Problem Definition and Agenda-Setting in Critical Perspective
Research output: Contributions to collected editions/works › Chapter › peer-review
Standard
Handbook of Critical Policy Studies. ed. / Frank Fischer; Doug Torgerson; Michael Orsini; Anna Durnova. Edward Elgar Publishing, 2015. p. 241-258.
Research output: Contributions to collected editions/works › Chapter › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - CHAP
T1 - Problem Definition and Agenda-Setting in Critical Perspective
AU - Barbehön, Marlon
AU - Münch, Sybille
AU - Lamping, Wolfram
PY - 2015/12
Y1 - 2015/12
N2 - Public policy-making, as technocratically conceived, appears as a rational process of solving known problems. Political problems are then regarded as part of a pre-given ‘neutral’ reality to which public policy simply responds. In contrast, our contribution develops a critical approach in that it traces three different (at times overlapping) perspectives. Firstly, we introduce approaches that criticize the top-down and linear conceptualizations of policy-making as problem-solving and instead study agenda-building as a complex process of turning issues into political problems. Secondly, we present a more fundamental epistemological challenge as constituted by post-positivist approaches and their focus on the struggle over the definition of problems at various stages of the policy process. Lastly, we introduce approaches that emphasize the role of power and political manipulation in problem definition and agenda-setting. Taken together, these strands provide the basis for a critical perspective which conceptualizes problem definition as a basic discursive process – part of the construction of a political world – and agenda-setting as a specific type of problem definition that attributes responsibility to a political actor or institution. From this perspective, problem definition and agenda-setting are not regarded as distinct phases but as constructions of reality that can be identified within the larger policy-making process.
AB - Public policy-making, as technocratically conceived, appears as a rational process of solving known problems. Political problems are then regarded as part of a pre-given ‘neutral’ reality to which public policy simply responds. In contrast, our contribution develops a critical approach in that it traces three different (at times overlapping) perspectives. Firstly, we introduce approaches that criticize the top-down and linear conceptualizations of policy-making as problem-solving and instead study agenda-building as a complex process of turning issues into political problems. Secondly, we present a more fundamental epistemological challenge as constituted by post-positivist approaches and their focus on the struggle over the definition of problems at various stages of the policy process. Lastly, we introduce approaches that emphasize the role of power and political manipulation in problem definition and agenda-setting. Taken together, these strands provide the basis for a critical perspective which conceptualizes problem definition as a basic discursive process – part of the construction of a political world – and agenda-setting as a specific type of problem definition that attributes responsibility to a political actor or institution. From this perspective, problem definition and agenda-setting are not regarded as distinct phases but as constructions of reality that can be identified within the larger policy-making process.
KW - Politics
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85030158069&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.4337/9781783472352.00021
DO - 10.4337/9781783472352.00021
M3 - Chapter
SN - 978 1 78347 234 5
SP - 241
EP - 258
BT - Handbook of Critical Policy Studies
A2 - Fischer, Frank
A2 - Torgerson, Doug
A2 - Orsini, Michael
A2 - Durnova, Anna
PB - Edward Elgar Publishing
ER -