Deadline: November 1, 2021 Public Policy Perspectives Policy Analysis paper (4,000 words) – Harvard referencing The purpose of this paper is to apply contemporary theoretical frameworks to a specific...

1 answer below »
file attached


Deadline: November 1, 2021 Public Policy Perspectives Policy Analysis paper (4,000 words) – Harvard referencing The purpose of this paper is to apply contemporary theoretical frameworks to a specific policy issue or problem. The aim of the paper is to use one of the policy theories outlined in class to analyse and evaluate a contemporary policy issue. Key to developing sound theoretical analysis is to delve into the assumptions and implications of a policy problem and the current manner in which the policy is implemented. Developing your understanding of policy making is, in my view, enhanced by using theories of the policy process to gain insight into why we have the policies we do, why policies fail and perhaps, to help identify the conditions that enable policies to change. Choose one policy theoretical framework from the list below: Advocacy Coalition Framework, Multiple Streams Framework, Institutional Rational Choice framework, Punctuated – equilibrium theory. The paper must include: · An outline of the characteristics of the policy framework · Clear rationale for the choice of framework · Reference to research that has used the framework · An outline of the policy issue · A clear analysis of the issue using the characteristics of the policy framework · Recommendations to change or update the policy based on your analysis · Clear and appropriate referencing · Clear and well-developed argument Detailed guide How to choose the framework? · You must consider whether the Framework is valid for the issue under consideration · Is your focus the problem and how this has been interpreted? · Is your focus the implementation? · Does the issue involve lots of different stakeholders? · Have there been radical and incremental changes? How do you explain the rationale (rationale and research)? · This means an explanation as to why you have chosen the particular framework · At least 3 reasons to demonstrate that you have considered the issue and how the theory or framework will enhance understanding and knowledge in the area · You must include literature that has used the framework (think of this section as the literature review) What are the characteristics of the Framework? · The main components of the Framework or Theory · It is important you demonstrate research in this section · The Theory or Framework must be well explained and demonstrate that you have sound knowledge in the area · Find articles that have used the Theory and see how authors explained the theory · Be selective in your approach, you need to explain the theory first and then use the theory Outline of issues and current implementation? · It is important to provide a brief overview of the policy issue · This can include temporal aspects, current status of the issue, how the policy is implemented, etc Analysis: You are developing an argument · The analysis is the most important—remember you are developing an argument! · You need to demonstrate that you can use the components of the theory to expand upon the issue · Some considerations include: What insights does the theory provide? What assumptions does the theory illuminate when examining the issue? Does the theory assist with identifying relationships between groups or institutions? Does the theory assist with identifying consequences or limitations? Recommendations · The analysis should point to areas that need improvement in the policy · The recommendations are simply the ideas that have come to light through the analysis · The recommendations are really key ideas that could be implemented or considered by policy makers · 2 or 3 key recommendations, but these need to relate to the analysis Language, expression · Grammar and punctuations · Paragraphs and topic sentences · Section headings · Referencing and citations References · Appropriate referencing · Page numbers · The importance of structure · 4000 words = 40 paragraphs · Points for introduction and conclusion · Decide on the most important sections (analysis), these need the greatest number of words · Make sure when developing your ideas, you note appropriate references
Answered 22 days AfterOct 08, 2021

Answer To: Deadline: November 1, 2021 Public Policy Perspectives Policy Analysis paper (4,000 words) – Harvard...

Insha answered on Oct 30 2021
133 Votes
PUBLIC POLICY PERSPECTIVES
POLICY ANALYSIS PAPER: PUNCTUATED – EQUILIBRIUM THEORY
Table of Contents
Introduction    3
Outline of Punctuated – Equilibrium Theory    3
In Science    3
In Public Policy    4
Rationale and Research    4
Contrast between Biology and Public Policy    5
Characteristics of the Framework    5
Key Contributions    6
Outline of Policy Issues    7
Critical Analysis    8
Insights    8
Assumptions    9
Decision-Making    9
Identifying Relationships between Groups or Institutions    10
Government Spending    10
Budgeting    11
Identifying Consequences or Limitations    12
Recommendations    13
Conclusion    13
References    15
Introduction
The goal of this study is to apply Punctuated – equilibrium theory in public policy making and changing, focusing government spending and budgeting. The key to creating effective theoretical analysis is to dive into the assumptions and consequences of a policy challenge. Using these theories of the
policy process will give insight into the reason for having this policy and the reason that this policies fail, to improve grasp of policymaking. Initially, this paper will highlight the framework and rationale for choosing it. Additionally it will be discussed about the policy characteristics and issues. Most importantly, this paper will analyse the issue using the framework. Lastly, it will be conclude with the recommendation based on research and analysis.
Outline of Punctuated – Equilibrium Theory
Political processes are typically characterised by stability and incrementalism, but they occasionally create large-scale deviations from the past, according to punctuated-equilibrium theory. Most policy domains are characterised by stasis rather than catastrophe, yet crises occasionally arise. The late Stephen Jay Gould was obsessed with punctuated equilibrium from the time it was invented. Punctuated Equilibrium is a theory about how the evolutionary process works, based on patterns of first appearances and histories of species in the fossil record. The theory of punctuated equilibrium was developed by Stephen Jay Gould and Niles Eldredge (1986) in 1971. They postulated that evolution is not a slow transformation, but a process of rapid morphological change over millions of years.
Punctuated equilibrium, also known as stasis patterns and episodic turnover, are significant generalisations about the fossil record that have been expressed in a variety of ways in the paleontological vocabulary. When evolution is quick and geological time is long, Darwinian gradualism predicts a trend of rapid evolution leading to stasis. Punctuated Equilibrium is a new book by American palaeontologist Richard Dawkins, who claims that studying better portions of the stratigraphic record will reveal more about species beginnings (Ahad, 2017). Hence, the Framework is valid for various issues.
In Science
In isolated populations, some authors claimed that fast biological evolution occurs through mutation, recombination and natural selection. Palaeontologists Gould and Eldredge (1986) claimed that biological evolution was not necessarily "slow and steady" or progressive, in line with Mayr's hypothesis. Gould and Eldredge (1986) proposed punctuated equilibrium as a different pace of biological evolution. They challenged the idea of evolution as a smooth process, instead advocating for "evolutionary pluralism," in which gradualism and punctuated equilibrium coexist. They admitted that proponents of phyletic palaeobiology had prevailed for a long time, reflecting Darwin's original idea of evolution. After much debate and scientific scrutiny, they changed their minds and advocated for a different strategy (Ahad, 2017).
In Public Policy
Punctuated-equilibrium theory attempts to explain a simple statement of fact: Political processes are usually characterised by stability and incrementalism, but large-scale deviations from the past do occur sometimes. Most policy domains are characterised by stasis rather than catastrophe, yet crises occasionally arise (Beyer, Breunig and Radojevic, 2017). Authors examine the fundamentals of punctuated equilibrium in this research, as well as recent empirical investigations from the United States and internationally and theoretical advancements.
The interplay of complex political institutions and behavioural decision-making provides the clearest explanation for both marginal and large-scale policy changes. A combination that results in punctuated equilibrium or patterns of stability and mobilisation. Punctuated equilibrium theory simply extends current agenda-setting theories to deal with both policy stagnation and policy punctuations, as agenda-setting theory has always relied on such a decision-making base (Matzke, 2020).
Rationale and Research
Political scientists Beyer, Breunig and Radojevic (2017) argued that the degree of change in public policy is typically sluggish and incremental. However, they claimed that, on rare occasions, public policy change might occur "sharply," "explosively," and in a "short period" as a result of an external shock (such as a trigger event), followed by a new pattern of slow and incremental policy change. The three main reasons for choosing this framework are as follows:
i. In 2009, Baumgartner et al. (2009) proposed that "disruptive dynamics" could provide positive feedback in punctuated equilibrium. Interactions between political parties, interest groups and politicians are examples of these processes. Because of the constant battle between opposing parties, policies are either in equilibrium or periodically out of equilibrium owing to policy punctuation.
ii. A punctuated policy reform or even a political revolution might occur when a system is in severe instability (Baumgartner et al. 2009). The modern punctuated equilibrium theory of public policy assumes that policy change is analysed in terms of equilibrium, homeostasis, or disequilibrium, authors further added. Only an external shock that causes a "tipping point" can result in a dramatic shift in policy. To explain and forecast policy change and behaviour, the theory blends classical structural functionalism with social constructionist theory.
iii. In punctuated equilibrium theory, social constructionist media analysis has concentrated on a specific aspect of the policy process, such as favourable or negative coverage of committee hearings or rephrasing of a policy problem. According to Matzke (2020), all news outlets got scores to the left of the typical member of Congress, with the exception of Fox News' Special Report and the Washington Times'. PBS News Hour, CNN News night, ABC's Good Morning America and USA Today's print outlets were the most centrist media outlets. Government acts or inactions in the executive branch, judicial rulings and legislation are all examples of public policy outputs. In a 2006 report, it was mentioned that the attempts to punctuate U.S. corporate average fuel economy requirements hit a political snag from 1981 to 2005 (Koski and Workman, 2018). According to a study by Koski and Workman (2018), there were no changes in environmentalist policy on wood harvesting, old growth forest protection, or ecosystem preservation from 1976 to 2005.
Contrast between Biology and Public Policy
Punctuated equilibrium as utilised in public policy differs from punctuated equilibrium as employed in evolutionary biology today. Borrowing from evolutionary biology's punctuated equilibrium hypothesis is a bad comparison. Public policy punctuated equilibrium is also at odds with recent study findings in U.S. state tobacco policy, U.S. Northwest forestry policy and U.S. car efficiency policy, all of which indicated that despite concerted efforts to change public policy, punctuation of equilibrium did not occur (Park and Sapotichne, 2020). Furthermore, despite attempts to discover punctuations, these current study findings utilising final policy outputs rather than defining the supposed tone of the policy process found none.
Characteristics of the Framework
In their landmark work "Agendas and Instability in American Politics," created PET (Baumgartner et al. 2009). They claimed that policies are generally stable over time, but that this stability can be disrupted by fast and significant policy change. They called these phenomena "punctuated equilibrium" after a concept from evolutionary biology (Park and Sapotichne, 2020).
Policymakers (like humans in general) are assumed to have limited (cognitive and temporal) resources, according to the PET. As a result, attention is limited and how it is allocated is critical when it comes to policy change. Because "change begets change," if a disruption within the political system results in positive feedback mechanisms, a policy change is predicted (Baumgartner et al. 2009).
PET was initially developed as a method for analysing the dynamics of policy processes, with the primary goal of better understanding policy stability and change. Later, particularly in their book "The Politics of Attention”, authors further added, Baumgartner, Jones and Mortensen (2018) expanded on these results to form the "universal punctuation thesis." PET has been chastised for emphasising federalist frameworks while ignoring the importance of political parties.
PET has been...
SOLUTION.PDF

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

More Questions »

Submit New Assignment

Copy and Paste Your Assignment Here