A CRITIQUE OF INSTITUTIONAL MODEL AND TOP-DOWN APPROACH OF PUBLIC POLICY
Keywords:
Institutional Model, Top-Down Approach, Critique, Public PolicyAbstract
Institutional model and top-down approach of public policy are interesting among technocrats as from the past up to present until they are widely researched and studied. Most of the books or textbooks in Thailand are likely to use such model and approach in explaining the public policy to cause understanding to the policy by lacking in-depth awareness of the model and approach in using the public policy. This article aims to criticize the institutional model and top-down approach for the purpose of in-depth understanding, including awareness of the institutional model and top-down approach for explaining the public policy in a variety of dimensions.
According to the Study, the institutional model and top-down approach should take into account certain considerations in explaining the public policy; for instance, the institutional model cannot be explained about definition and institutionalization in an express manner until it is viewed that it is the ideal model and explains every issue of public policy without limitation. Also, the top-down approach is viewed that it is the model lacking public policy guarantee from concentrating on public policy driven by the executive and legislative branches via election. Therefore, understanding the institutional model and the top-down approach is beneficial to be applied in the future.
References
Cochran, C. L. and Malone, E. F. (1999). Public policy: Perspectives and Choices. Boston: McGrawHill.
Dryzek, J. S. (2006). Policy Analysis as Critique. In Moran, M., Rein, M., and Goodin, R., eds., The Oxford Handbooks of Political Science. Oxford: University Press, 190-206.
Dye, T. R. (2013). Understanding Public Policy. 14th ed. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.
Fung, A. (2006). Democratizing the Policy Process. In Moran, M., Rein, M., and Goodin, R., Eds. The Oxford Handbooks of Political Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 669-688.
Hill, M. (2005). The Public Policy Process. 4th ed. Harlow: Pearson.
Immergut, E. M. (1992). The Rules of the Game: The Logic of Health Policy-Making in France, Switzerland and Sweden. In Steinmo, S., Thelen, K., and Longstreth, F., eds. Structuring Politics: Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 57-89.
Immergut, E. M. (2006). “Policy Analysis as Critique.” In Moran, M., Rein, M., and Goodin, R., eds., The Oxford Handbooks of Political Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 557-571.
John, P. (1998). Analysing Public Policy. London: Pinter.
Kickert, W. J. M., Klijn, E. H., and Koppenjan, J. F. M., eds. (1997). Managing Complex Networks: Strategies for the Public Sector. London: Sage.
March, J. G. and Olsen, J. P. (1984). The New Institutionalism: Organisational Factors in Political Life. American Political Science Review, 78, 734–749.
Mazmanian, D. A., and Sabatier, P. A. (1989). Implementation and Public Policy. Lanham: University Press of America.
Nordlinger, E. A. (1981). On the Autonomy of the Democratic State. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Orr, D., Neumann., J., and Muuss-Merholz, J. (2017). German OER Practices and Policy from Bottom-up to Top-down Initiatives. Moscow: UNESCO Institute for Information Technologies in Education.
Pülzl, H., and Oliver, T. Implementing Public Policy. In Fischer, F., Miller, G. J., and Sidney, M. S., eds. (2007). Handbook of Public Policy Analysis Theory, Politics, and Methods. Florida: CRC Press, 89-108.
Skocpol, T. (1994). Social Policy in the United States. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Stachowiak, S., Robles, L., Habtemariam, E., and Maltry., M. (2016). Beyond the Win: Pathways for Policy Implementation. Seattle: ORS impact.
Surel, Y. (2000). The Role of Cognitive and Normative Frames in Policy-Making. Journal of European Public Policy, 7(4), 495–512.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
The content and information in this journal shall be considered as the individual opinions of the authors. In all cases, the editorial board may not necessarily agree with these opinions or be responsible for them.
The articles and information that are published in the journal are considered to be the copyright of the journal. Any party who wishes to re-publish the journal’s articles must seek permission from the journal’s editor. Articles that receive the agreement for publications must not appear in any other publications prior to their appearance in this journal. The editorial board will send one copy of the journal to each author whose submission was accepted and published.
