On Foreign Policy by George Alexander L

Author:George, Alexander L.
Language: eng
Format: epub
ISBN: 978-1-317-25520-8
Publisher: Taylor & Francis (CAM)

Types of Judgment in Policymaking

Trade-Off Judgments Among Analytical Quality of an Option, the Need to Obtain Support, and Use of Time and Political Resources

In fact, three related trade-offs are at issue here. The first is the trade-off between seeking to maximize the analytical quality of the policy to be chosen (i.e., which option is most likely to achieve given policy objectives at acceptable levels of cost and risk) and needing to obtain sufficient support for the policy option that is finally chosen. Another familiar, often difficult trade-off problem arises from having to decide how much time and policymaking resources to allocate to the effort to identify the best possible option. A third trade-off problem arises from having to decide how much political capital, influence resources, and time to expend in an effort to increase the level of support for the option to be chosen. Only this type of judgment will be discussed in detail in this chapter.

Judgments of Political Side Effects and Opportunity Costs

Still another type of trade-off dilemma must be recognized. The criterion of analytical rationality is applied most comfortably by the policymaker when the problem in question is “bounded”—that is, when it is insulated from other policy issues that are already on the agenda or may soon emerge. But many policy issues are embedded in broader political and policy contexts. When this is so, policymakers find it necessary to consider what effect their choice on a particular policy issue will have on their overall political standing and on other parts of their overall policy program. In choosing what to do in situations of this kind, policymakers are guided not exclusively or even primarily by the dictates of analytical rationality but may be heavily influenced by their judgment of the political side effects and opportunity costs of their choices. Of course, this is not to say that a policy choice that is “best” when judged by the criterion of analytical rationality always conflicts with the decisionmaker’s political interests—indeed, it may enhance them—or that the analytically best policy choice on a particular issue will necessarily entail significant opportunity costs, but simply to recognize that such trade-off dilemmas often do arise.

Judgments of Utility and Acceptable Risk

Policy analysts provide policymakers with relevant information for attempting to calculate the utility of different options. This task is often severely complicated by the inherent uncertainties regarding so many of the factors on which decisions and choices must be based. Although policy analysts attempt to identify relevant uncertainties and possible costs and risks, policymakers often perceive other possible costs and risks and other benefits that analysts have not considered. In the final analysis, it is the policymakers who must judge what costs and risks they are willing to accept in return for payoffs to which they attach particular value. Similarly, it is the policymakers who have to decide whether to choose an option that offers the possibility of a bigger payoff but is more risky or an option that offers less of a payoff but is less risky.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.