The Dynamics of Incrementalism: Subsystems, Politics, and Public Lands

Abstract

A host of research has been produced in the decade since Baumgartner and Jones' theory of punctuated equilibrium first drew attention to the dynamics of policy change over time. Much of this research follows a topic across time, highlighting the shift from negative to positive feedback as challengers push an issue from subsystem to institutional level. Far less attention has been paid to the periods between major punctuations, neglecting key questions about whether incremental periods reflect an absence of challengers or the successful defense of established subsystem interests.This research is a comparison of policy change across two segments of environmental policy. The breakup of the timber subsystem was a clear victory for environmentalists, yet these same actors have been largely unsuccessful at dislodging established grazing interests. These findings highlight the strategic value of venue shifting for bypassing entrenched interests and illustrate the potential for successful challenges to occur in judicial venues.

The Tortoise or the Hare? Incrementalism, Punctuations, and Their Consequences

“…Still, a casual perusal of public policy and public administration journals finds most articles employing or advocating an incremental model of budgeting, or decision making, for that matter, to end around 1990. The exceptions to this rule are generally more nuanced (and correct) examinations that attempt to understand why incrementalism exists (Jones, True, & Baumgarter, 1997; Wood, 2006) or has persisted in certain policy areas rather than wholesale endorsements of incrementalism as we are introduced to in graduate seminars.…”

Climate Change and Western Public Lands: a Survey of U.S. Federal Land Managers on the Status of Adaptation Efforts

“…In particular, the emergence in the 1990s of environmental priorities such as preserving endangered species and managing for whole ecosystems and, even more recently, new paradigms for fire management have posed challenges to existing policy settings in public lands. Although new environmental coalitions and landmark court rulings have been important (Wood 2006), findings have also highlighted the importance of durable policy objectives such as the requirements of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in helping to promote changes in policy settings, or rules for decision making, in federal agencies at the local level (Cashore and Howlett 2007). Research in the fire management arena also points to the role of the media, windows of opportunity, public and manager perceptions, institutional factors, and learning networks in changing policy settings in public lands agencies (Wise and Frietag 2002, Davis 2006, Calkin et al 2011, Reiners 2012, Steelman and McCaffrey 2011.…”

Pet Sounds: Subsystems, Regimes, Policy Punctuations, and the Neglect of African American Farmers, 1935–2006

“…PET has been used in a variety of policy realms to examine the interplay of positive and negative feedback in the maintenance of institutionally induced policy equilibria (Baumgartner & Jones, 1991, 1993, 2002; Cashore & Howlett, 2007; Givel, 2006, 2008; May, Sapotichne, & Workman, 2010; Repetto, 2006; True, Jones, & Baumgartner, 1999; Wood, 2006; Worsham, 2006). The argument, in short, is that policy equilibria, which foster an incremental inertia that gives the appearance of stability over lengthy periods of time, are subject to radical change at opportune moments.…”