Transcript Policy Studies Intentional Explanation of the State`s Actions

北京师范大学
教育研究方法讲座系列 (2):
教育政策研究
第二讲
教育政策研究的知识论基础：
理论视域的探讨
Perspectives in Policy Study: An Overview
 Analytical-technical perspective
Epistemological premise: Public policies are social facts. They
are social actions, programs and projects undertaken by the
modern state to intervene the state of affairs of particular public
domains in a modern society.
Aims of enquiry: Accordingly, policy studies is scientific
enquiry aims to provide causal explanation for the question why
the state undertaking particular policy actions and not the
otherwise. More specifically, it aims to analytically identify and
verify the antecedent conditions that caused the policy action to
take place.
Practical premise: Based on the causal relation verified by
policy studies, policy makers can then make prediction, meansends calculation, and technical engineering about the policy
situation concerned. It aims to impose technical control over the
situation.
Perspectives in Policy Study: An Overview
 Interpretive-political perspective:
Epistemological premise: Public policies are social construction
of realities. They are meanings, values, preferences and desires
attributed by the modern state and others interest groups to the
state of affairs of particular public domains in a modern society.
Aim of enquiry: Accordingly, policy studies is social enquiry
aims to interpret and explain why particular meanings and
values are signified in a policy “text” in a policy context, and not
the otherwise.
Practical premise: Based on the interpretations and
understandings revealed by policy studies, policy participants
can then engage in communication and dialogue which aim to
facilitate mutual understanding, to nurture consensus, and
plausibly to work out politically reciprocal solution to the policy
issue in point.
Perspectives in Policy Study: An Overview
 Discursive-critical perspective:
Epistemological premise: Public policies are authoritative
values and even “effective discursive totality” legitimized and
imposed by the modern state on the state of affairs in a
particular public domain in a modern society.
Aim of enquiry: Accordingly, policy studies is critical enquiry
aims to reveal how and why particular policy discourses are
legitimized in a policy arena.
Practical premise: Based on the critical studies on policy
discourse, policy critics can then reveal and assess the
possible systemic biases and distortions hypostatized and
legitimatized in particular policy domain and to strive to liberate
human and social potentials from these biases and distortions.
(I)
The Analytical-Technical Perspective
in
Policy Studies in Education
Epistemological Basis:
Analytic-Positivist Approach
 Stuart Nagel’s simple policy analysis model
 “Public Policy analysis can be defined as determining which
of various alternative public or governmental policy will most
achieve a given set of goals in light of the relations between
the policies and the goals. That definition brings out four key
elements of policy evaluation which are:
 Goals, including normative constraints and relative weights for
The
End
the
goals.
 Policies, programs, projects, decisions, options, means, or other
The Means
alternatives
that are available for achieving the goals.
 Relations between the policies and the goals, including relations
The
that
are Causality
established by intuition, authority, statistics,
observation, deduction, guesses, or other means
 Draw a conclusion as to which policy or combination of policies
Choice
isThe
best to
adopt in light of the goals, policies, and relations.”
Epistemological Basis:
Analytic-Positivist Approach
 Stokey and Zeckhauser’s Framework for policy analysis
 Establishing the Context. What is the underlying problem that must be
dealt with? What specific objectives are to be pursued in confronting
this problem?
 Laying out the alternatives. What are the alternative courses of action?
What are the possibilities for gathering further information?
 Predicting the consequences. What are the consequences of each of
the alternative actions? What techniques are relevant for predicting
these consequences? If outcomes are uncertain, what is the estimated
likelihood of each?
 Valuing the outcomes. By what criteria should we measure success in
pursuing each objective? Recognizing that inevitably some alternatives
will be superior with respect to certain objectives and inferior with
respect to others, how should different combinations of valued
objectives be compared with one another?
 Making a choice. Drawing all aspects of the analysis together, what is
the preferred course of action?
Epistemological Basis:
Analytic-Positivist Approach
 In searching of causality, prediction, and prescription for
policy action and logical positivism emerged from
natural science seemingly pointing the way.
And three basic premises of logical positivism
Methodological monism
Logical empiricism as the ideal-typical method of verification
Deductive-Nomological model as the idea-typical model of
explanation
Epistemological Basis:
Analytic-Positivist Approach
 The ideal-typical model of analytical-positivist
perspective: Deductive-Nomological explanation
The D-N explanation is the type of explanation commonly
used in researches in natural sciences. It makes up of
three parts:
The explanatory premises or the casual law (covering law),
which is a universal statement of the sufficient and necessary
conditions (explanans/cause) for the truth of the explanandum
(effect). Accordingly, a causal law in natural science
must comprises the following components
Epistemological Basis:
Analytic-Positivist Approach
 D-N explanation ….makes up of three parts:
The explanatory premises or the casual law (covering law)…
The factual truth of both the the explanandum (i.e. the phenonmenon to be
explained) and the explanans.
The conditionality between the explanandum and explanans
•
•
•
Sufficient conditions: It refers to the kinds of conditionality between the explanandum and
explanans, in which the explanans can exhaustively but not universally explain the truth of the
explanandum.
Necessary conditions: It refers to the kinds of conditionality between the explanandum and
explanans, in which the explanans can universally but not exhaustively explain the truth of the
explanandum.
Sufficient and necessary conditions: It refers to the kinds of conditionality between the
explanandum and explanans, in which the explanans can both exhaustively and universally
explain the truth of the explanandum.
The temporal order of the explanans must be in precedence to the
explanandum
Epistemological Basis:
Analytic-Positivist Approach
 D-N explanation ….makes up of three parts:
The explanatory premises or the casual law (covering law)…
………
The initial condition, which defines the property of a specific
case of the explanandum.
The conclusion, which state the exhaustive explanation of the
specific explicandum by the explicans.
Deductive-Nomological Explanation
 The syllogism (Theoretical syllogism)
Antecedent condition (Cause)
Explanans
Covering Law (Nomology)
Conclusion (Effect)
Explanandum
Deductive-Nomological Explanation
 The components of D-N Model of explanation
Nomological Premise/Covering Law
Sufficient & necessary condition
Explanadum
Explanans/
Cause
conditionality
Explanandum/Effect/
Object of Explanation
Epistemological Basis:
Analytic-Positivist Approach
 The compromised model: Statistical-Probabilistic (S-P)
explanation:
The S-P model is the type of explanation commonly use in
quantitative researches in social sciences. It is also made up of
three parts similar to those in nomological-deductive explanation.
There are two differences in probabilistic explanation. One is that
the explanatory premises is not in the form of law-like /
nomological statement of the sufficient and necessary conditions
of the truth of the explanandum but only a probabilistic statement
specifying the likelihood of the causal relationship between the
explanans and explanandum. The second difference is that in the
conclusion, the specific explanandum under study cannot be
exhaustive explained by the explanans but can only be explained
in probabilistic terms.
Deductive-Nomological Explanation
 The syllogism (Theoretical syllogism)
Antecedent condition (Cause)
Explanans
Probabilistic Law
Conclusion (Effect)
Explanandum
Statistical-Probabilistic Explanation
 The components of S-P Model of explanation
Probabilistic Premise
Plausible condition
Explanadum
Explanans/
Cause
Probability
Explanandum/Effect/
Object of Explanation
Epistemological Basis:
Analytic-Positivist Approach
 Logical-empiricism: The exemplary method of verification
in logical-positivism
Empiricism: It refers to the method of verification based primary
by sensory experiences of human being. More specifically, it is
based on recorded experiences methodically collected by
scientists. More importantly, these recorded experiences will then
be set against their respective propositions to see whether they
correspond each other. And it is through this operation of so call
correspondence principle that scientific propositions will be
verified against the external national world.
Logicism: Apart from empirical verification that rely on human
experiences, scientists can also rely on pure logical inference and
mathematical calculations to verify their propositions. For
example propositions in in geometry and mathematical physical
are usually not verified with empirical data but pure mathematical
and logical inferences.
Epistemological Basis:
Analytic-Positivist Approach
 Dahl and Lindblom’s conception of rational calculation
 Limitations and difficulties in means-end rational
calculation
 Information deficiency: Relevant or even essential
information to the means-end rational calculation may be
incomplete, unavailable, difficult to obtain,
 Communication problem: Available information may not be
able to be dissimulated to all decision-making parties or
the information may appear to be difficult to comprehend.
 The number of variables involved is too many to be
exhausted.
 The complexity of the relations among variables is too
complicated to be comprehended not to mention
exhausted.
Epistemological Basis:
Analytic-Positivist Approach
 Dahl and Lindblom’s conception of rational calculation
Scientists’ solutions to cognitive deficiency in means-end
rational calculation
“Scientists deal with (a) the problem of information by
systematic observation, (b) with the problem of communication
by developing a precise and logical language usually including
the language of mathematics, (c) with the problems of an
excessive number of and complex relations among variables
by specialization, controlled by experiment, quantification,
rigorous and system analysis, and exclusion of phenomena not
amenable to these methods.” (Dahl & Lindblom, 1992, p. 78) In
summary, these methods include
Epistemological Basis:
Analytic-Positivist Approach
 Dahl and Lindblom’s conception of rational calculation
Scientists’ solutions to cognitive deficiency in means-end
rational calculation: In summary, these methods include
Codification: Method of reducing and unifying numerous,
complicated and disorderly information into comprehensible units
Quantification: Method of quantifying information and units into
comparable values.
Sampling: Selectively analyzing a fragment, a specimen of the
phenomenon under observation.
Observations in control situations or by randomization.
Modeling: Model “is a purposeful reduction of a mass of
information to a manageable size and shape, and hence is a
principal tool in the analyst’s work-tool. Indeed, we will be
employing models throughout this book.” (Stokey & Zeckhauser,
1978, p.9)
Technical-rational Perspective in
Policy Study
 The concept of instrumental and technical rationality
The concept of rationality: Rationality can be defined as
conscious and knowledgeable ways human beings
approaches and even masters the world around them.
Rationality therefore is a state of mind and a way of life, in
which human beings strive to act on and master their
environment .
The concepts of instrumental and substantive rationality
Instrumental rationality refers to conscious and knowledgeable
process through which human beings calculate and choose the
most expedient means to achieve preconceived and/or
predetermined end.
Substantive rationality refers to conscious and knowledgeable
process through which human beings decide the ends most
worthy of achieving.
Technical-rational Perspective in
Policy Study
 The concept of instrumental and technical
rationality
 The instrumental-technical turns in policy studies
 Policy scientists who adhere to value-neutral or even
value-free method of inquiry advocate that substantive
choice of policy end are political decisions and should
be left to politicians.
 Accordingly, they contend that policy scientists should
confine themselves to the technical issues of choosing
the best, or more specifically the most cost-effective
policy instruments or means to attain the “politically”
pre-determined ends.
Technical-rational Perspective in
Policy Study
 Technical-rational perspective in policy studies
Following the conclusions drawn from analytic-positivist
policy studies, the next task to be performed by policy analysts
is to work out, if possible to the last technical details, the
action plan to carry out the policy measures. Hence, it is a task
guarded by instrument and technical rationality.
Assumptions of comprehensive (technical) rational model in
policy studies: (Forester, 1989, Pp. 49-54)…
Technical-rational Perspective in
Policy Study
 Technical-rational perspective in policy studies
Assumptions of comprehensive (technical) rational model in
policy studies: (Forester, 1989, Pp. 49-54)
The agent/actor: A single decision-maker (or a group of fully
consenting decision makers) who is a utility-maximizing,
instrumentally rational actor
The setting: Analogous to the decision-maker’s office, “by
assumption a closed system”
The problem: Well defined problem, “its scope, time horizon,
value dimensions, and chains of consequences are clearly given”
and close at hand.
Information: Assumed to be “perfect, complete, accessible, and
comprehensible.”
Outcome: A single best solution or the most optimum resolution
Analytical-Technical Perspective
Education Policy
Means
Antecedent Causes
End
Causal Relationship
Anticipated Effects
To control & act
To Know
Analytical positivism
Analytical codification
Technical rationalism
Omniscient
Variable quantification
Manipulation of policy-means
Omnipotent variables
assumption
assumption
Control & Randomization of
Generalization & sampling
other variables
Empiriciization & observation
Achievement of policy goals
Modeling the policy world
Revisions and Criticism on
Analytic-Technical Perspective
 Herbert Simon’s concept of bounded rationality
 Simon’s defines that “rationality denotes a style of behavior
(A) that is appropriate to the achievement of a given goals, (B)
within the limits imposed by given conditions and constraints.”
(Simon, 1982, p.405)
 The concept of satisfice: Simon differentiates two stances in
regard to (A), i.e. the degree of “appropriateness to goal
achievement.
 Maximizing or optimizing stance of the “economic man”: “While
economic man maximizes - selects the best alternative from
among all those available to him”
 Satisficing stance of the “administrative man”: “Administrative
man satisfices - look for a course of action that is satisfactory or
‘good enough’. (Simon, 1957, p. xxv)
Revisions and Criticism on
Analytic-Technical Mode
 Herbert Simon’s concept of bounded rationality
 The concept of bounded rationality: In regard to (B), Simon
indicates that “It is impossible for the behaviour of a single,
isolated individual to reach any high degree of rationality. The
number of alternatives he must explore is so great, the
information he would need to evaluate them so vast that even
an approximation to objective rationality is hard to conceive.
Individual choice takes place in an environment of ‘givens’ –
premises that are accepted by the subject as base for his
choice; and behaviour is adaptive only within the limits set by
these ‘givens’.” (Simon, 1957, p. 79; my emphasis)
Revisions and Criticism on
Analytic-Technical Mode
 Herbert Simon’s concept of bounded rationality
 Simon specifies limitations imposed by the
environment of givens are
 Limitation of the knowledge
• Incomplete and fragmented nature of knowledge,
• Limits of knowledge about the consequences, i.e.
predictability of knowledge
 Limitations of the cognitive ability of the decider makers
• Limits of attention
• Limits on the storage capacity of human mind
• Limits of the learning ability of human beings, i.e.
observation, communication, comprehension, ….
• Limits on changes of status quo, i.e. human habits, routine,
mind set, …
• limits on organizational environments.
Revisions and Criticism on
Analytic-Technical Mode
 Choices under calculated risk
Risk can be construed as “the residual variance in a theory of
ration choice” (March, 1994, p. 35) or more specifically, the
unexplained variance in a causal modeling equation. It is
basically grown out of the epistemological constraints of the
scientific means-end rational model.
Therefore, “calculated risks are often necessary because
scientific methods have not yet produced tested knowledge
about the probable consequences of large incremental
changes…and existing reality is highly undesirable.” (Dahl &
Lindblom, 1992, p. 85)
Growing industry for risk estimation and risk management in
public policy
Revisions and Criticism on
Analytic-Technical Mode
 Charles Lindblom’s science of muddling through
Charles Lindblom agrees with Simon on the limitations
of human rationality, yet Lindblom diagnoses that the
sources of these limitations are more than the
cognitive capacity of human mind. He suggests that
limitations are integral parts of the very process of
policy making. Lindblom characterizes this process as
“successive limited comparison” and “muddling
through”.
Revisions and Criticism on
Analytic-Technical Mode
 Charles Lindblom’s science of muddling through
 “Incrementalism is a method of social action that takes
existing reality as one alternative and compares the
probable gains and loses of closely related alternatives
by making relatively small adjustments in existing
reality, or making larger adjustments about whose
consequences approximately as much is known as
about the consequences of existing reality, or both.”
(Dahl & Lindblom, p. 82)
 Lindblom’s two models of decision-making
Rational-Comprehensive (Root)
Successive Limited Comparisons (Branch)
1a Clarification of values or objectives distinct
from and usually prerequisite to empirical
analysis of alternative policies.
1b Selection of value goals and empirical
analysis of the needed action are not distinct
from one another but are closely intertwined.
2a Policy-formulation is therefore approached
through means-end analysis: First the ends
are isolated, then the means to achieve them
are sought.
2b Since means and ends are not distinct,
means-end analysis is often inappropriate or
limited.
3a The test of a “good” policy is that it can be
shown to the most appropriate means to
desired ends.
3b The test of a “good” policy is typically that
various analysts find themselves directly
agreeing on a policy (without their agreeing
that it is the most appropriate means to an
agreed objective).
4a Analysis is comprehensive; every
important relevant factor is taken into
account.
4b Analysis is drastically limited:
i) Important possible outcomes are neglected.
ii) Important alternative potential policies are
neglected.
iii) Important affected values are neglected.
5a Theory is often heavily relied upon.
5b A succession of comparisons greatly reduces
or eliminates reliance on theory.
Revisions and Criticism on
Analytic-Technical Mode
John Forester’s typology of bounded
rationality
 Bounded rationality I: Cognitive limits
 Bounded rationality II: Social differentiation
 Bounded rationality III: Pluralist conflict
 Bounded rationality IV: Structural distortions
(II)
Interpretive-Political Perspective
in
Policy Studies in Education
Interpretive Perspective in
Public Policy Study
 David Easton defines public policy as “the
authoritative allocation of values for the whole society.”
(Easton, 1953, p. 129)
Interpretive Perspective in
Public Policy Study
 Stephen Ball indicates that “Policy is clearly a matter
of the ‘authoritative allocation of values’; policies are
the operational statements of values, ‘statements of
prescriptive intent’ (Kogan 1975 p.55). But values do
not float free of their social context. We need to ask
whose values are validated in policy, and whose are
not. Thus, the authoritative allocation of values draws
our attention to the centrality of power and control in
the concept of policy’ (Prunty 1985 p.135). Policies
project images of an ideal society (education policies
project definitions of what counts as education).” (Ball,
1990, p. 3)
Interpretive Perspective in
Public Policy Study
 In another occasion, Ball specifies his own approach
to policy study that “in current writing on policy
issue I actually inhabit two very different
conceptualization of policy. …I will call these policy
as text and policy as discourse. …The point I am
moving to is that policy is not one or the other, but
both: they are ‘implicit in each other’.” (1994, p.15)
Interpretive Perspective in
Public Policy Study
 Dvora Yanow defines “public policy as texts that are
interpreted as they are enacted by implementers,
(and)…as texts that are ‘read’ by various stakeholder
groups.” (2000, p. 17)
Therefore, “an interpretive approach to policy
analysis …is one that focuses on the meanings of
policy, on values, feelings, or beliefs they express,
and on the processes by which those meanings are
communicated to and ‘read’ by various audiences.
Interpretive Perspective in
Public Policy Study
Basic assumptions of interpretive approach
to the study of public policy:
Public policy is not construed as self-defined
phenomenon and/or natural phenomenon treated
in natural science, but is taken as human artifact
deliberated and constructed by human beings
with specific intents and particular meanings.
Accordingly, policy studies are research efforts to
identified the meanings and values allocated,
imputed, and attributed to a particular policy
phenomenon by all parties concerned.
Interpretive Perspective in
Public Policy Study
Basic assumptions of interpretive approach
to the study of public policy:
Since the primary meaning-constructor (or more
appropriately put ‘author’) of public policy is the
modern state. As by definition the modern state is
the sovereign power and authority over a
definitive territory and its residents, hence public
policy studies are research efforts to investigate
what are the intents, meanings or values that the
state has ascribed to a particular public policies
and why.
Interpretive Perspective in
Public Policy Study
Basic assumptions of interpretive approach
to the study of public policy:
Furthermore, in pluralistic and democratic
political system, the author of public policy is not
confined to the sovereign state. Various interested
parties may also attribute different or even
contradictory meanings to a same policy
phenomenon and take different or even
antagonistic stances towards a policy prescription.
Interpretive Perspective in
Public Policy Study
Basic assumptions of interpretive approach
to the study of public policy:
Accordingly, public policy study is research
efforts striving
 to explore what and how meanings and values are
written / encoded into policy “texts” by the state
or the government.
 to explore what and how meanings and values are
read / decoded from public policy “texts” by
interest groups / interpretive communities, i.e.
hermeneutic and ethnographic studies of
interpretations of public policy by social groups.
Interpretive Perspective in
Public Policy Study
Basic assumptions of interpretive approach
to the study of public policy:
Accordingly, public policy study is research
efforts striving …
 to explore what authoritative meanings and values
are emerged and constituted amid these diverse
interpretations of public policy.
 to expose the politicking processes via which
authoritative meanings and values are
constructed within the political context of a public
policy.
Intentional explanation:
Explaining the State’s Acts
Georg H. von Wright’s Two Traditions of
Inquiry
1916-2003
Intentional explanation:
Explaining the State’s Acts
Georg H. von Wright’s Two Traditions of
Inquiry
 “It is therefore misleading to say that
understanding versus explanation marks the
difference between two types of scientific
intelligibility. But one could say that the
intentional or nonintentional character of their
objects marks the difference between two types
of understanding and of explanation.” (von
Wright, 1971, p.135)
Intentional explanation:
Explaining the State’s Acts
Von Wright’s Two Traditions of Inquiry…
 Distinction between causal and teleological
explanations
Causal explanation: It refers to the mode of explanation,
which attempt to seek the sufficient and/or necessary
conditions (i.e. explanans) which antecede the phenomenon
to be explained (i.e. explanandum). Causal explanations
normally point to the past. ‘This happened, because that
had occurred’ is the typical form in language.” (von Wright,
1971, p. 83) It seeks to verify the antecedent conditions for
an observed natural phenomenon. This mode of explanation
can further be differentiated into
• Deductive-nomological explanation
• Inductive-probabilistic explanation
Deductive-Nomological Explanation
 The components of deductive-nomological explanation
Nomological Premise/Covering Law
Sufficient & necessary condition
Explanadum
Explanans/
Cause
conditionality
Explanandum/Effect/
Object of Explanation
Intentional explanation:
Explaining the State’s Acts
Wright’s Two Traditions of Inquiry…
 Distinction between causal and teleological
explanations
 Teleological explanation: It refers to the mode of
explanation, which attempt to reveal the goals and/or
intentions, which generate or motivate the explanadum
(usually an action to be explained) to take place.
“Teleological explanations point to the future. ‘This
happened in order that that should occur.’” (von Wright,
1971, p. 83) This mode of explanation can be differentiated
into
• Intentional explanation
• Rational-choice explanation
• Functional explanation (Quasi-teleological explanation)
Distinctive features of intentional
(teleological) explanations
Causal explanation
Antecedent Condition:
Cause
retrospective
attribution
Explanandum: An apple falls
Explanandum: A man acts
Reason
prospective
protention
Intentional /Teological explanation
Intent/goal
Intentional explanation:
Explaining the State’s Acts
Re-orientating the mode of explanation in
policy studies:
 Intentional explanation has been advocated by some
social scientists as the typical mode of explanation
used in social sciences. In fact, as Jon Elster
underlines, its feature "distinguishes the social
sciences from the natural sciences." (Elster, 1983, p.
69)
Intentional explanation:
Explaining the State’s Acts
Re-orientating the mode of explanation in
policy studies:
 However, to inquire into the intentions and
subjective meanings of actors and groups of actors
in public policy, for examples statesmen,
politicians, frontline policy service deliverers,
policy service recipients, political parties, interest
groups, etc. Policy researchers encounter one of
the central methodological problems in social
science. This aporia has be aptly depicted by Max
Weber as follow:
Intentional explanation:
Explaining the State’s Acts
Re-orientating the mode of explanation in
policy studies:
"Sociology is a science concerning itself with the
interpretive understanding of social action and
thereby with causal explanation of its course and
consequence." (Weber, 1978, p.4)
Policy Studies as Intentional Explanation of
the State Actions (1): Interpretative Approach
What is meaning? A phenomenological
investigation
 Alfred Schutz, one of the prominent
phenomenological sociologists of the twentieth
century suggests in his book The Phenomenology
of Social World that
“Meaning is a certain way of directing one’s gaze at
an item of one’s experience. This item is thus
‘selected out’ and rendered discrete by a reflexive
act. Meaning indicates, therefore, a peculiar
attitude on the part of Ego toward the flow of its
own duration.” (Schutz, 1967, p. 42)
55
Policy Studies as Intentional Explanation of
the State Actions (1): Interpretative Approach
What is meaning? …
This definition may be discerned with the three
constituent concepts in phenomenology, namely,
attention, intention and protention. In other words,
meanings are made up of the attention, intention
and protention that the Ego has attribute to an
object in the concrete and discrete world.
 Attention refers the act of one’ consciousness in
“selecting out” an object from the concrete and discrete
world
 Intention refers the act of one’s consciousness in forming
a perception and attitude towards the object and retaining
it and recalling it in the future
Policy Studies as Intentional Explanation of
the State Actions (1): Interpretative Approach
What is meaning? …
This definition may be discerned with the three
constituent concepts ….
 Protention refers to the act of consciousness of
formulating an action plan (a project) to fulfill one
anticipation towards the object
Policy Studies as Intentional Explanation of
the State Actions (1): Interpretative Approach
Schutz’s concept of action
 By applying the conceptual apparatus derived
from phenomenological philosophy, Schutz
proposes to clarify Max Weber’s conception of
subjective meaning of social action in interpretive
sociology in the following way.
Policy Studies as Intentional Explanation of
the State Actions (1): Interpretative Approach
Schutz’s concept of action
 ….. Schutz proposes to clarify Max Weber’s
conception of subjective meaning of social action
in interpretive sociology in the following way.
“Now we are in a position to state that what
distinguishes action from behavior is that action is
the execution of a projected act. And we can
immediately proceed to our next step: the meaning
of any action is its corresponding projected act. In
saying this we are giving clarity to Max Weber’s
vague concept of the ‘orientation of an action’. An
action, we submit, is oriented toward its
corresponding projected act.” (Schutz, 1967, p. 61)
Policy Studies as Intentional Explanation of
the State Actions (1): Interpretative Approach
Schutz’s concept of meaning-context
By applying the constituent concepts of
phenomenology, Schutz further suggests that
meanings forged within one’s Ego are
“configurated” into a whole, which Schutz called
“meaning-context”. By meaning-context, Schutz
characterized it as follows …
Policy Studies as Intentional Explanation of
the State Actions (1): Interpretative Approach
Schutz’s concept of meaning-context
……By meaning-context, Schutz characterized it as
follows
“Let us define meaning-context formally: We say that
our lived experience E1, E2, …, En, stand in a
meaning-context if and only if, once they have been
lived through in separate steps, they are then
constituted into a synthesis of a high order,
becoming thereby unified objects of monothetic
attention.” (Schutz, 1967, p.75)
Policy Studies as Intentional Explanation of
the State Actions (1): Interpretative Approach
Schutz’s concept of meaning-context…
Schutz indicates that meaning-context derived
within one’s inner time consciousness bears
numbers of structural features. (Schutz, 1967, p. 7478)
Unity: Though intentional acts and/or fulfillment-act
various meaning-endowing experiences are unified and
integrated into coherent whole within the Ego. Hence,
meaning-context generated from meaning-endowing
experiences also bears the internal structure of unity and
coherence.
Policy Studies as Intentional Explanation of
the State Actions (1): Interpretative Approach
Schutz’s concept of meaning-context…
Schutz indicates that meaning-context bears
numbers of structural features…..
 Continuity: As lived experiences are set within the stream
of consciousness of duration (i.e. Durée), therefore, the
meaning-context thereby derived is internally structured
into a continuity of temporal ordering.
 Hierarchy: Through her lived experiences in different
spheres of the life-world, individual will congifurated
various meaning-contexts for lived experiences in various
spheres of life. And these complex meaning-contexts are
structured in hierarchical order according to their degree
of meaningfulness and significance.
Internal time consciousness
Durée
Action
Anticipation & fulfillment
Behavior
Attitude-taking Act
Reproduction, Retention, Perception
Meaning-context
of unity and continuity
Hierarchy
Meaning-context
of unity and continuity
Stream of consciousness
Intentionality
The
subject
Intentional-Act
Intentional
object
64
Phenomenological conceptual framework of meaning
Policy Studies as Intentional Explanation of
the State Actions (1): Interpretative Approach
Accordingly, interpretive policy studies can be
construed as research efforts to investigate
what are the attention, intention and protention that
the state granted to a policy phenomenon and/or
issue;
what are the attention, intention and protention that
interested parties within a policy arena attributed to
the policy text produced by the state;
how these attentions, intentions and protentions
are related to the meaning-context of the state and
to those of the interested parties; and why.
Policy Studies Intentional Explanation of the
State’s Actions (2): Hermeneutic Approach
 Hermeneutic study of public policy
“Hermeneutics is a discipline that has been primarily
concerned with the elucidation of rules for the
interpretation of texts.” (Thompson, 1981, p.36)
Policy Studies Intentional Explanation of the
State’s Actions (2): Hermeneutic Approach
 What is interpretation?
“Interpretation … is an attempt to make clear, to make sense
of an object of study. This object must, therefore, be a text, or
a text-analogue, which in some way is confused, incomplete,
cloudy, seemingly contradictory  in one way or another
unclear. The interpretation aims to bring to light an underlying
coherence or sense. …The object of a science of
interpretation must thus have (a) sense (coherence and
meaning) , distinguishable from its (b) expression, which is for
or by (c) a subject.” (Taylor, 1994, p.181-182)
Policy Studies Intentional Explanation of the
State’s Actions (2): Hermeneutic Approach
 What is interpretation?
“When we speak of the ‘meaning’ of a given predicament, we
are using a concept which has the following articulation:
Meaning is for or by a subject…
Meaning is of something…
Things only have meaning in a field, that is, in relation to the
meanings of other things.” (Taylor, 1994, p. 185-186)
Policy Studies Intentional Explanation of the
State’s Actions (2): Hermeneutic Approach
 What is interpretation?
Dimension of linguistic meaning: “Meanings …. is for a
subject, of something, in a field. This distinguishes it from
linguistic meaning which has a four- and not threedimensional structure. Linguistic meaning is for subjects and
in a field, but it is the meaning of signifiers and it is about a
world of referent.” (Taylor, 1994, p.186)
Meaning by and/for a subject
Meaning in a field
Meaning of something
• Meaning of the signifier
• Meaning about a world of referent
Field
Author
Meaning
Signifier
Referent
Reader
Field
Author
Meaning By
Meaning
Meaning Of
Meaning About
Signifier
Referent
Meaning For
Reader
Policy Studies Intentional Explanation of the
State’s Actions (2): Hermeneutic Approach
 What is a Text? (Ricoeur, 1981, p. 145-164)
"A Text is any discourse fixed by writing" (p.145) i.e. a fixation
of speech act by writing.
Fixation enables the speech to be conserved, i.e. durability of text
A text ‘divides the act of writing and the act of reading into two
sides, between which there is no communication. … The text thus
produces a double eclipse of the reader and the writer.’ (p. 146-47)
Policy text can therefore be primarily conceived as the
authoritative fixation of meanings by the government
Policy Studies Intentional Explanation of the
State’s Actions (2): Hermeneutic Approach
 What is a Text? (Ricoeur, 1981, p. 145-164)
Hermeneutical Function of Distanciation (Ricoeur, 1981, p.
131-44)
Text as language event and speech act
• Distanciation between language event and meaning
• Articulation of meaning in language event is ‘the core of the whole
hermeneutic problem.’ (p. 134)
Text as work
• Distanciation between text as the work and its authors
• ‘Hermeneutics remains the art of discerning the discourse in the
work; but this discourse is only given in and through the structures
of the work. Thus interpretation is the reply to the fundamental
distanciation constituted by the objectification of man in work of
discourse, an objectification comparable to that expressed in the
products of his labour and his art.’ (P. 138)
Policy Studies Intentional Explanation of the
State’s Actions (2): Hermeneutic Approach
 What is a Text? (Ricoeur, 1981, p. 145-164)
Hermeneutical Function of Distanciation (Ricoeur, 1981, p.
131-44)
Distanciation between act of writing and act of reading
‘The text must be able to…”decontextualize” itself in such a way
that it can be “recontextualise” in a new situation – as
accomplished…by the act of reading.’ (p. 139)
Distanciation between the text and the reference and denotation
of discourse
• The world the text: ‘Reference…distinguishes discourse from
language, the latter has no relation with reality, its words returning to
other words in the endless circle of the dictionary. Only discourse,
we shall say, intends things, applies itself to reality, expresses the
world.’ (p. 140)
• ‘The most fundamental hermeneutical problem … is to explicate the
type of being-in-the world (life-world) unfolded in front of the text’.
(p.141)
Policy Studies Intentional Explanation of the
State’s Actions (2): Hermeneutic Approach
 What is a Text? (Ricoeur, 1981, p. 145-164)
Hermeneutical Function of Distanciation (Ricoeur, 1981, p.
131-44)
Four hermeneutic problems in policy-text study
• Hermeneutic problem of bridging the distanciation between policy
texts and policy meanings and values
• Hermeneutic problem of bridging the distanciation between policy
texts and authors’ (governmental) intents
• Hermeneutic problem of bridging the distanciation between policy
texts and readers ‘reading of the texts
• Hermeneutic problem of bridging between the distanciation between
the policy texts and their referencing world
Field
PolicyAuthor
Makers
Meaning
Policy Intents
& Values
Signifier
Policy
Text
Policy Environment
Referent
and Issue
Reader
Policy Stakeholders
Policy Studies Intentional Explanation of the
State’s Actions (2): Hermeneutic Approach
 From texts to textuality
The concept of textuality: Apart from retrieve the meanings
embedded in texts, hermeneutic study can also explore another
dimension of texts, i.e. “the texture of texts, their form and
organization” (Fairclough, 1995, p. 4). By introducing the
concept of textuality into hermeneutic study, text analysis can
then go beyond studying texts in linguistic forms (written or
spoken) and explore texts, which take on multi-semiotic forms.
The concept of multi-semiotic textuality is especially significant
in the age of mass communication and then the information age
In the mass-communication age, the exemplar text of multisemiotic form is of course televisions.
In the information age, literal texts have been further replace by
digital-imagery texts through computer-mediated-communication
and in the internet.
Policy Studies Intentional Explanation of the
State’s Actions (2): Hermeneutic Approach
From texts to textuality
Dimensions of textuality of the policy text:
Genre
Frame
Rhetoric
Narrative
(To be discussed on Topic 6: Policy Making Process)
Policy Studies Intentional Explanation of the
State’s Actions (2): Hermeneutic Approach
From texts to textuality
 As the concept of texuality is applied to policy
studies in the information age, it becomes apparent
that analysis of policy text should extend beyond
the analysis of the policy documents in its literal
form and to analyze meanings and values
embedded in policy texts in multi-semiotic forms,
such as documentaries, commercials, and news
footages in TV; and websites in Internet.
Policy Studies Intentional Explanation of the
State’s Actions (2): Hermeneutic Approach
From texts to textuality and intertextuality
The concept of intertextuality: It refers to the texture
of the text when it is set against its social and history
contexts. In other words, “intertextuality implies ‘the
insertion of history into the text and of this text into
history’. (Kristeva, 1986, p. 39) By ‘the insertion of
history into the text’, …text absorbs and is built out of
texts from the past.” (Fairclough, 1992, p.102)
As the concept of intextuality is applied to policy
studies, it implies that policy documents should be
analyzed in conjunction synchronically with other
current policy texts and/or diachronically with policy
texts in the past.
Policy Studies Intentional Explanation of the
State’s Actions (2): Hermeneutic Approach
 Multi-lateral hermeneutic study of public policy
The multi-lateral process of writing (encoding) and
reading (decoding) of policy texts (Ball, 1992)
Multiple authors in the production processes of policy texts
Multiple readers in the processes formulation and
implementation of policy texts
Policy Studies Intentional Explanation of the
State’s Actions (2): Hermeneutic Approach
 Multi-lateral hermeneutic study of public policy
The multi-lateral process of writing (encoding) and
reading (decoding) of policy texts (Ball, 1992)
Notions writerly and readerly texts:
The writerliness of policy texts refers to the flexibility built in policy
texts which “invite the reader to ‘join-in’, to ‘co-operate’ and coauthor’. (p. 11) In other words, it provides readers rooms to interpret
or even re-write the policy texts.
The readerliness of policy text refers to the rigidity built in policy
texts which provide “minimum of opportunity for creative
interpretation by the reader(s).” (p.11)
Reciprocating, bargaining and interacting relationship between
writers and readers of policy texts
Policy Studies Intentional Explanation of the
State’s Actions (2): Hermeneutic Approach
 Conception of interpretive communities in policy study
(Yanow, 2000)
Given the multi-lateral features in policy interpretations, policy
arguments are therefore involved multiple communities, each of
which can have their own interpretations of the policy text and
subsequently produce their own texts (in multi-semiotic forms)
in relation to the policy argument.
artifacts
language, objects,
acts
meaning(s)
values, beliefs,
feelings
Figure 1.1 Meanings (values, beliefs, feelings) are embedded in policy
artifacts (language, objects, acts) in a symbolic (representational)
relationship.
artifacts
language, objects,
acts
meaning(s)
values, beliefs,
feelings
Figure 1.2 The use of artifacts maintains or changes their underlying
meanings.
artifacts
language, objects,
acts
meaning
meaning
Interpretive
community
meaning
meaning
interpretive
community
Interpretive Interpretive
community community
meaning
interpretive community
Figure 1.4 Symbolic artifacts accommodate multiple meanings.
Field
Author
Meaning
Policy
Signifier
Text
Interpretive
community
Interpretive
community
Referent
Interpretive
Reader
community
Interpretive
community
Interpretive
community
Policy Studies Intentional Explanation of the
State’s Actions (2): Hermeneutic Approach
 Conception of interpretive communities in policy study
Hence, the starting point of interpretive inquiry into a particular
policy issue is to identify the various interpretive communities
participate in the formulation and implementation processes of
the policy.
The second step access the “local knowledge”, i.e. the definition
of situation, knowledge at hand and system of relevance,
produced by different interpretive communities. The access can
be attained by means of document analysis, conversational
interviews and participation observations with different
interpretive communities.
By juxtaposing and mapping out the similarities and differences
in the local knowledge produced by various interpretive
communities with regard to the policy in point, the architecture
of arguments constituted around the policy issue in point can be
revealed.
Table 1.1 Steps in Interpretive Policy Analysis
1. Identify the artifacts (language, objects, acts) that are significant
carriers of meaning for a given policy issue, as perceived by policyrelevant actors and interpretive communities
2. Identify communities of meaning/interpretation/speech/practice that are
relevant to the policy issue under analysis
3. Identify the “discourses”: the specific meanings being communicated
through specific artifacts and their entailments (in thought, speech and
act)
4. Identify the points of conflict and their conceptual sources (affective,
cognitive, and/or moral) that reflect different interpretations by different
communities
Interventions/Actions
5a. Show implications of different meanings/interpretations for policy
formulation and/or action
5b. Show that differences reflect different ways of seeing
5c. Negotiate/mediate/intervene in some other form to bridge differences
(e.g., suggest reformulation or reframing)
Policy Studies as Rational-Choice
Explanation of the State’s Actions
 Apart from the phenomenological perspective, another
perspectives, namely ration-choice theory, has also
formulate an approach to intentional explanation with its
conceptual apparatus.
 Assumptions of rational-choice theory in intentional
explanation: Jon Elster underlines that in order to avoid
the idiosyncratic and subjective nature of intentional
explanation under phenomenological perspective, we
can assume that the actors in point, i.e. the state, are
agents who are endowed with rationality and autonomy;
and their undertakings are conscious and rational
actions.
Policy Studies as Rational-Choice
Explanation of the State’s Actions
 Intentional explanation: In light of these two
assumptions, Elster has reformulated intentional
explanation by analytically decompose it into "a triadic
relation between action, desire and belief." (Elster, 1983,
90)
“A successful intentional explanation establishes the
behavior as action and the performer as an agent. An
explanation of this form amounts to demonstrating three
place relation between the behavior/action (A), a set of
cognitions (C) entertained by the individual and a set of
desire (D) that can also be impute to him. (Eslter, 1994,
P. 311)
Triadic relation in Intentional Explanation
Cognition
Action
Desire
(Source: Elster, 1994, P. 318)
Policy Studies as Rational-Choice
Explanation of the State’s Actions
 Intentional explanation: …Elster has reformulated
intentional explanation …
……
Given this basic schema, Elster formulated intentional
explanation with the following three propositions:
(1)
Given C, A is the best means to realize D
(2)
C and D cause A
(3)
C and D cause A qua reasons
Policy Studies as Rational-Choice
Explanation of the State’s Actions
 Rational-choice explanation: Accordingly, Elster asserts
further that “rational-choice explanation goes beyond
intentionality in several respects.” (Elster, 1994, P.313)
The basic requirement is that the triadic schema must
be consistent both internally and externally.
Internal consistency: In order to turn a subjective intentionality
into a rational project of action, Elster suggests that it must
comply with two propositions
(4) The set of beliefs C is internally consistent
(5) The set of desires D is internally consistent
Policy Studies as Rational-Choice
Explanation of the State’s Actions
 Rational-choice explanation: ….
External consistency: Elster further asserts that “one might
want to demand more rationality of the beliefs and desires than
mere consistency. In particular, one might require that the
beliefs be in some sense substantively well grounded, i.e.
inductively justified by the available.” (Elster, 1994, P.314) As a
result, there are three more conditions to be complied with:
(1b) The belief must be the best belief, given the available
evidence
(2b) The belief must be caused by the available evidence
(3b) The evidence must cause the belief ‘in the right way’
Accordingly, the triadic schema may then be reformulated as
follow
Rational-Choice Explanation
Evidence
Cognition
Action
Desire
(Source: Elster, 1994, P. 318)
Rational-Choice Explanation (2009)
Information
Cognition
Causal explanation
Teleological explanation
Action
Desire
(Source: Elster, 2009, P. 15)
Policy Studies as Quasi-Teleological Explanation
of the State’s Actions: Functional Explanation
 This type of explanation is most commonly used in
biology. It "takes the form of indicating one or more
functions (or even dysfunctions) that a unit performs in
maintaining or realizing certain traits of the system to
which the unit belongs." (Nagel, 1979, p. 23) For
example, in explaining why human being has lung, the
typical explanation in biology is that lung (L) performs
the function of breathing (B), i.e. provide oxygen to the
of the proper maintenance of the system of a human
body (H). Accordingly functional explanation consist of
the followings
L perform the function of B to the system of H
B therefore explains the existence of L or H's possession of L.
Policy Studies as Quasi-Teleological Explanation
of the State’s Actions: Functional Explanation
 However, there is a basic logical setback in this
functional-explanatory structure. That is, since L
performs B, therefore L must be an antecedent of B.
However in the cause-effect explanatory structure, the
existence of an effect (L) could not have anteceded that
of its cause (B). Therefore, B could not have been the
cause of L.
Policy Studies as Quasi-Teleological Explanation
of the State’s Actions: Functional Explanation
 Nevertheless, in biology this setback can be
compensated by the mechanism of natural selection in
the theory of evolution. That is the seemingly temporal
ordering mismatch between B and L can be explained
away within the much longer timeline within the
mechanism of natural selection and adaptation found in
the evolutionary process of species.
Policy Studies as Quasi-Teleological Explanation
of the State’s Actions: Functional Explanation
 Revisions of functional explanation in social sciences:
In social science research there are at least three
formulations, which attempt to provide some sort of
selection mechanism in social development processes
upon which the functional explanation for social
phenomena can be built.
The concept of equilibrium in Social System Theory: The first
selection mechanism supporting the functional explanation for
social activities are put forth by US sociologists, such as Talcott
Parsons and Robert K. Merton, who were the leading figures of
the Social System Theory. The theory was one of the dominant
schools in sociology in the 1960s. …..
Policy Studies as Quasi-Teleological Explanation
of the State’s Actions: Functional Explanation
The concept of equilibrium in Social System Theory: …….
It advocates that human society can be conceptualized as a wellintegrated social system, which is made up of numbers of
subsystems or called social institutions. It is assumed that each
of these subsystems will develop its own set of structure and
function. Together these subsystems will work concertedly to
attain a state of equilibrium for the system as a whole. And it is
further assumed that this state of equilibrium of the system will
maintain itself over a definite period of time. It is suggested that
this “grand theory” of social equilibrium can be taken as the
evolutionary basis of the selection mechanism for the functional
explanation in social sciences. That is, the functional
explanation for the existence of a social activity can be
accessed in terms of its contributions to the maintenance of
social equilibrium of the social system, which the social practice
in point is embedded.
Policy Studies as Quasi-Teleological Explanation
of the State’s Actions: Functional Explanation
The concept of equilibrium in Social System Theory: …….
……….
In retrospect, it is common knowledge within the discipline of
sociology that such a grand theory of social evolution and
social equilibrium has been challenged and criticized by social
scientists from the perspectives of conflict theory. As a result,
the functional explanation in social sciences has to look for
another more creditable conception selection mechanism as its
theoretical basis.
Policy Studies as Quasi-Teleological Explanation
of the State’s Actions: Functional Explanation
The “consequence law”: G.A. Cohen, a prominent Marxian
philosopher in Oxford University, has put forth another attempt
to provide a selection mechanism for functional explanation in
social science. Instead of building a grand theory for the social
ecological environment as a whole, Cohen suggests that social
scientists could settle with the “consequence law”. (Cohen
1978) By “consequence law”, it refers to the “beneficial
consequence” that a particular social activity could bring to its
participants. And as result it would motivate its participants to
continue to take part in the social activity in point and in turn it
would sustain the social endeavor as a whole. …..
Policy Studies as Quasi-Teleological Explanation
of the State’s Actions: Functional Explanation
The “consequence law”: …..
Cohen suggests, For example, within Marxian conception of
relation of production or class relation, one can render a
functional explanation for the existence of a particular form of
relation of production by the consequence it entailed. That is, a
particular relation of production will sustain itself over time (or
in Marian term reproduce) as long as it can render its
participants “good enough” beneficial consequences that they
would remain within that relation of production and rather than
overthrow it, i.e. wage a class revolution.
1941-2009
Policy Studies as Quasi-Teleological Explanation
of the State’s Actions: Functional Explanation
Functional explanation by institutional persistence: In recent
decades, there are several further revisions on the selectionmechanism basis for the functional explanation in social
sciences. (Kincaid, 1994; 2007; Pettit, 2002) These revisions aim
to further retreat from the theoretical claim of providing an
overall evolutionary theory of the social system for the
functional explanation in social science. Instead, they further
revise that
Persistence as explanandum (the effect to be explained): Both Kincaid
(2007) and Pettit (2002) have suggested that functional explanation for the
existence of a particular social activity should simply aims to provide an
explanation for the persistence or reproduction of the social activity in
point, instead of rendering any exhaustive causal mechanism of how the
social activity come about.
Policy Studies as Quasi-Teleological Explanation
of the State’s Actions: Functional Explanation
Functional explanation by institutional persistence: ……
Distinction between current persistence and origin of the explanandum:
Both Kincaid (2007) and Pettit (2002) have further suggested that in
functional explanation of the existence of a social activity, the explanandum
should only be it persistence or reproduction in a particular point in time
rather than to trace the whole evolutionary process of the social activity
back to its origin of formation.
Institutional embeddedness: In functional explanation, the explananda are
no long rational actions deliberately carried out by agents as presupposed
in model of rational-choice explanation, instead they are social persistence
and resilience found in institutional contexts. Therefore, it is assumed that
functional explanation must be sensitive to the historical and institutional
contexts in which the explananda are embedded. (Kincaid, 1994; 2007;
Pettit, 2002)
Policy Studies as Quasi-Teleological Explanation
of the State’s Actions: Functional Explanation
Functional explanation by institutional persistence: ……
Distinction between optimal and stable consequences: Kincaid (1994; 2007)
has further underlined that the beneficial consequences in use to provide
functional explanation for social activities should not be defined in optimal
terms as some rational-choice theorists insisted. Instead, the beneficial
consequences in functional explanations should only be defined in terms of
“stable consequences” or in Herbert Simon’s terms “satisficing” or “good
enough” consequences.
Distinction between particularistic and universalistic explanations: Given all
these revisions, the model of functional explanation in its present form
could not have claimed to render a universal and exhaustive explanation to
its explanandum. All it could claim is that it has provide one of the
contributing factors to the persistence of a particular social activity within a
particular institutional context in ea particular point in time.
Policy Studies as Quasi-Teleological Explanation
of the State’s Actions: Functional Explanation
 The state of the art of the functional explanation in
social science: Given the revisions reviewed above, the
current functional explanation model may be
summarized as follows.
Functional (Qusai-Teleological) Explanation
Other factors
Function at t0
Function at tn
Social
Action
Institutionalization
Contextual Embeddedness
Persistence
Policy as Political Bargain and
Compromise to Meaning & Value Conflicts
 David Easton’s conception political system: Easton
differentiates his conception of public policy as
authoritative allocation of values into three components
of a political system
Input of political demands and supports
Conversions of input into authoritative allocation of values
Output of policy
Policy as Political Bargain and
Compromise to Meaning & Value Conflicts
 Gabriel A. Almond functional categorization of political
system
Input functions
Political socialization and recruitment
Interest articulation
Interest aggregation
Political communication
Output functions
Rule-making
Rule-application
Rule adjudication
Policy as Political Bargain and
Compromise to Meaning & Value Conflicts
Dahl and Lindblom’s conception of political
bargaining in polyarchy
Robert Dahl’s of polyarchy
Two theoretical dimensions of democratization
• Public contestation: It indicates “the extent of
permissible opposition, public contestation, or political
competition” of the government. (Dahl, 1971, p. 4)
• Inclusiveness of participation: It indicates “the
proportion of the population entitled to participate on a
more or less equal plane in controlling and contesting
the conduct of the government.” (Dahl, 1971, p. 4)
US & UK
HKSAR
PRC
Policy as Political Bargain and
Compromise to Meaning & Value Conflicts
Dahl and Lindblom’s conception of political
bargaining in polyarchy
Robert Dahl’s of polyarchy
 The concept of polyarchy: “Polyarchy may be
thought of as relatively (but incompletely)
democratized regimes, or to put it in another way,
polyarchy are regimes that have been substantially
popularized and liberalized, that is, highly inclusive
and extensively open to public contestation.” (Dahl,
1971, p. 8)
Policy as Political Bargain and
Compromise to Meaning & Value Conflicts
 Dahl and Lindblom’s conception of political bargaining
in polyarchy
Social pluralism and political bargaining as necessary condition
of polyarchy
Social pluralism: “Polyarchy requires a considerable degree of
social pluralism, that is, a diversity of social organizations with a
large measure of autonomy with respect to one another.” (Dahl and
Lindblom, 1992, P. 302)
Political bargaining as necessity for polyarchy in social pluralism: In
social pluralism, “if leaders agree on everything they would have no
need to bargain; if on the nothing, they could not bargain. Leaders
bargain because they disagree and expect that further agreement is
possible and will be profitable. …Hence, bargaining takes place
because it is necessary, possible, and thought to be profitable.”
(Dahl and Lindblom, 1992, p. 326)
Policy as Political Bargain and
Compromise to Meaning & Value Conflicts
 Corporatism: Criticism on pluralism in policy studies
Schmitter’s juxtaposition of concepts of pluralism and
corporatism
“Pluralism can be defined as a system of interest representation in
which the constituent units are organized into an unspecified
number of multiple, voluntary, competitive, nonhierarchically
ordered and self determined ( as to type or scope of interest)
categories which are not specifically licensed, recognized,
subsidized, created or otherwise controlled in leadership selection
or interest articulation by the state and which do not exercise a
monopoly of representational activity within their respective
categories. (Schmitter, 1979, p. 15)
Policy as Political Bargain and
Compromise to Meaning & Value Conflicts
 Corporatism: Criticism on pluralism in policy studies
Schmitter’s juxtaposition of concepts of pluralism and
corporatism
“Corporatism can be defined as a system of interest
representation in which the constituent units are organized into a
limited number of singular, compulsory, noncompetitive,
hierarchically ordered and functionally differentiated categories,
recognized or licensed (if not created) by the state and granted a
deliberate representational monopoly within their respective
categories in exchange for observing certain controls on their
selection of leaders and articulation of demands and supports.
(Schmitter, 1979, p. 13)
Policy as Political Bargain and
Compromise to Meaning & Value Conflicts
 Corporatism: Criticism on pluralism in policy studies
Liberal and authoritarian corporatism
Liberal corporatism: Liberal/societal corporatism refers to the kind
of interest-mediation mechanism constituted by liberal democratic
states mainly between interest organizations of the labor and the
capital. It aims to construct a kind of welfare corporatism or
welfare state within which two major interests namely the labor
and the capital can work out some collaborations under the
mediation of the state; e.g. Scandinavian welfare state and postWWII welfare state in UK.
Policy as Political Bargain and
Compromise to Meaning & Value Conflicts
 Corporatism: Criticism on pluralism in policy studies
Liberal and authoritarian corporatism
Authoritarian corporatism: Authoritarian/state corporatism refers
to the kind of interest-mediation mechanism of constructed by
bureaucratic-authoritarian state among interest organizations
licensed by the state. Within authoritarian corporatism, the state is
more or less secluded from societal and political pressures and
can absolve chosen interest groupings into the corporatism to
legitimate and/or facilitate its ruling, e.g. authoritarian regimes
established in south America in the 1960s; regimes in the 1970s in
east Asia, especially the four little dragon.
Policy as Political Bargain and
Compromise to Meaning & Value Conflicts
 Policy as State Apparatus in Resolving
Societal Conflicts or Struggles
(To be discussed in Topic 3)
 Education Policy as text interpreted by actors,
mediated and enacted by actors in institutional
settings
(To be discussed in Topic 7-8)
Policy as Political Bargain and
Compromise to Meaning & Value Conflicts
 Policy as State Apparatus in Resolving
Societal Conflicts or Struggles
(To be discussed in Topic 3)
 Education Policy as text interpreted by actors,
mediated and enacted by actors in institutional
settings
(To be discussed in Topic 7-8)
Information
Cognition
Causal (because-of) Explanation
Intentional (in-order-to) Explanation
Desire
Social
Action
Other
factors
Teleological Explanation
Quasi-Teleological Explanation
(Functional Explanation)
Function at t0
Persistence
Function at tn
Institutionalization
Contextual Embeddedness
Synthesis of Analytical & Interpretative Perspectives in Policy Studies
Information
Cognition
Causal (because-of) Explanation
Intentional (in-order-to) Explanation
Intentionality
Desire
Social
Action
Other
Attention,
Perception, retention, reproduction, intention & potention
Teleological Explanation
factors
Quasi-Teleological Explanation
(Functional Explanation)
Function at t0
Persistence
Function at tn
Institutionalization
Contextual Embeddedness
(III)
Discursive- Critical Perspective
in
Policy Studies in Education
Argumentative and Persuasive Turns
in Policy Studies
Public policy as argumentative and persuasive
practice
 Redefining the nature of public policy: “As
politicians know too well but social scientists too
often forget, public policy is made of language.
Whether in written or oral form, argument is central
in all stages of the policy process.” (Majone, 1989,
p.1)
Argumentative and Linguistic
Turns in Policy Studies
Public policy as linguistic and argumentative
practice (cont’d)
 Redefining the role of the policy analysts: “In a system
of government by discussion, analysis - even
professional analysis - has less to do with formal
techniques of problem solving than with process of
argument. The job of analysts consists in large part of
producing evidence and arguments to be used in the
course of public debate. Its crucial argumentative
aspect is what distinguishes policy analysis from the
academic social science on the one hand, and from
problem-solving methodologies such as operations
research on the other. …
Argumentative and Linguistic
Turns in Policy Studies
Public policy as linguistic and argumentative
practice (cont’d)
 … They must persuade if they are to be taken seriously
in the forums of public deliberation. Thus, analysts, like
lawyers, politicians, and others who make a
fundamental use of language, will always be involved in
all the technical problems of language, including
rhetorical problems. (Majone, 1989, p. 7)
Argumentative and Linguistic
Turns in Policy Studies
Public policy as practice of persuasion
 Redefining the nature of public policy: “All our talk of
‘making’ public policy, of ‘choosing’ and ‘deciding’, loses
track of the home truth … that politics and policy making
is mostly a matter of persuasion. Decide, choose,
legislate as they will, policy makers must carry people
with them, if their determinations are to have the full
force of policy. …To make policy in a way that makes it
stick, policy makers cannot merely issue edicts. They
need to persuade the people who must follow their edicts
if those are to become general public practice.” (Goodin
et al., 2006, p. 5)
Argumentative and Linguistic
Turns in Policy Studies
Public policy as practice of persuasion
 Redefining the core of the discipline: “Not only is
the practice of public policy making largely a
matter of persuasion. So is the discipline of
studying public policy making aptly described as
itself being a ‘persuasion’. It is a mood more than a
science, a loosely organized body of percepts and
positions rather than a tightly integrated body of
systemic knowledge, more art and craft and
genuine ‘science’.” (ibid)
Discursive Perspective in
Policy Studies
Locating the levels of study for policy discourse
 The concept of discourse has become popular in social
sciences in past decades. As the concept being used by
various disciplines in social sciences, the meanings of
the concept have become heterogeneous if not chaotic.
 At conversation level, the concept of discourse can
refers to speech act, language use, or parole. For
example in classroom discourse study, discourse is
taken as speech act and speech exchange between
teachers and students in the classroom context.
Discursive Perspective in
Policy Studies
 Locating the levels of study for policy discourse
 At institution level, discourse can refers to cognitive,
regulative and normative rules governing the circulation
and practice of ideas, concepts, categories and
representations of social meanings within a social
institutional domain. For examples, in medical institution,
discourse may take the form of a certification issued by
a doctor to a patient indicating the health condition of
the latter and the whole institutional configuration
making this certification effective; and in educational
institution, discourse may take the form of a certificate
issued by government to a student certifying passing of
an examination of the latter and the whole institutional
configuration making this certification effective.
Discursive Perspective in
Policy Studies
Locating the levels of study for policy discourse
 At socio-cultural system level, discourse can refers to
the dominance or hegemony governing the circulation
and/or practice of ideas, concepts, categories and
representations of social meanings in a society. For
example, the discourses of neo-liberal capitalism or
socialism in economy system; discourse of liberal
democracy or proletarian dictatorship in political system;
etc.
Discursive Perspective in
Policy Studies
The conception of discourse in public policy
 Frank Fischer defines “Discourse …is an ensemble of
ideas and concepts that give social meaning to social
and physical relations.” (2003, p. 90)
 David Howarth defines Discourse refers “to historically
specific systems of meaning which form the identities
of subjects and objects.” (2002, quoted in Fischer, 2003,
p. 73)
 Maarten Hajer defines discourse as “a specific
ensemble of ideas, concepts, and categories that are
produced, reproduced, and transformed to give
meaning to physical and social relations.” (1995,
quoted in Fischer, 2003, p. 73)
Discursive Perspective in
Policy Studies
The conception of discourse in public policy
 Taken together these conceptions of discourse, policy
discourse can then be characterized as a historically
specific ensemble of ideas, concepts and categories
which gives meaning to physical and social relations
and forms identities of subjects and objects within a
particular policy domain and/or around a specific policy
issue. For example, the neo-liberalism in public policy;
the “Washington consensus” in fiscal policy; the
welfare state or the workfare state in welfare policy;
comprehensive- egalitarianism or quasi-market
discourse in education policy.
Michel Foucault’s Theory of
Discourse
(1926-1984)
Michel Foucault’s Theory of
Discourse
Conception of Statement
 The statement – the constituent unit of a discourse
“The statement is not the same kind of unit as the
sentence, the proposition, or the speech act…The
statements is not …a structure (i.e. a group of relations
between variable elements...); it is a function of
existence that properly belong to signs and on the
basis of which one may then decide, through analysis
or intuition, whether or not they ‘make sense’,
according to what rule they follow one another or are
juxtaposed, of what they are the sign, and what sort of
act is carried out by their formulation (oral or written).”
(Foucault, 1972, p. 86-87)
Michel Foucault’s Theory of
Discourse
Conception of Statement
 Accordingly policy statement can then be defined as a
specification or even a prescription (in oral or written
format) circulating in a particular public policy domain.
It defines the “conditions of existence” the objects in
the specific public policy domain are qualified to obtain.
For examples:
Michel Foucault’s Theory of
Discourse
 For examples:
 Liberal studies is one of the four core subjects in New Senior
Secondary Curriculum
 Profit-making kindergartens are not eligible to participate in
educational-voucher scheme
 Form-3 students in school X are below the standard of
Territory-wide System Assessment in English-language
 Student X is a EMI-capable student in SSPA, school Y is a
EMI school, teacher Z is a EMI-capable teacher
 Student A is a Special-Educational-Needs (SEN) student
 Primary school M has adopted small-class-size teaching
 School N is a “Quality” school in ESR scheme
 School Q is not managed by Incorporated Management
Committee (IMC)
Michel Foucault’s Theory of
Discourse
Conception of discourse
 A discourse “is the totality of all effective statements
(whether spoken or written). ... Description of discourse
is in opposition to the history of thought. There…a
system of thought can be reconstituted only on the
basis of a definite discursive totality. …The analysis of
thought is always allegorical in relation to the
discourse that it employs. Its question is unfailingly:
what is being said in what was said? …what is this
specific existence that emerges from what is said and
nowhere else?” (Foucault, 1972, p. 27-28)
Michel Foucault’s Theory of
Discourse
Conception of discourse
 “We can now give a full meaning to the definition of
‘discourse’. …We shall call discourse a group of
statements in so far as they belong to the same
discursive formation. …It is made up of a limited
number of statements for which a group of conditions
of existence can be defined.” (p. 117)
Michel Foucault’s Theory of
Discourse
Michel Foucault’s Theory of
Discourse
Conception of discourse
 Hence, a policy discourse is a totality and unity of
effective policy statements within a public policy
domain in specific historical, cultural, and socioeconomic contexts. For example, the quasi-market
discourse on education reforms implemented by
capitalist states in developed countries in the last
decade of the 20th century can be construed as a
totality of effective policy statements which stipulate
the underlying principles as well as the operational
mechanism of the schooling system in these countries.
Standardization, Normalization, Commodification & Reification
TTRA,
TOC,
SVAIS
EMILanguage
SurveillanceTeacher
Capable Proficiency Competence
Teachers Asessment Framework
evaluationism
EMICapable
SVAIS Students
Principal
Professional
Development
Market signals
SSPA
Discretionary
Places
ParentocracyParental
DSS
Demand
Choice
consumerism
SSE
Marketization
QAI
Supply
ERS
DisciplineSBM
managerialism
Audited
Schools
S-B Ordinance
EMI Schools
Pre-school Voucher System
Standardization & Dismantliztion
Fragmentation & Stratification
Medium of Exchange
Michel Foucault’s Theory of
Discourse
Foucault’s Theory of Discursive Formation
Foucault differentiates the formation of a
discourse into four interrelated parts.
 The Formation of Object:
Mapping the surface of the emergence of the object
Describing the authorities of delimitation
Analyzing the grids of specification
Michel Foucault’s Theory of
Discourse
Foucault’s Theory of Discursive Formation
 The Formation of Enunciative Modality
Identifying who is speaking, who is accorded the right to
use this sort of language, who is qualified to do so.
Describing the institutional sites from which the
discourse is made and form which the discourse derives
its legitimate source and point of application
Analyzing the position of the subject, in which s/he
occupies in relation to the various domains and groups of
objects
Michel Foucault’s Theory of
Discourse
Foucault’s Theory of Discursive Formation
 The Formation of Concepts: the formation of the
organization of the field of statements where they
appeared and circulated
Identifying the forms of succession, e.g.
• Orderings of enunciative series
• Types of dependence of the statement
• Rhetorical schemata according to which groups of
statements may be combined
Michel Foucault’s Theory of
Discourse
Foucault’s Theory of Discursive Formation
 The Formation of Concepts: the formation of the
organization of the field of statements where they
appeared and circulated
 Identifying the forms of coexistence
• Field of presence
• Field of concomitance
• Field of memory
 Identifying the procedures of intervention that may be
legitimately applied to statements, e.g. technique of
rewriting , method of transcribing, mode of translating,
means of transferring, method of systematizing
Michel Foucault’s Theory of
Discourse
Foucault’s Theory of Discursive Formation
 The Formation of Strategies or theoretical and
thematic choice
 Determining the points of diffraction of discourse
• Point of incompatibility
• Point of equivalence
• Point of systematization
 Analyzing the economy of the discursive constellation
 Analyzing the other authority, e.g. functional to fields of
non-discursive practice, observing the rules and
processes of appropriation of discourse
Michel Foucault’s Theory of
Discourse
Foucault’s Theory of Power/Knowledge and
Discourse
 The relation between discourse and power:
“Discourse can be both an instrument and an
effect of power… Discourse transmits and
produces power; it reinforces it.” (Foucault, 1978,
101, my italic)
 The concept of power/knowledge
 “It is in discourse that power and knowledge are joined
together” (Foucault, 1978, p. 100) and constitute what
Foucault conceptualized the power/knowledge.
Michel Foucault’s Theory of
Discourse
The concept of power/knowledge
“We should admit … that power and knowledge directly imply
one another; that there is no power relation without the
correlative constitution of a field of knowledge, nor any
knowledge that does not presuppose and constitute at the same
time power relations. These power/knowledge relations are to be
analyzed, therefore, not on the basis of a subject of knowledge
who is or is not free in relation to the power system, but, on the
contrary, the subject who knows, the objects to be known and
the modalities of knowledge must be regarded as so many
effects of these fundamental implications of power/knowledge
and their historical transformations. In short, it is not the
activities of the subject of knowledge that produces a corpus of
knowledge, useful or resistant to power, but power/knowledge,
the processes and struggles that traverse it and of which it is
made up, that determines the forms and possible domains of
knowledge.” (Foucault, 1977, p. 28)
Critical Discourse Analysis
Critical Discourse Analysis
Assumptions of Critical Discourse Analysis
(CDA): As a research approach, CDA has
assigned numbers of particular features to the
understanding of discourse
 Discourse as social practice: Discourse is no
longer construed as individual language use in
forms of text or talk, but as social practices which
implies
 Representation and/or expression of meaning and value
 Acts upon the world
 Acts upon social relations between human beings
Critical Discourse Analysis
Assumptions of CDA
 Constitutive nature of discourse: Construed as
social practice, discourse therefore takes on a
constitutive nature. In other words, human beings
use discourse to construct the worlds or realities
around them. This constitutive nature of discourse
may manifest in at least three aspects
 Ideational construction: “Discourse contributes to the
construction of system of knowledge and belief.”
(Fairclough, 1992, p. 64) For example, discourse of
science contributes to the construction of the material
world around us so are discourse of myths or religion.
Critical Discourse Analysis
Assumptions of CDA
 Constitutive nature of discourse:
 Relational construction: “Discourse help construct social
relationship between people.” (ibid) For example, liberaldemocratic discourse derived from the Enlightenment
contributes to the constitution of the political realities of
modern societies.
 Identity construction: Discourse contributes to the
construction of social subjects, self and social identity.
For example, the identity of citizenship is constructed
through the liberal-democratic discourse in the past three
centuries in human societies.
Critical Discourse Analysis
Assumptions of CDA
 Dialectic relationship between discourse and the social
structure
“It is important that the relationship between discourse
and social structure should be seen dialectically if we
are to avoid the pitfalls of overemphasizing on the one
hand the social determination of discourse, and on the
other hand the construction of the social in discourse.”
(Fairclough, 1992, p. 65) In other words, the dialectic
perspective in the relation between discourse and social
structure takes both social determination and social
construction into to consideration and assumes them to
be in a interactive and mediating relation.
Critical Discourse Analysis
Assumptions of CDA
 Discourse is historical: CDA takes discourse as
concrete social practice in particular historical and
socio-cultural contexts. Hence, analysis of contexts,
where the discourse takes place, is an essential part
of CDA.
Critical Discourse Analysis
Assumptions of CDA
 Ideological effect of discourse: The core question
CDA attempts to explore is how discourse serves as
means to legitimatize and reproduce prevailing
relations of power in a society, i.e. constituting
ideological effects for forms of social dominations.
Hence, to wage critique on domination and the
social distortion and bias that it elicits is what
makes CDA “critical”.
Critical Discourse Analysis
Fairclough’s three-dimensional framework of
CDA
 Three-dimensional analytical framework of CDA
 Text analysis: This dimension of discourse analysis
includes
• Analyses of text
• Analysis of textuality
• Analysis of intertextuality
 Discourse analysis: It covers analysis of the process of
production, distribution and consumption of a discourse.
In other words, it basically correspond Foucault’s
conception of discursive formation.
Critical Discourse Analysis
Three-dimensional framework of CDA (cont’d)
 Three-dimensional analytical framework of CDA
 Ideology analysis: This aspect of discourse analysis aims to
reveal the ideological effect embedded and/or constituted in a
particular discursive practice. By ideological effect of a
discourse, it refers to effect of a discourse in legitimating and
reproducing prevailing inequalities in power relations and social
distortions and biases in social-cultural practice.
Furthermore, as an ideological effect of a discourse has achieved
the cognitive status of “taken for granted” or “common sense”
among participants of a discourse, then it has constituted, what
Gramsci conceptualizes, hegemony. Hegemony is “an
ideological complex” (Gramsci, 1971; quoted in Fairclough, 1992,
p. 92), which constitutes “leadership as well as domination
across the economic, political, cultural and ideological domains
of a society.” (Fairclough, 1992, p. 92)
Figure 1: Analytical Framework of Critical Discourse Analysis
Critical Discourse Analysis
Fairclough’s three-dimensional framework of
CDA
 The mediating function of discursive practices between
textual practices and social-cultural practices.
“Critical discourse analysis is very much about making
connections between social and cultural structures and
processes on the one hand, and properties of text on the
other.” (Faieclough and Wodak, 1997, p. 277) Critical
discourse analysts has construed the dimension of
discursive practice as the mediator between the two.
They has characterized the connection to be mediating
in nature. In other words, the connection is neither direct
nor deterministic but in the form of dialectic and
interactive.
Critical Discourse Analysis
Fairclough’s three-dimensional framework of
CDA
 The mediating function of discursive practices between
textual practices and social-cultural practices.
“Critical discourse analysis is very much about making
connections between social and cultural structures and
processes on the one hand, and properties of text on the
other.” (Faieclough and Wodak, 1997, p. 277) Critical
discourse analysts has construed the dimension of
discursive practice as the mediator between the two.
They has characterized the connection to be mediating
in nature. In other words, the connection is neither direct
nor deterministic but in the form of dialectic and
interactive.
DISCOURSE
Totality of all effective statements
Intertextuality
Formation of
Objects
Textuality as Textual of the text
Text as Fixation of discourse
Hermeneutics as Distanciation Bridging
Discourse
Meanings
Absence
Frame
Genre
Discourse
Author’s
Intentions
Rhetoric
Author’s
Context
Readers’
Context
Metaphor
Text
Being-There of
the text
World of Text
Being-There of
the text
Audience ―
Rhetor
Formation of
Enunciative
Modelity
Formation of
Concepts
Formation of
Strategies &
Thematic Choice
Iconicity
167
Policy Studies as Social Critiques
 Conception of social critique and critical social science
 According to Jurgen Habermas, a prominent figure in Critical
Theory in Germany, the primary concern of critical social
scientists and social critiques in general is to refute the
assumption of empirical-positivistic social researcher that social
regularities revealed in social researches are given facts
comparable to those natural facts discovered in natural science.
Accordingly, they must reflect on the legitimation foundation,
which the prevailing social regularities are built upon. More
specially, they have to go beyond the status quo and try hard to
reveal the possible "power-hypostatized" social relations and
"ideologically-frozen" social discourses at work. (1971, P. 310)
Policy Studies as Critiques
 Conception of critique and critical social science
 Applying these ideas to policy studies, critical policy studies can
then be construed as attempts to unmask the possible
 distorted social relations hypostatized in specific public policies,
which are bias in favor of the dominants and/or against the
dominated, and
 distorted social discourses frozen in particular policy arenas, that
ideologues of the advantageous have forged in order to mystify
and/or rationalize the prevailing biases.
 As a result, the objective of critical social science, including
critical policy studies, is to emancipate
 the disadvantageous and dominated from distorted and biased
social relations instituted in prevailing social arrangements;
 the articulations and voices of the disadvantageous and dominated,
which have been silenced in the ideologies forged by the
ideologues of the dominants.
Policy Studies as Critiques
 Aspects of criticality in policy studies
 Critique on policy issues and frames: Critical policy researchers
can set out to reflect on the way a policy issue is formulated and
framed by the dominant policy discourse of the state. And see if
there are any relational and ideological distortions embedded in
a particular formulation of policy issue.
 Critique on policy stances of specific parties: Critical policy
researchers can reflect on the possible relational distortion
embedded in the discursive process of a particular policy arena.
That is, they can assess the chances and capacities that
different interest parties possess in articulating their concerns
and in redressing their grievances. Furthermore, critical policy
studies can also reflect on the ideological distortions found in
the arguments formulated and proclaimed by different parties
concerned.
Policy Studies as Critiques
 Aspects of criticality in policy studies
 Critique on policy context: The third aspect of criticality in policy
studies is to reflect on the macro socio-historical context and/or
meso institutional context, form which a particular policy issue
is originated. More specifically, it can assess whether there is
any relational and ideological distortions embedded in these
context, which give rise to the policy issue at point.
 Critique on policy practice: The final aspect of criticality in
policy studies is to reflect on the possibilities of transformation
and emancipation that a policy practice can bring about in
rectifying the relational and ideological distortions embedded in
a policy phenomenon.
Synthesis of Analytical, Interpretative & Critical Perspectives in Policy Studies
Information
Cognition
Causal (because-of) Explanation
Intentional (in-order-to) Explanation
Desire
Intentionality
Social
Distortions
&Action
Biases
Teleological Explanation
Other
factors
Quasi-Teleological Explanation
(Functional Explanation)
Distortions
Persistence
&
Biases
Function at t0
Function at tn
Institutionalization
Contextual Embeddedness
Lecture 2
Epistemological Foundations of Policy Studies in Education:
Theoretical Perspectives
END