Policy success, policy failure and grey areas in-between: a framework to help capture complex policy outcomes

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

139 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Policy protagonists are keen to claim that policy is successful while
opponents are more likely to frame policies as failures. The reality is that
policy outcomes are often somewhere in between these extremes. An
added difficulty is that policy has multiple dimensions, often succeeding
in some respects but not in others, according to facts and their
interpretation. This paper sets out a framework designed to capture the
bundles of outcomes that indicate how successful or unsuccessful a policy
has been. It reviews existing literature on policy evaluation and
improvement, public value, good practice, political strategy and policy
failure and success in order to identify what can be built on and gaps that
need to be filled. It conceives policy as having three realms: processes,
programs and politics. Policies may succeed and/or fail in each of these
and along a spectrum of success, resilient success, conflicted success,
precarious success and failure. It concludes by examining contradictions
between different forms of success, including what is known colloquially
as good politics but bad policy.
LanguageEnglish
Pages345-362
Number of pages18
JournalPolicy Sciences
Volume30
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2010

Fingerprint

politics
political strategy
best practice
policy
evaluation
Values
literature
programme
public

Keywords

  • policy framework
  • public policy
  • politics

Cite this

@article{69d18ea6b91f4382997d454850895a54,
title = "Policy success, policy failure and grey areas in-between: a framework to help capture complex policy outcomes",
abstract = "Policy protagonists are keen to claim that policy is successful whileopponents are more likely to frame policies as failures. The reality is thatpolicy outcomes are often somewhere in between these extremes. Anadded difficulty is that policy has multiple dimensions, often succeedingin some respects but not in others, according to facts and theirinterpretation. This paper sets out a framework designed to capture thebundles of outcomes that indicate how successful or unsuccessful a policyhas been. It reviews existing literature on policy evaluation andimprovement, public value, good practice, political strategy and policyfailure and success in order to identify what can be built on and gaps thatneed to be filled. It conceives policy as having three realms: processes,programs and politics. Policies may succeed and/or fail in each of theseand along a spectrum of success, resilient success, conflicted success,precarious success and failure. It concludes by examining contradictionsbetween different forms of success, including what is known colloquiallyas good politics but bad policy.",
keywords = "policy framework, public policy, politics",
author = "Allan McConnell",
year = "2010",
doi = "10.1017/S0143814X10000152",
language = "English",
volume = "30",
pages = "345--362",
journal = "Policy Sciences",
issn = "0032-2687",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Policy success, policy failure and grey areas in-between: a framework to help capture complex policy outcomes

AU - McConnell, Allan

PY - 2010

Y1 - 2010

N2 - Policy protagonists are keen to claim that policy is successful whileopponents are more likely to frame policies as failures. The reality is thatpolicy outcomes are often somewhere in between these extremes. Anadded difficulty is that policy has multiple dimensions, often succeedingin some respects but not in others, according to facts and theirinterpretation. This paper sets out a framework designed to capture thebundles of outcomes that indicate how successful or unsuccessful a policyhas been. It reviews existing literature on policy evaluation andimprovement, public value, good practice, political strategy and policyfailure and success in order to identify what can be built on and gaps thatneed to be filled. It conceives policy as having three realms: processes,programs and politics. Policies may succeed and/or fail in each of theseand along a spectrum of success, resilient success, conflicted success,precarious success and failure. It concludes by examining contradictionsbetween different forms of success, including what is known colloquiallyas good politics but bad policy.

AB - Policy protagonists are keen to claim that policy is successful whileopponents are more likely to frame policies as failures. The reality is thatpolicy outcomes are often somewhere in between these extremes. Anadded difficulty is that policy has multiple dimensions, often succeedingin some respects but not in others, according to facts and theirinterpretation. This paper sets out a framework designed to capture thebundles of outcomes that indicate how successful or unsuccessful a policyhas been. It reviews existing literature on policy evaluation andimprovement, public value, good practice, political strategy and policyfailure and success in order to identify what can be built on and gaps thatneed to be filled. It conceives policy as having three realms: processes,programs and politics. Policies may succeed and/or fail in each of theseand along a spectrum of success, resilient success, conflicted success,precarious success and failure. It concludes by examining contradictionsbetween different forms of success, including what is known colloquiallyas good politics but bad policy.

KW - policy framework

KW - public policy

KW - politics

U2 - 10.1017/S0143814X10000152

DO - 10.1017/S0143814X10000152

M3 - Article

VL - 30

SP - 345

EP - 362

JO - Policy Sciences

T2 - Policy Sciences

JF - Policy Sciences

SN - 0032-2687

ER -