There is no “point” in decision-making: a model of transactive rationality for public policy and administration

被引:0
作者
Shyama Kuruvilla
Philipp Dorstewitz
机构
[1] Boston University,Department of International Health, School of Public Health
[2] Maastricht University,Department of Philosophy
来源
Policy Sciences | 2010年 / 43卷
关键词
Public policy; Public administration; Rationality; Transactive rationality; Pragmatist philosophy; Science; Democracy; Morality; Ecological; John Dewey;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The hope that policy-making is a rational process lies at the heart of policy science and democratic practice. However, what constitutes rationality is not clear. In policy deliberations, scientific, democratic, moral, and ecological concerns are often at odds. Harold Lasswell, in instituting the contemporary policy sciences, found that John Dewey’s pragmatist philosophy provided an integrative foundation that took into account all these considerations. As the policy sciences developed with a predominantly empirical focus on discrete aspects of policy-making, this holistic perspective was lost for a while. Contemporary theorists are reclaiming pragmatist philosophy as a framework for public policy and administration. In this article, key postulates of pragmatist philosophy are transposed to policy science by developing a new theoretical model of transactive rationality. This model is developed in light of current policy analyses, and against the backdrop of three classical policy science theories of rationality: linear and bounded rationalism; incrementalism; and mixed-scanning. Transactive rationality is a “fourth approach” that, by integrating scientific, democratic, moral, and ecological considerations, serves as a more holistic, explanatory, and normative guide for public policy and democratic practice.
引用
收藏
页码:263 / 287
页数:24
相关论文
共 46 条
  • [1] Alexander T(1993)John Dewey and the moral imagination: Beyond Putnam and Rorty toward a postmodern ethics Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 19 369-400
  • [2] Bachrach P(1962)Decisions and nondecisions: An analytical framework American Political Science Review 56 632-642
  • [3] Baratz MS(1991)Agenda dynamics and policy subsystems Journal of Politics 53 1044-1074
  • [4] Baumgartner FR(2000)Stakeholder analysis: A review Health Policy and Planning 15 239-246
  • [5] Jones BD(1972)A garbage can model of organizational choice Administrative Science Quarterly 17 1-25
  • [6] Brugha R(2002)Policy analysis in the Good Society The Good Society 11 37-41
  • [7] Varvasovsky Z(1946)Interaction and transaction The Journal of Philosophy 43 505-517
  • [8] Cohen MD(2007)Rationality as situated inquiry: A pragmatist perspective on policy and planning Philosophy of Management 6 91-118
  • [9] March JG(2004)Understanding health and illness: Research at the interface between science and indigenous knowledge International Journal of Epidemiology 33 1138-1143
  • [10] Olsen JP(1967)Mixed scanning: A ‘third approach’ to decision-making Public Administration Review 27 385-392