SJ - Evaluation

SJ - Evaluation - Mark Sproule-Jones Government at Work:...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Mark Sproule-Jones Government at Work: Canadian parliamentary Federalism and its Public Policy Effects. P.261-274 Evaluation Paradigm Lost There are limits of orthodox ways to assess public policies Orthodoxy or established paradigm viewed policy outcomes as the consequence, in part, of rules, and that policy outcomes could be improved by appropriate rule changes. Criteria for assessing improvements most developed in an economic sense of utilitarian or paretian criteria for evaluation. Limits revealed through discussion of raison detre Rules were not simply manipulated at will to get preferred policy outcomes Rules had multiple meanings for individuals, and some went beyond the more instrumental and tapped into some basic presuppositions about the social world. Individuals enjoy some personal autonomy of rules Rules could never be accurately manipulated by individuals with the certainty that desired policy outcomes would ensure Rules only incentive rather than commands for individuals to obey. In a historical sense, rules represent the preferred state of community affairs for successive generations. Rules always lag behind individual/collective requirements, as persons develop and evolve new meanings about surrounding world. Rules rarely stood alone and had predictive policy consequences. Rules multiple and configurative in shape. Configurative nature built in federal system of govt. where both levels have [de facto] access to the same policy fields. Rules-in use can be replaced by other rules with comparable outcomes Or consequences of single rule can be offset by combined operation of other rules in configuration. Rules may negate each other, or compensate/undermine On strictly empirical grounds, rule configurations and their policy consequences are highly complex, and it may be beyond limits of our current understanding to disentangle the effects of any one rule within a rule configuration in the interests of assessment and evaluation.of assessment and evaluation....
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 02/11/2012 for the course POLI 211 taught by Professor Sabetti during the Fall '08 term at McGill.

Page1 / 6

SJ - Evaluation - Mark Sproule-Jones Government at Work:...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online