Operationalizing Lasswell’s call for clarification of value goals: an equity-based approach to normative public policy analysis

IF 3.8 3区 管理学 Q1 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Policy Sciences Pub Date : 2024-03-26 DOI:10.1007/s11077-024-09525-w
Peter Linquiti
{"title":"Operationalizing Lasswell’s call for clarification of value goals: an equity-based approach to normative public policy analysis","authors":"Peter Linquiti","doi":"10.1007/s11077-024-09525-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In 1951, Harold Lasswell defined the ability to clarify value goals as integral to a policy analyst’s job. But graduate education in public policy analysis has paid insufficient attention to the skills needed to investigate and clarify value disputes. In turn, practicing policy analysts don’t have ready access to a set of methods for normative analysis that serves Lasswell’s vision of a contextualized, holistic, and interdisciplinary policy science. I start by describing calls for more emphasis on social equity in policy analysis and explore the complementary relationship of empirical, fact-based analysis and normative, value-driven analysis. I then propose seven competencies that policy analysts should be expected to master. They need to understand how normative issues arise in and adjacent to the classical model of policy analysis. They need to master a vocabulary for normative analysis and understand how humans make moral judgments, recognizing the distinction between moral rationalism and moral intuitionism. To engage in moral rationalism, practitioners need to be able to use the tools of analytic political philosophy. When it comes to moral intuitionism, they need to recognize the emotion-driven foundations of moral judgement and personal values. Finally, policy analysts also need to know where to find the values that are relevant to their analysis. Mastery of these competencies will allow analysts to better serve what Laswell describes as the intelligence needs of policymakers.</p>","PeriodicalId":51433,"journal":{"name":"Policy Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Policy Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-024-09525-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In 1951, Harold Lasswell defined the ability to clarify value goals as integral to a policy analyst’s job. But graduate education in public policy analysis has paid insufficient attention to the skills needed to investigate and clarify value disputes. In turn, practicing policy analysts don’t have ready access to a set of methods for normative analysis that serves Lasswell’s vision of a contextualized, holistic, and interdisciplinary policy science. I start by describing calls for more emphasis on social equity in policy analysis and explore the complementary relationship of empirical, fact-based analysis and normative, value-driven analysis. I then propose seven competencies that policy analysts should be expected to master. They need to understand how normative issues arise in and adjacent to the classical model of policy analysis. They need to master a vocabulary for normative analysis and understand how humans make moral judgments, recognizing the distinction between moral rationalism and moral intuitionism. To engage in moral rationalism, practitioners need to be able to use the tools of analytic political philosophy. When it comes to moral intuitionism, they need to recognize the emotion-driven foundations of moral judgement and personal values. Finally, policy analysts also need to know where to find the values that are relevant to their analysis. Mastery of these competencies will allow analysts to better serve what Laswell describes as the intelligence needs of policymakers.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
落实拉斯韦尔关于澄清价值目标的呼吁:基于公平的规范性公共政策分析方法
1951 年,哈罗德-拉斯韦尔将澄清价值目标的能力定义为政策分析师工作中不可或缺的一部分。但公共政策分析的研究生教育对调查和澄清价值争议所需的技能关注不够。反过来,实践中的政策分析师也无法随时获得一套规范性分析方法,以满足拉斯韦尔关于背景化、整体性和跨学科政策科学的愿景。我首先介绍了在政策分析中更加重视社会公平的呼声,并探讨了基于事实的实证分析与以价值为导向的规范分析之间的互补关系。然后,我提出了政策分析师应掌握的七种能力。他们需要了解规范性问题是如何在经典的政策分析模式中产生的,以及如何与之相邻。他们需要掌握规范分析的词汇,了解人类如何做出道德判断,认识到道德理性主义与道德直觉主义之间的区别。要从事道德理性主义研究,实践者需要能够使用分析政治哲学的工具。说到道德直觉主义,他们需要认识到道德判断和个人价值观的情感驱动基础。最后,政策分析人员还需要知道在哪里可以找到与其分析相关的价值观。掌握了这些能力,分析人员就能更好地满足拉斯韦尔所说的政策制定者的情报需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Policy Sciences
Policy Sciences Multiple-
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
9.40%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: The policy sciences are distinctive within the policy movement in that they embrace the scholarly traditions innovated and elaborated by Harold D. Lasswell and Myres S. McDougal. Within these pages we provide space for approaches that are problem-oriented, contextual, and multi-method in orientation. There are many other journals in which authors can take top-down, deductive, and large-sample approach or adopt a primarily theoretical focus. Policy Sciences encourages systematic and empirical investigations in which problems are clearly identified from a practical and theoretical perspective, are well situated in the extant literature, and are investigated utilizing methodologies compatible with contextual, as opposed to reductionist, understandings. We tend not to publish pieces that are solely theoretical, but favor works in which the applied policy lessons are clearly articulated. Policy Sciences favors, but does not publish exclusively, works that either explicitly or implicitly utilize the policy sciences framework. The policy sciences can be applied to articles with greater or lesser intensity to accommodate the focus of an author’s work. At the minimum, this means taking a problem oriented, multi-method or contextual approach. At the fullest expression, it may mean leveraging central theory or explicitly applying aspects of the framework, which is comprised of three principal dimensions: (1) social process, which is mapped in terms of participants, perspectives, situations, base values, strategies, outcomes and effects, with values (power, wealth, enlightenment, skill, rectitude, respect, well-being, and affection) being the key elements in understanding participants’ behaviors and interactions; (2) decision process, which is mapped in terms of seven functions—intelligence, promotion, prescription, invocation, application, termination, and appraisal; and (3) problem orientation, which comprises the intellectual tasks of clarifying goals, describing trends, analyzing conditions, projecting developments, and inventing, evaluating, and selecting alternatives. There is a more extensive core literature that also applies and can be visited at the policy sciences website: http://www.policysciences.org/classicworks.cfm. In addition to articles that explicitly utilize the policy sciences framework, Policy Sciences has a long tradition of publishing papers that draw on various aspects of that framework and its central theory as well as high quality conceptual pieces that address key challenges, opportunities, or approaches in ways congruent with the perspective that this journal strives to maintain and extend.Officially cited as: Policy Sci
期刊最新文献
A semi-automated approach to policy-relevant evidence synthesis: combining natural language processing, causal mapping, and graph analytics for public policy Environmental identity and perceived salience of policy issues in coastal communities: a moderated-mediation analysis Nudging citizens co-production: Assessing multiple behavioral strategies The political polarization over abortion: An analysis of advocacy coalition belief systems (Un)usual advocacy coalitions in a multi-system setting: the case of hydrogen in Germany
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1