Developing a Systematic Decision-Making Framework: Bureaucratic Politics in Perspective

Abstract

The bureaucratic politics model has achieved great popularity in the study of decision making. Yet too often the term “bureaucratic politics” is used by scholars and practitioners without clearly stating its policy application. The decision-making behavior that occurred during the Johnson and Nixon administrations for SALT I serves to illustrate many of the limits of the model. First, the decision-making structure posited by the bureaucratic politics model is not nearly as prevalent within the executive branch as is commonly assumed. Second, even where the bureaucratic politics structure is present, the decision-making process is not always one of bargaining, compromise, and consensus. Finally, the decision context and the decision participants are ignored in the model. To provide a clearer understanding of policy-making behavior, a more systematic decision-making framework is offered, which should contribute to the development of better model- and theory-building.

When and How do Bureaucratic Conflicts Matter in Trade Policy? Evidence from the US Trade Policymaking Process during the Clinton Administration (1993–2001)

“…This hypothesis is also called into question by critics such as Art (1973) and Rosati (1981), to whom the BPM does not make any distinction regarding the moments in which the process of bargaining within the Executive indeed makes a difference in the formulation of foreign policies. Bureaucratic divisions often do not generate a resultant.…”

“…Some works, such as those by Jerel Rosati (1981) and Bendor and Moe (1985), are exceptions and must be given credit. Moreover, the criticisms themselves are imperfect.…”

“…Jerel Rosati (1981), for instance, refers to the relevance of the president and the prospect that his participation in moments of crisis might result in bureaucratic conflicts being suppressed in favour of the presidential approach towards foreign policy. Other works, in turn, analyse bureaucratic politics in the context of relations among interest groups, the Legislative, and the Executive (Bendor and Moe 1985).…”

A construção institucional da política comercial brasileira: a Câmara de Comércio Exterior (CAMEX) no governo Cardoso

“…Os críticos sugerem que o modelo não leva em conta o poder estrutural decorrente do poder de nomeação do chefe de governo (KRASNER, 1972;FREEDMAN, 1976). Rosati (1981) observou padrões distintos que não são captados pelas abordagens burocráticas e do poder estrutural. Ambas não avaliam o nível de envolvimento do chefe de governo, que é variável chave para a diferenciação da análise, pois este possui recursos para moldar o processo decisório de acordo com suas preferências.…”

EU development cooperation: From model to symbol

“…Roy Ginsberg argued that decisions are brought about by different elites, both national ones and those based in Brussels, who are engaged in 'bureaucratic politics' (Ginsberg, 1989). Characteristics of bureaucratic politics are that 'the decision is formulated through bargaining and compromise', and that 'numerous individuals and organizations, with varying interests, are involved for any single issue, without the predominance of any participant' (Rosati, 1981: 238; see also Ginsberg, 1989;Peters, 1992 andPeters, 1997). Apart from the bargaining among a large number of actors, there are at least two other relevant and characteristic features of European decision making.…”