Introduction
Public policy serves as a cornerstone of governance, shaping societal outcomes through deliberate decisions and actions. According to Wissink (2000:71-73), policy manifests in diverse forms, ranging from regulatory frameworks to distributive and redistributive mechanisms, each addressing specific societal needs or challenges. Understanding these forms is essential for effective policy analysis, which involves systematic evaluation to inform decision-making and improve outcomes. This essay explores various approaches to policy analysis, drawing on theoretical perspectives and analytical frameworks. To ground this discussion in a practical context, the essay examines the United Kingdom’s recent Net Zero by 2050 policy as a case study, illustrating how different analytical approaches can be applied to evaluate current public policy. The purpose of this essay is to provide a comprehensive overview of policy analysis techniques while highlighting their relevance and limitations in addressing complex policy challenges. The discussion will cover key approaches such as rational-comprehensive, incrementalist, and mixed-scanning models, before applying these to the chosen policy.
Forms of Policy as Identified by Wissink
Wissink (2000:71-73) provides a nuanced classification of policy forms, which serves as a foundation for understanding the diverse purposes and impacts of governmental action. These include regulatory policies, which impose rules and standards (e.g., environmental regulations); distributive policies, which allocate resources to specific groups (e.g., welfare benefits); redistributive policies, which transfer resources to balance inequalities (e.g., progressive taxation); and constituent policies, which establish institutional frameworks (e.g., electoral laws). Each form addresses distinct societal issues, and their identification is crucial for policy analysis as it shapes the choice of analytical tools and evaluation criteria. Indeed, recognising whether a policy is regulatory or redistributive, for instance, influences whether analysts focus on compliance mechanisms or equity outcomes. This classification highlights the multifaceted nature of policy, necessitating varied analytical approaches to capture the full scope of intended and unintended consequences.
Approaches to Policy Analysis
Policy analysis is a structured process of evaluating policy options, implementation, and outcomes to inform decision-making. Several approaches exist, each with distinct methodologies, strengths, and limitations. The rational-comprehensive model, often associated with classical decision theory, assumes that policymakers can identify all possible options, predict outcomes, and select the most optimal solution based on objective criteria (Simon, 1997). While this approach offers a systematic framework, it is arguably unrealistic due to time constraints, incomplete information, and human cognitive limitations, particularly in complex policy areas like climate change.
In contrast, the incrementalist approach, developed by Lindblom (1959), suggests that policymakers make small, gradual adjustments to existing policies rather than undertaking comprehensive overhauls. This method prioritises feasibility and consensus, reducing the risk of drastic errors. However, it can perpetuate inefficiencies or fail to address underlying systemic issues, as it often avoids radical change. For instance, incremental adjustments to healthcare funding might address immediate shortfalls but overlook long-term structural reforms.
A third notable framework is Etzioni’s (1967) mixed-scanning approach, which combines elements of rational and incremental models. It advocates for a broad initial scan of major policy options followed by detailed analysis of selected alternatives. This hybrid method balances thoroughness with practicality, though it requires significant expertise to prioritise issues effectively. These approaches, among others, demonstrate the diversity of tools available to analysts, each suited to different policy contexts and challenges.
Case Study: Applying Policy Analysis to the UK’s Net Zero by 2050 Policy
To illustrate the application of these analytical approaches, this essay examines the UK’s Net Zero by 2050 policy, a commitment enshrined in law through the Climate Change Act 2008 (amended 2019) to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by mid-century (UK Government, 2019). This policy embodies elements of Wissink’s regulatory and distributive forms, as it imposes binding targets on industries while allocating resources for renewable energy transitions. Analysing this policy through different approaches reveals varied insights into its formulation and potential effectiveness.
Applying the rational-comprehensive model, analysts might attempt to evaluate all possible pathways to net zero, such as carbon capture, renewable energy expansion, and behavioural change campaigns, weighing costs against environmental benefits. For instance, the UK’s Climate Change Committee provides detailed reports on carbon budgets and technology costs, aiming for an evidence-based strategy (CCC, 2021). However, the model’s limitations are evident: predicting long-term technological advancements or global economic shifts is inherently uncertain, potentially undermining the feasibility of a fully rational plan.
Through an incrementalist lens, the Net Zero policy can be seen as a series of small steps building on prior commitments, such as the original 80% emissions reduction target set in 2008. Incremental adjustments, like annual carbon budgets and sector-specific targets, allow for gradual progress and stakeholder adaptation. Yet, critics argue that this cautious approach risks delaying urgent, transformative actions needed to meet the 2050 deadline, especially in high-emission sectors like transport (IPCC, 2018). Indeed, incrementalism might prioritise short-term political acceptability over the radical innovation required.
Finally, a mixed-scanning approach offers a balanced perspective, initially scanning broad strategies (e.g., decarbonisation across energy, industry, and agriculture) before focusing on feasible priorities, such as offshore wind investment, which the UK has identified as a key strength (UK Government, 2021). This method acknowledges resource constraints while aiming for strategic depth, though it requires robust coordination across government departments to avoid fragmented efforts. Therefore, each analytical lens provides unique insights into the policy’s strengths and challenges, highlighting the importance of selecting an appropriate framework based on policy goals and context.
Limitations and Relevance of Policy Analysis Approaches
While these approaches offer valuable tools for dissecting public policy, their applicability is not without limits. The rational-comprehensive model, though thorough, often fails in dynamic, unpredictable environments where data is incomplete. Incrementalism, while pragmatic, can reinforce the status quo, potentially neglecting innovative solutions. Mixed-scanning, though flexible, demands significant analytical skill to prioritise effectively. Furthermore, policy analysis must account for political, social, and economic factors beyond the chosen framework, as these often shape outcomes more than technical evaluations. For the Net Zero policy, understanding public support or international cooperation—factors less quantifiable through these models—remains critical. Generally, a combination of approaches, tailored to the policy’s form and context, appears most effective. This reinforces Wissink’s (2000) point that policy’s diverse manifestations require equally diverse analytical strategies to ensure comprehensive evaluation.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Wissink’s (2000:71-73) categorisation of policy forms provides a vital lens for understanding the varied purposes and impacts of governmental action, from regulation to redistribution. Approaches to policy analysis, including rational-comprehensive, incrementalist, and mixed-scanning models, offer distinct methods to evaluate such policies, each with unique strengths and limitations. Applying these frameworks to the UK’s Net Zero by 2050 policy highlights their practical relevance and challenges, particularly in balancing ambition with feasibility in addressing climate change. While no single approach fully captures the complexity of modern policy challenges, their combined use can enhance decision-making by providing comprehensive insights. The implications of this discussion extend beyond academia, underscoring the need for policymakers to adopt flexible, evidence-based analytical strategies to tackle pressing societal issues effectively. Ultimately, as policy environments grow increasingly complex, the ongoing development and critique of analytical tools remain essential for ensuring governance that is both responsive and sustainable.
References
- Climate Change Committee (CCC). (2021) Sixth Carbon Budget. Climate Change Committee.
- Etzioni, A. (1967) Mixed-Scanning: A ‘Third’ Approach to Decision-Making. Public Administration Review, 27(5), pp. 385-392.
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). (2018) Global Warming of 1.5°C. IPCC.
- Lindblom, C.E. (1959) The Science of ‘Muddling Through’. Public Administration Review, 19(2), pp. 79-88.
- Simon, H.A. (1997) Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organizations. 4th ed. Free Press.
- UK Government. (2019) UK Becomes First Major Economy to Pass Net Zero Emissions Law. UK Government.
- UK Government. (2021) Net Zero Strategy: Build Back Greener. UK Government.
- Wissink, H.F. (2000) Policy Analysis: Concepts and Practice. In: Cloete, F. and Wissink, H. (eds.) Improving Public Policy. Van Schaik Publishers, pp. 71-73.
