How Should We Theorise Public Policy? Problem Solving and Problematicity

Abstract

The concept of policy problem informs the scholarly study of policymaking as well as policy practice. But the problem solving theory of policymaking has many conceptual shortcomings. The problem solving concept is flawed because it defines complex problems univocally, obscuring differences of opinion; focuses on problem solving at the expense of problem setting; and represents the policy process scientifically to disguise and/or suppress the contingent nature of political reasoning. The propositional basis of theories of the policy process excludes problematicity and produces a fragmented theory which misrepresents the political nature of policymaking. By building upon an epistemology of questioning we can address these shortcomings by revising and expanding the problem concept in policy theory. Such a conception implies that policy studies is not distinctive because it is applied and should therefore be integrated with political theory. The word "solution" doesn't exist in the dictionary of politics. What you do is get a settlement of an issue that lasts for some time. Then the battles reopen.

Introduction to the Handbook on Policy, Process and Governing

“…What you do is get a settlement of an issue that lasts for some time. Then the battles reopen' (Turnbull 2006). But at the same time, participants need to find ways of managing this tension.…”

Fisheries and coastal governance as a wicked problem

“…On political issues, stakeholders tend to have different views and priorities, which are not based on knowledge as much as values and interest. Here, not only the problem definitions and the solutions that one may support reflect a political stand, politics also determine which questions are asked [28].…”

“…Conflicts are not fully resolved, and settlements of an issue last until battles reopen. As Turnbull [28] stresses with regard to political arenas, solutions ''transforms things to a greater or lesser degree but they do not usually eliminate problems altogether'' (p. 5). This may easily create a legitimacy deficit, as stakeholders would not only question outcomes and/or procedures but may even try to combat them by ''voice'' or by ''exit'' [32], resulting negatively thus on governability.…”

Practicing public policy in an age of disruption

“…through technologyreflect legacy thinking ossified around principles of Enlightenment rationality and, thus, fail to realize their promised effectiveness. As such, there is theoretical space to integrate a new concept of policy problematizationwhat Turnbull (2006) calls an "epistemology of questioning"into theories of policy change that have already provided a rich theoretical lens for examining policymaking under the old epistemic. The practical implication of this argument is that seemingly transformative modifications in a given stage of the policy process [from problem definition to policy formulation, implementation, and evaluation; see Howlett and Geist (2013) for a summary] improve only the efficiency of old models.…”