Patching vs Packaging in Policy Formulation: Assessing Policy Portfolio Design

Thinking about policy mixes is at the forefront of current research work in the policy sciences and raises many significant questions with respect to policy tools and instruments, processes of policy formulation, and the evolution of tool choices over time. Not least among these is how to assess the...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Michael Howlett, Jeremy Rayner
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Cogitatio 2013-10-01
Series:Politics and Governance
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/95
id doaj-f006aa33346842748073efc14e05bf11
record_format Article
spelling doaj-f006aa33346842748073efc14e05bf112020-11-25T00:46:07ZengCogitatioPolitics and Governance2183-24632013-10-011217018210.17645/pag.v1i2.9531Patching vs Packaging in Policy Formulation: Assessing Policy Portfolio DesignMichael Howlett0Jeremy Rayner1Department of Political Science, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC V5A 1S6, Canada Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore, Singapore 259772, SingaporeJohnson-Shoyama Graduate School of Public Policy, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5B8, CanadaThinking about policy mixes is at the forefront of current research work in the policy sciences and raises many significant questions with respect to policy tools and instruments, processes of policy formulation, and the evolution of tool choices over time. Not least among these is how to assess the potential for multiple policy tools to achieve policy goals in an efficient and effective way. Previous conceptual work on policy mixes has highlighted evaluative criteria such as "consistency" (the ability of multiple policy tools to reinforce rather than undermine each other in the pursuit of individual policy goals), "coherence" (or the ability of multiple policy goals to co-exist with each other in a logical fashion), and "congruence" (or the ability of multiple goals and instruments to work together in a uni-directional or mutually supportive fashion) as important design principles and measures of optimality in policy mixes. And previous empirical work on the evolution of existing policy mixes has highlighted how these three criteria are often lacking in mixes which have evolved over time as well as those which have otherwise been consciously designed. This article revisits this early design work in order to more clearly assess the reasons why many existing policy mixes are sub-optimal and the consequences this has for thinking about policy formulation processes and the practices of policy design.https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/95planningpolicy designpolicy instrumentspolicy layeringpolicy mixespolicy portfolios
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Michael Howlett
Jeremy Rayner
spellingShingle Michael Howlett
Jeremy Rayner
Patching vs Packaging in Policy Formulation: Assessing Policy Portfolio Design
Politics and Governance
planning
policy design
policy instruments
policy layering
policy mixes
policy portfolios
author_facet Michael Howlett
Jeremy Rayner
author_sort Michael Howlett
title Patching vs Packaging in Policy Formulation: Assessing Policy Portfolio Design
title_short Patching vs Packaging in Policy Formulation: Assessing Policy Portfolio Design
title_full Patching vs Packaging in Policy Formulation: Assessing Policy Portfolio Design
title_fullStr Patching vs Packaging in Policy Formulation: Assessing Policy Portfolio Design
title_full_unstemmed Patching vs Packaging in Policy Formulation: Assessing Policy Portfolio Design
title_sort patching vs packaging in policy formulation: assessing policy portfolio design
publisher Cogitatio
series Politics and Governance
issn 2183-2463
publishDate 2013-10-01
description Thinking about policy mixes is at the forefront of current research work in the policy sciences and raises many significant questions with respect to policy tools and instruments, processes of policy formulation, and the evolution of tool choices over time. Not least among these is how to assess the potential for multiple policy tools to achieve policy goals in an efficient and effective way. Previous conceptual work on policy mixes has highlighted evaluative criteria such as "consistency" (the ability of multiple policy tools to reinforce rather than undermine each other in the pursuit of individual policy goals), "coherence" (or the ability of multiple policy goals to co-exist with each other in a logical fashion), and "congruence" (or the ability of multiple goals and instruments to work together in a uni-directional or mutually supportive fashion) as important design principles and measures of optimality in policy mixes. And previous empirical work on the evolution of existing policy mixes has highlighted how these three criteria are often lacking in mixes which have evolved over time as well as those which have otherwise been consciously designed. This article revisits this early design work in order to more clearly assess the reasons why many existing policy mixes are sub-optimal and the consequences this has for thinking about policy formulation processes and the practices of policy design.
topic planning
policy design
policy instruments
policy layering
policy mixes
policy portfolios
url https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/95
work_keys_str_mv AT michaelhowlett patchingvspackaginginpolicyformulationassessingpolicyportfoliodesign
AT jeremyrayner patchingvspackaginginpolicyformulationassessingpolicyportfoliodesign
_version_ 1725266886230278144