly Miservative, in that it justifies a bias against innovation and in favour ineiiia. Policy makers who embrace incrementalism are more likely t be concerned with day-to day problems than with indulging in itif term visionary thinking. Their energy is channeled into keeping tr ship on course, not on reflecting on where that course is leading, luiiher difficulty is that incrementalism sheds little light on those •lineal decisions that are radical, even revolutionary, in character. In of such difficulties, the idea of 'mixed scanning', which attempts !■> 'aiilge the gap between the rational approach and incrementalism »i proposed. Mixed scanning allows for decision-making being i<nt:iit'il out in two distinct phases. First, decision makers broadly (-.iintie, or scan, all the available policy options in terms of their

effectiveness in meeting pre-existing objectives. Then, a narrower and more incremental approach is adopted as the details of a selected policy option are reviewed. In this way, for example, a broad decision to cut public spending must be accompanied by a series of more narrowly focused decisions relating to the specific areas or programmes that may be affected.

Bureaucratic and organisation models

Both rational actor and incremental models are essentially 'black box' theories of decision-making; neither pays attention to the impact that the stmcture of the policy making process has on the resulting decisions. Bureaucratic or organisational models, on the other hand\ try to get inside the black box by highlighting the degree to whic process influences product. Two contrasting, but related, models exist. The first, usually called the 'organisational process' model, highT the impact on decisions of the values, assumptions and regul patterns of behaviour that are found in any large organisation. Rat than corresponding to rational analysis and objective evaluatio decisions are seen to reflect the entrenched culture of the governme departmently or agency that makes them. The second theory, t' 'bureaucratic politics' model, emphasises the impact on decisions bargaining between personnel and agencies, each pursuing differen perceived interests. This approach dismisses the idea of the state as monolith united around a single view or a single interest, and sugge' that decisions arise from an arena of contest in which the balance advantage is constantly shifting.

Although these models undoubtedly draw attention to impo: aspects of decision-making, they also have their drawbacks. In t' first place, the organisational process model allows little scope political leadership to be imposed from above. It would be foolish, example, to suggest that all decisions are shaped by organisatio pressures and perceptions, for this would be to ignore the perso role played by the leaders. Secondly, it is simplistic to suggest, as bureaucratic politics model does, that political actors simply h views that are based on their own position and on the interests of organisations in which they work, for personal sympathies individual goals cannot be altogether discounted. Finally, to exp decisions entirely in terms of black-box considerations is to fail give any weight to the external pressures that emanate from broader economic, political and ideological context.

Belief system models

Although decision makers may believe that they are being ratio rigorous and strictly impartial, their social and political values

кч as a powerful filter, defining for them what is thinkable, what is possible, and what is desirable. Certain information and particular options are therefore not appreciated or even considered, while other pieces of information and other courses of action feature prominently in the calculus of decision-making. Indeed, without a mechanism to 11Iter information, decision makers would simply be overwhelmed by i lie sheer volume of data confronting them.

However, there are different views about the origin and nature of [ I us filtering process. A policy system may include not only interlocking groups of politicians, civil servants and interest groups, but also researchers, academics and journalists concerned with that .пса. Within these subsystems, 'advocacy coalitions' emerge that comprise collections of individuals who share broadly similar beliefs .md values. These beliefs nevertheless operate on three different levels:

• deep core beliefs (fundamental moral or philosophical principles)

• near-core beliefs (policy preferences)

• secondary beliefs (views about implementation or application). The importance of such beliefs is that they provide the 'glue' of

politics, binding together people on the basis of shared values and preferences. However, while core beliefs are highly resistant to change, a greater measure of disagreement and flexibility is usually found at the near-core and secondary levels. Using this framework, policy change could largely be understood in terms of shifting balance of forces within a policy subsystem, in particular through the iluminance of one advocacy coalition over others. This process may nevertheless be seen to be rational insofar as debate within a belief svstem, and rivalry between belief systems, promotes 'policy oriented learning'.

AFTER-READING activity

♦ Read the text in more depth to do the 'After-reading exercises'

Ex. 1. Comprehension check

1 What is central to the policy process and why is it difficult to

establish how and why decisions are made? ¹ What are the procedures to reach a decision? ^; Comment on the main features and drawbacks of 'rational actor

models' of decision-making.

4. How do 'incremental models' of decision-making differ from the 'rational' ones?

5. Why have these models also been criticised?

6. What is behind the idea of 'mixed scanning'?

7. What impact does the structure of policy — making process have on the resulting decisions?

8. What do the 'organisational process' model and the 'bureaucratic politics' model emphasise?

9. What are their drawbacks?

!0. What plays the role of a powerful filter of information in decision-making?

11. Comment on the three different levels of beliefs.

12. When can debate within a belief system and rivalry between belief systems be seen as rational?

Ex. 2. Terminology

Match the notions: decision, policy, public policy, ethnocentrism, issue, agenda setting, policy network (or policy community) with the definitions.

• ... is a (typically unconscious) bias that results from a failure to appreciate the significance of cultural differentiation.

• ... is a matter recognised as a policy agenda.

• ... is an act of choice; a selection from a range of options.

• is the ability to structure policy debate by controlling

which issues are discussed or establishing priority amongst them.

• ... in a general sense is a plan of action adopted by an individual, group, business or government.

• can be seen as the formal or stated decisions of

government bodies.

• is a systematic set of relationships between political actors

that cut across formal institutional arrangements and the divide* between government and nongovernmental bodies.

• Work with the dictionary and consult the text to do ex. 3, 4 '

Ex. 3. Translate from English into Russian

Bundles of decisions; at the heart of such theories; cost — benefit analysis; in the making of business decisions; a set of preferences; a number of conflicting objectives; it lacks overriding goals and clear-­in ends; in the light of feedback; a strategy of avoidance or evasion;

i profoundly conservative model; indulging in long-term visionary ((linking; to keep the ship on course; an idea of 'mixed scanning'; a more incremental approach; 'black box' theories of decision-making; 1 he values, assumptions and regular patterns of behaviour; bargaining between personnel and agencies; decision makers would simply be overwhelmed by the sheer volume of data confronting them; to filter iiilbrmation; interlocking groups of politicians; 'advocacy coalitions'.

Ex. 4. Translate from Russian into English

Корыстное стремление к получению материального удовле-шорения; подсчитать ч-л с точки зрения пользы; в этом свете; имеющиеся в наличии средства для достижения цели; эффек-шнность, надежность; затраты; обеспечить достижение желае­мою результата; анализ расходов-доходов; повседневные про-ч'!емы; сократить расходы на социальные нужды; придавать тачение чему-либо; противоположные, но связанные между 1 обой модели; объективная оценка; представлять мало возмож­ностей для политического руководства; не принимать ч-л во инимание; исходить из чего-либо; рациональные и объективные ученые; определенная информация и варианты не рассматрива­ются; фигурировать в подсчетах; государственные служащие.

B.

a. simplicity

b. initiation

c. to advance the theory

d. to dismiss

e. to establish

f. to incline

i:x. 5. Fill in the blanks in column 'A' with the topical vocabulary units from column 'B\ making all necessary changes

Professor Einstein of

relativity.

The ... of that suggestion could be very misleading. Policy making relates to the acts of ... and implementation. Some policy makers... to move away from problems, rather than to solve them. Before the embargo could be lifted Iraq must... all the UN Security Council resolutions. The theory of 'bureaucratic polities' ... the idea of the state as a

monolith united around a single view.

g. to implement

h. to innovate, to comprise

i. to perceive

7. The business of government in rich countries is conducted amid ... institutions.

8. Decision-making models have been ... on the basis of economic theories most of which... utilitarianism.

9. The Eurocrats know that the smoothness or otherwise of the transition to the euro will deeply ... the way ordinary people think about the EU.

j. to channel the energy

k. to affect

7. Politicians want their actions ... as both goal-oriented and the product of careful thought.

8. Some policy makers ... their ... into only 'keeping the ship on course' without reflecting on where that course might be leading.

Ex. 6. Make the following adjectives negative and make up sentences with them

human, economic, careful, rational, accurate, comparable, objective, rigorous, partial, powerful, thinkable, desirable, certain

Ex. 7. Fill in the blanks with 'affect' or 'effect* and their derivatives

1. The UN Charter came into ... in 1945.

2. The means of achieving a goal are evaluated in terms of their .... reliability and costs.

3. The government's new policy has yielded a great economic

4. ... of the division of power in politics depends primarily on a government system.

5. The candidate's programme includes ... use of national wealth.

6. The leader of that party ... rhetoric.

7. He ... a freethinker.

s. Several hundred cattle ... by foot-and-mouth disease. '» He is held in great... in the high echelons of power. 10. She has turned out to be an ... mother.

Kx. 8. Fill in the blanks with 'may (might)', 'can (could)', 'must' or should'

1 From one perspective, global interdependence ... draw the world's diverse components together in pursuit of mutual survival and welfare.

• Awareness of common destiny of all, alongside the inability of sovereign states to address many shared problems through unilateral national action, ... energize efforts to put aside national competition.

• Few states ... afford to disentangle themselves from the interdependent ties that bind them together in the common fate on which their welfare depends.

I If global interdependence undermines national and international welfare and security, the leaders ... try to constrain or perhaps reverse its effects.

^ What goals ... a nation state pursue?

(> In earlier times the answer was easy: The state ... promote the

internal welfare of its citizens, provide for the common defense,

and preserve the nation's values and the way of life.

We live in an age of tradeoffs, as many problems ... be resolved

only at the risk of exacerbating others, s No country ... longer afford to pursue the quest for power in

ways that reduce the security and welfare of its competitors. '> Like any irrepressible force, the new technology ... bestow on us

undreamed of benefits but also inflict irrepressible damage. Mi. Since no amount of military might ... guarantee a state's

invulnerability, preparations for war ... be assessed only in terms

of other consequences.

II The relative costs and benefits of preparations for war ... be weighed against the kinds of threats to national security that still arise.

l¹ Better distribution of wealth in the advanced countries has reduced if not obviated whatever need there ... have been to seek abroad a safety-valve for pressures building at home.

11 To preserve peace, one ... prepare for war.

Ex. 9. Open the brackets and translate the text into Russian