Based on the framework of Paul A. Sabatier and Daniel A. Mazmanian, we analyse the causes of public policy implementation deviation in China. By theoretical analysis and system analysis, we begin with the manifestations of policy implementation deviation. They include: (1) perfunctory policy implementation, (2) attached policy implementation, (3) alternative policy implementation, (4) delaying policy implementation and (5) rough policy implementation. Then we discuss main causes of public policy implementation deviation. Two aspects of policy, both policy itself and variables except policy, could be responsible for the deviation of public policy. And there are many indicators below these two aspects. These indicators must be given top priority. We conclude the paper with some advice based on above causes of policy implementation deviation. The major advice include: (1) improve policy itself, such as formulate policy that have incorporation of adequate causal, make clear policy directives; allocate the financial and administrative rights of central government and local governments properly; (2) ameliorate variables except policy, such as control the development of interest groups; make disadvantaged groups express their demands more easily; optimize the supervision mechanism of the public policy implementation. Keywords-The causes of public policy implementation deviation; A framework of Paul A. Sabatier and Daniel A. Mazmanian
ABSTRACT. The governance of climate adaptation involves the collective efforts of multiple societal actors to address problems, or to reap the benefits, associated with impacts of climate change. Governing involves the creation of institutions, rules and organizations, and the selection of normative principles to guide problem solution and institution building. We argue that actors involved in governing climate change adaptation, as climate change governance regimes evolve, inevitably must engage in making choices, for instance on problem definitions, jurisdictional levels, on modes of governance and policy instruments, and on the timing of interventions. Yet little is known about how and why these choices are made in practice, and how such choices affect the outcomes of our efforts to govern adaptation. In this introduction we review the current state of evidence and the specific contribution of the articles published in this Special Feature, which are aimed at bringing greater clarity in these matters, and thereby informing both governance theory and practice. Collectively, the contributing papers suggest that the way issues are defined has important consequences for the support for governance interventions, and their effectiveness. The articles suggest that currently the emphasis in adaptation governance is on the local and regional levels, while underscoring the benefits of interventions and governance at higher jurisdictional levels in terms of visioning and scaling-up effective approaches. The articles suggest that there is a central role of government agencies in leading governance interventions to address spillover effects, to provide public goods, and to promote the long-term perspectives for planning. They highlight the issue of justice in the governance of adaptation showing how governance measures have wide distributional consequences, including the potential to amplify existing inequalities, access to resources, or generating new injustices through distribution of risks. For several of these findings, future research directions are suggested.
Social movements frequently fail to achieve the policy changes they seek, despite impressive demonstrations of widespread support. Yet movement participation has become increasingly popular as a form of political action. The authors seek to resolve this dilemma by distinguishing between three arenas of movement success: changing policy, gaining participation in the policy process, and changing social values. It is suggested that gaining access to the policy process is the most effective path for movement organizations to have an impact on policy outcomes, because authorities are often more willing to offer inclusion in the process than they are to accept movement demands for policy change. The authors' hypotheses are examined in light of the experience of the nuclear freeze movement, which sought and failed to achieve policy change, and the movement to control hazardous wastes, in which environmentalists are having an impact on policy by gaining participation in regulatory and implementation decisions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.