The Experts below are selected from a list of 3669 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Frank R Baumgartner - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Punctuated Equilibrium theory explaining stability and change in public policymaking
2018Co-Authors: James L True, Bryan D Jones, Frank R BaumgartnerAbstract:Punctuated-Equilibrium theory seeks to explain a simple observation: political processes are generally characterized by stability and incrementalism, but occasionally they produce large-scale departures. Punctuated-Equilibrium theory extends these observations by placing the policy process on a dual foundation of political institutions and boundedly rational decisionmaking. It emphasizes two related elements of the policy process: issue definition and agenda setting. The chapter examines Punctuated-Equilibrium theory and its foundations in the longitudinal study of political institutions and in political decisionmaking. It provides the Punctuated-Equilibrium theory to national budgeting and provide some recent evidence of punctuations and equilibria in US national government spending since World War II. The chapter shows how the theory has been generalized, including extensions to policymaking in US state and local governments as well as European national governments. It concludes with an assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this approach to understanding public policymaking.
-
Punctuated Equilibrium in public budgeting in authoritarian and democratic brazil
2015Co-Authors: Beatriz Rey, Derek A Epp, Frank R BaumgartnerAbstract:We explore Punctuated Equilibrium in public budgets with a focus on Brazil before and after its transition to democracy. Empirical evidence in this area has largely been limited to western democracies, but the differences between authoritarian and democratic regime types suggest important research questions. Our data on Brazil suggest a modest shift from higher to lower kurtosis in budget distributions with the transition to democracy. We interpret that to be related to the greater information-processing capabilities of a democratic regime as well as its greater range of diverse priorities. However, we suggest as well that future research needs to gather much more data on a wider range of countries. We show how this might begin with a review of data available for 26 OECD countries, suggesting great variability among them in budgetary kurtosis, but call for more data collection in non-democratic regimes as the most fruitful research plan going forward.
-
from there to here Punctuated Equilibrium to the general punctuation thesis to a theory of government information processing
Policy Studies Journal, 2012Co-Authors: Bryan D Jones, Frank R BaumgartnerAbstract:In this introduction to the Policy Study Journal’s special issue on Punctuated Equilibrium, we provide an overview of the approach, how it evolved, some of the major critiques directed at it, and some of the major developments it has spawned. We argue that the most important aspect of a theory or framework is not whether it is right or wrong, but the extent to which it is fruitful; that is, the extent to which it stimulated further research. Finally, we review the articles in this issue and put them in context. We are very pleased that the editors of the Policy Studies Journal chose to highlight Punctuated Equilibrium Theory (PET) in this special issue. We hope that the quality and the intellectual and empirical breadth of these articles validate their decision. In this introductory essay, we provide an overview of PET, how it evolved, some of the criticisms of the approach (which themselves stimulated more work), and some of the major developments it has spawned. Perhaps the most important aspect of a theory or framework (see Ostrom, PSJ special issue on Institutional Analysis and Development [IAD] for a discussion of the distinctions) is not whether it is right or wrong, or even whether it organizes research around a theme. We think it centers on the extent to which the idea is fruitful, by which we mean the extent to which it stimulates further research that itself raised more new questions. Nothing is settled in scientific inquiry, nor should it be. Indeed, the success of the concept may lie in its future obsolescence because new ways of thinking should be able to incorporate PET more or less seamlessly. Punctuated Equilibrium Theory (PET) was born of our unhappiness with policy process models that emphasized stability, rules, incremental adjustment, and “gridlock” whereas we saw policy change as oftentimes disjoint, episodic, and not always predictable. In the first generation policy process models, developed mostly in the 1950s and 1960s, decision making was thought of as incremental, subsystems seemed eternal, and the political order was stable. Minor adjustments from the status quo were achieved via heuristic rules worked out among the participants (Wildavsky version: Wildavsky, 1964) or via “mutual partisan adjustment” (Lindblom version:
-
public budgeting in the eu commission a test of the Punctuated Equilibrium thesis
Politique européenne, 2012Co-Authors: Frank R Baumgartner, Martial Foucault, Abel FrancoisAbstract:We test a Punctuated Equilibrium model of budgeting in the context of the European Union. Compared either to the US or to the national systems of its member states, we know little about the impact of the institutional design of the EU on its internal budgeting processes. For one, we do not know whether the heterogeneous preferences of each member-state are likely to create friction or venue-shopping towards the EU Commission. This paper first describes European budgeting processes since the inception of the EU, taking into consideration the enlargement process. In a second section, we present European budgeting data to test models of friction, incrementalism, and Punctuated Equilibrium, drawing from a developing literature with US and European applications. The findings make clear that EU budgeting processes correspond to a Punctuated Equilibrium model of budgetary choice, as previous studies have recently shown for the US and many European member states. Article prepared for submission to the European Journal of Political Research August 23, 2007 1 Baumgartner would like to acknowledge his collaborator Bryan D. Jones, the support of National Science Foundation grant number SBR 9320922, and the Camargo Foundation. All three authors would thank the Direction Generale du Budget de la Commission Europeenne for its answers to various requests.
-
Punctuated Equilibrium in comparative perspective
American Journal of Political Science, 2009Co-Authors: Frank R Baumgartner, Bryan D Jones, Christian Breunig, Christoffer Greenpedersen, Peter B Mortensen, Michiel Nuytemans, Stefaan WalgraveAbstract:We explore the impact of institutional design on the distribution of changes in outputs of governmental processes in the United States, Belgium, and Denmark. Using comprehensive indicators of governmental actions over several decades, we show that in each country the level of institutional friction increases as we look at processes further along the policy cycle. Assessingmultiplepolicymakinginstitutionsineachcountryallowsustocontrolforthenatureofthepolicyinputs,asallthe institutions we consider cover the full range of social and political issues in the country. We find that all distributions exhibit high kurtosis values, significantly higher than the Normal distribution which would be expected if changes in government attention and activities were proportionate to changes in social inputs. Further, in each country, those institutions that impose higher decision-making costs show progressively higher kurtosis values. The results suggest general patterns that we hypothesize to be related to boundedly rational behavior in a complex social environment.
Adam Wellstead - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
have policy process scholars embraced causal mechanisms a review of five popular frameworks
Social Science Research Network, 2020Co-Authors: Jeroen Van Der Heijden, Evert A Lindquist, Johanna Kuhlmann, Adam WellsteadAbstract:Over 30 years, several key frameworks and theories of the policy process have emerged which have guided a burgeoning empirical literature. A more recent development has been a growing interest in the application of a ‘causal mechanism’ perspective to policy studies. This paper reviews selected theories of the policy process (Multiple Streams Approach, Advocacy Coalition Framework, Punctuated Equilibrium Theory, Narrative Framework Theory, and Institutional Analysis and Development Framework) and reports on an exploratory meta-analysis and synthesis to gauge the take-up of causal-mechanistic approaches. The findings suggest that there has been limited application of causal mechanisms, and calls for more theoretical and empirical work on that aspect. Given the overlapping frameworks exploring different aspects of the policy process, further research informed by causal-mechanism approaches points to a new generation of inquiry across these and other policy process theoretical frameworks.
-
causal mechanisms in policy process research are we taking them seriously should we
Social Science Research Network, 2019Co-Authors: Evert A Lindquist, Adam WellsteadAbstract:For nearly 20 years, the four edited volumes of Theories of the Policy Process (TPP) have reviewed and chronicled the key frameworks and theories of the policy process. With the growing sophistication and the ever increasing number of empirical applications of each approach, the volume’s editors have called for policy process scholars to take causality seriously. We argue that the growing interest in causal mechanisms in other areas of political sciences and in social sciences generally may contribute to the next generation of policy process research. A textual analysis of TPP’s 4th edition reveals a ‘lumpiness’ in the use of causality and mechanisms across seven popular approaches: the Multiple Streams Approach, the Advocacy Coalition Framework, Punctuated Equilibrium Theory, Institutional Analysis and Design, Policy Diffusion, Policy Feedback Theory, and Narrative Framework Theory.
Bryan D Jones - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Punctuated Equilibrium theory explaining stability and change in public policymaking
2018Co-Authors: James L True, Bryan D Jones, Frank R BaumgartnerAbstract:Punctuated-Equilibrium theory seeks to explain a simple observation: political processes are generally characterized by stability and incrementalism, but occasionally they produce large-scale departures. Punctuated-Equilibrium theory extends these observations by placing the policy process on a dual foundation of political institutions and boundedly rational decisionmaking. It emphasizes two related elements of the policy process: issue definition and agenda setting. The chapter examines Punctuated-Equilibrium theory and its foundations in the longitudinal study of political institutions and in political decisionmaking. It provides the Punctuated-Equilibrium theory to national budgeting and provide some recent evidence of punctuations and equilibria in US national government spending since World War II. The chapter shows how the theory has been generalized, including extensions to policymaking in US state and local governments as well as European national governments. It concludes with an assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this approach to understanding public policymaking.
-
from there to here Punctuated Equilibrium to the general punctuation thesis to a theory of government information processing
Policy Studies Journal, 2012Co-Authors: Bryan D Jones, Frank R BaumgartnerAbstract:In this introduction to the Policy Study Journal’s special issue on Punctuated Equilibrium, we provide an overview of the approach, how it evolved, some of the major critiques directed at it, and some of the major developments it has spawned. We argue that the most important aspect of a theory or framework is not whether it is right or wrong, but the extent to which it is fruitful; that is, the extent to which it stimulated further research. Finally, we review the articles in this issue and put them in context. We are very pleased that the editors of the Policy Studies Journal chose to highlight Punctuated Equilibrium Theory (PET) in this special issue. We hope that the quality and the intellectual and empirical breadth of these articles validate their decision. In this introductory essay, we provide an overview of PET, how it evolved, some of the criticisms of the approach (which themselves stimulated more work), and some of the major developments it has spawned. Perhaps the most important aspect of a theory or framework (see Ostrom, PSJ special issue on Institutional Analysis and Development [IAD] for a discussion of the distinctions) is not whether it is right or wrong, or even whether it organizes research around a theme. We think it centers on the extent to which the idea is fruitful, by which we mean the extent to which it stimulates further research that itself raised more new questions. Nothing is settled in scientific inquiry, nor should it be. Indeed, the success of the concept may lie in its future obsolescence because new ways of thinking should be able to incorporate PET more or less seamlessly. Punctuated Equilibrium Theory (PET) was born of our unhappiness with policy process models that emphasized stability, rules, incremental adjustment, and “gridlock” whereas we saw policy change as oftentimes disjoint, episodic, and not always predictable. In the first generation policy process models, developed mostly in the 1950s and 1960s, decision making was thought of as incremental, subsystems seemed eternal, and the political order was stable. Minor adjustments from the status quo were achieved via heuristic rules worked out among the participants (Wildavsky version: Wildavsky, 1964) or via “mutual partisan adjustment” (Lindblom version:
-
Punctuated Equilibrium in comparative perspective
American Journal of Political Science, 2009Co-Authors: Frank R Baumgartner, Bryan D Jones, Christian Breunig, Christoffer Greenpedersen, Peter B Mortensen, Michiel Nuytemans, Stefaan WalgraveAbstract:We explore the impact of institutional design on the distribution of changes in outputs of governmental processes in the United States, Belgium, and Denmark. Using comprehensive indicators of governmental actions over several decades, we show that in each country the level of institutional friction increases as we look at processes further along the policy cycle. Assessingmultiplepolicymakinginstitutionsineachcountryallowsustocontrolforthenatureofthepolicyinputs,asallthe institutions we consider cover the full range of social and political issues in the country. We find that all distributions exhibit high kurtosis values, significantly higher than the Normal distribution which would be expected if changes in government attention and activities were proportionate to changes in social inputs. Further, in each country, those institutions that impose higher decision-making costs show progressively higher kurtosis values. The results suggest general patterns that we hypothesize to be related to boundedly rational behavior in a complex social environment.
-
information processing and policy dynamics
Policy Studies Journal, 2009Co-Authors: Samuel Workman, Bryan D Jones, Ashley JochimAbstract:In this article, we trace the evolution of Punctuated Equilibrium theories of the policy process to the development of a full theory of government information processing. Noting that Punctuated Equilibrium is one realization of a larger theory of government information processing, we outline a research agenda for the study of agenda setting, policy dynamics, and information flows in the policy process. In doing so, we relate the study of government information processing to such important features of American government as inter-institutional dynamics and delegation in the policy process.
-
a model of choice for public policy
Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 2004Co-Authors: Bryan D Jones, Frank R BaumgartnerAbstract:Punctuated Equilibrium is supposed to be a viable alternative to incrementalism, and, indeed, the authors of the model have sometimes made such claims. But Punctuated Equilibrium was developed to explain change in policy subsystems and does not serve as a complete model of policy choice in the same way that incrementalism has served. This article develops a full-blown and viable model of choice for public policy based on disproportionate information processing. Its dynamics are based in the allocation of political attention to policy topics and the manner in which political systems process information. The model leads directly to outcomes that are consistent with Punctuated Equilibrium and are not generally consistent with incrementalism. Incrementalism, however, may be deduced from the model as a special case. The model is best tested using stochastic process approaches. Incrementalism logically must yield a normal distribution of outcomes, but disproportionate information processing yields leptokurtic outcomes. Adding institutional constraints only makes the stochastic process implications more severe. To support our arguments, we present both static and dynamic simulations of these processes. We also show that these simulations are consistent with observations of U.S. government budgets. Incrementalism implies that policy choice at a particular time is a marginal adjustment from a previous policy choice. The model has been thoroughly discredited by theoretical, methodological, and empirical critiques, but it survives because no convincing alternative has been offered. It is the purpose of this article to offer such an alternative, one that shows how incrementalism is a special case of a generalized updating model we term disproportionate information processing. It is also the foundation for Punctuated Equilibrium, so it unifies incrementalism and Punctuated Equilibrium within a single decision-making model. Incrementalism failed because it had no underlying theory of information processing; once one is specified, the rest is easy. Models of policy choice are best tested using stochastic process methods that focus on full distributions of choices rather than single choices. We examine the stochastic process implications of disproportionate information processing and compare these implications to This article expands on material in Jones and Baumgartner (2005). We gratefully acknowledge Jim Stimson for his insight and programming skills that allowed us to produce the dynamic simulations presented here. Address correspondence to Bryan D. Jones at bdjones@u.washington.edu. doi:10.1093/jopart/mui018 Advance Access publication on December 16, 2004 Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol. 15, no. 3 a 2005 Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Inc.; all rights reserved. JPART 15:325–351
Susan Moloney - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
australian quarantine policy from centralization to coordination with mid pandemic covid 19 shifts
Public Administration Review, 2020Co-Authors: Kim Moloney, Susan MoloneyAbstract:By combining a historical institutionalism approach with institutional isomorphism and Punctuated Equilibrium, this paper analyses quarantine policy change across 120 years of Australian quarantine history. By anchoring our analysis within specific time periods (years before the Spanish flu, seven decades of inaction, and multiple post-1997 pandemic updates and responses), we highlight when and why policies did or did not change and how constant push-and-pulls between State and Commonwealth institutional ownership altered policy possibilities. The heart of our analysis showcases how Australia's successful COVID-19 response is a unique output of prior quarantine policies, institutional evolution, and mid-pandemic alterations of key national pandemic response plans. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Bernardo A Huberman - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
a Punctuated Equilibrium model of technology diffusion
Management Science, 1999Co-Authors: Christoph H Loch, Bernardo A HubermanAbstract:We present an evolutionary model of technology diffusion in which an old and a new technology are available, both of which improve their performance incrementally over time. Technology adopters make repeated choices between the established and the new technology based on their perceived performance, which is subject to uncertainty. Both technologies exhibit positive externalities, or performance benefits from others using the same technology. We find that the superior technology will not necessarily be broadly adopted by the population. Externalities cause two stable usage equilibria to exist, one with the old technology being the standard and the other with the new technology the standard. Punctuations, or sudden shifts, in these equilibria determine the patterns of technology diffusion. The time for an Equilibrium punctuation depends on the rate of incremental improvement of both technologies, and on the system's resistance to switching between equilibria. If the new technology has a higher rate of incremental improvement, it is adopted faster, and adoption may precede performance parity if the system's resistance to switching is low. Adoption of the new technology may trail performance parity if the system's resistance to switching is high.
-
a Punctuated Equilibrium model of technology diffusion
Social Science Research Network, 1997Co-Authors: Christoph H Loch, Bernardo A HubermanAbstract:We present an evolutionary model of technology diffusion in which an old and a new technology are available, both of which improve their performance incrementally over time. Technology adopters make repeated choices between the established and the new technology based on their perceived performance, which is subject to uncertainty. Both technologies exhibit positive externalities or performance benefits from others using the same technology. We find that superior technology will not necessarily be broadly adopted by the population. Externalities cause two stable usage equilibria to exist, one with the old technology being the standard and the other the new technology the standard. Punctuations, or sudden shifts, in these equilibria determine the patterns of technology diffusion. The time for an Equilibrium punctuation depends on the rate of incremental improvement of both technologies and on the system's resistance to switching between equilibria. If the new technology has a higher rate of incremental improvement, it is adopted faster, and adoption precedes performance parity if the system's resistance to switching is low. Adoption of the new technology trails performance parity if the system's resistance to switching is high.
