RESEARCH & EVALUATION

The Policy Cycle: Democratic Process or Rational

Paradigm Revisited?
Sophia Everett
Director
Intermodal Teaching Program
Victoria University

Discussion on policy-making and of effective policy-making mechanisms is once again

emerging in the policy literature. Much of the debate in the past focused on whether the
method applied in the physical sciences was appropriate for policy and policy-making.
Current debate appears to be reverting to some form of rationalism in so far as good
policy processes are seen to yield the most effective results. This article discusses what
appears to be a revival of rationalism — the process-oriented policy cycle. The article
argues that there is little doubt that effective policy-making requires good process but it
is erroneous to suggest that the content of policy, particularly in the case of contentious
decisions, is derived from the policy cycle itself. It is argued further that the policy cycle
is not a substitute for the actual making of decisions but an administrative and bureaucratic
mechanism for effectively setting in place a process once the difficult decisions have been
made.
Discussion on policy-making and of effective play’ adopts a modification of the concepts of
policy-making mechanisms is emerging once the policy cycle — a normative mechanism for
again in the policy literature. The questions of comprehensive and systematic policy-making
how policies are made, who makes them and where the focus is on process (Bridgman and
what influences are exerted on the policy-maker Davis 1998). Not unlike practitioners in the
periodically occur. For much of the 20th century physical and somewhat later the social sciences
researchers have debated the rationality, or who believed that scientific truth would result
otherwise, of the policy-making process and for from the application of the rigorous scientific
much of that time the rational/scientific model, method, the policy cycle proponents suggest
an essential feature of man’s view of the world that good policy is likely to result from the
and a reflection of the existing paradigm in the application of a rigorous process (Edwards
physical and biological sciences, dominated 2001; Bridgman and Davis 1998).
the debate. Researchers such as Simon (1955) This article discusses debate occurring in
and pluralists such as Lindblom (1959, 1979) recent times on what appears to be a revival of
and Dahl (1961) questioned the validity of this rationalism — the process-oriented policy cycle.
approach arguing that policy-making was too It does so within the background of the rational/
complex to be examined in this manner and scientific paradigm and the debate regarding
much of the ensuing debate in the literature attemp- the appropriateness of that model by researchers
ted to refute the rational/scientific paradigm. such as Simon (1955) and early pluralists such
Current debate, however, appears to be as Lindblom (1959, 1979) and Dahl (1961). The
reverting to some form of the rationalism and in article argues that there is little doubt that effec-
recent policy writings some principles of the tive policy-making requires good process but,
rational decision-making paradigm are evident. it is argued, it is erroneous and simplistic to
Edwards (1998:148) states, for example, that suggest that the content of policy, particularly
while ‘policy-making is not necessarily a purely in the case of contentious decisions, is derived
rational or logical pursuit’ and that ‘electoral, from the cycle itself as suggested by Bridgman
budget and other considerations often come into and Davis (1998:2) and Edwards (2001:4). Rath-
Australian Journal of Public Administration • 62(2):65–70, June 2003
© National Council of the Institute of Public Administration, Australia 2003. Published by Blackwell Publishing Limited
66 Everett

er this article argues that the policy cycle is not a that politicians and administrators have limited
substitute for the actual making of decisions but ability to compare options and may be unable
an administrative and bureaucratic mechan-ism to identify the ‘correct’ decision, developed a
for effectively setting in place a process once the ‘behaviour alternative model’ premised on the
difficult decisions have been made. notion of ‘bounded rationality’. Decision-
The article further presents a case study makers, rather than pursue all objectives and
which indicates that the outworkings of the investigate all options, would sacrifice complete
political contest, or the ‘play of power’, in fact objectivity in order to satisfy the need for a
determine the content of policy, whether a speedy and workable solution (Davis et al.
particular issue is on the agenda and whether 1993). Simon could not completely divorce
the policy will be implemented. himself from the scientific paradigm, however,
for recognising that ‘rational’ man was a myth
Return to Rationalism? he nevertheless measured man’s performance
according to rational criteria. Simon’s (1955)
Policy-making, like other social science dis- concept of ‘satisficing’, for example, indicated
ciplines, was explicable in terms of the rational/ the decision-maker’s deviation from the rational
scientific paradigm for the first half of the 20th ideal.
century. This prescriptive model was process Lindblom (1959) suggested further that
oriented comprising a number of logically policy-making, rather than being a scientific
ordered sequential steps which comprehensively process, was akin to the ‘science of “muddling
canvassed, assessed and compared all options. through”, arguing that policy-making was an
The rigorous application of this mechanism en- inherently political process. He suggested that
sured a ‘rational’ outcome by selecting the most policy content and the process of decision-
effective means of achieving an end, breaking making was the outcome of ‘a play of power’
down decision-making into phases, ensuring which proceeds by interaction and a series of
comparison of options and providing a single negotiating steps between groups using a
most appropriate answer (Davis et al. 1993). variety of resources and techniques in order to
The debate over the efficacy of this model, reach a solution.
Davis et al. (1993) indicate, stretches back to Policy decisions in a democratic system are
the 1930s when controversy began to surround carried out not by a single governing body or a
the scientific methodological application to the dominant economic elite but by a multiplicity
social sciences when two distinct schools of of participants. Political leaders in the making
thought emerged. Proponents believed that the of policy are influenced in their choice of action
scientific model could reduce idiosyncratic by pressure groups and other influential forces.
decisions and introduce order, a uniform Pluralist theory then rests on the notion of power
method, an element of predictability and an which is dispersed. The nature, source and exer-
analytical technique to the apparent chaotic cise of power have been widely discussed (eg
characteristics of decision-making. Sceptics, on Lukes 1978, 1986) but Self (1986) has argued
the other hand, suggested that the inputs to any that the ultimate source of power in a democracy
major government decision were so complex, lies with the electorate as political parties
and so contingent, that extensive analytical perform the function of aggregating group
techniques could at best only inform decision- interests and will bid competitively for the
making (1993:160). support of groups in their efforts to win elections.
The rational/scientific model, despite its In more recent times events leading to
rigidities and restrictions in explaining policy- changing philosophies and objectives have
making, was consistent with man’s existing emerged that have impacted on the public
world view as it was believed that ‘an empiric- sector. These trends have been driven by govern-
ism akin to that used in physics was the best ment — both the administrative and political
device for learning political truths’ (Goodin and arms — and have led to the transformation of
Klingemann 1996:559). the public sector from the traditional form of
The rigidity of the rational/scientific model public administration to managerial roles and
was modified by Simon (1955) who, arguing solutions being applied to public sector issues.

© National Council of the Institute of Public Administration, Australia 2003

The Policy Cycle: Democratic Process or Rational Paradigm Revisited? 67

The Policy Cycle: Rationalism The policy cycle is a mechanism to help

Revisited the public sector manager smooth a complex
policy process and to inject rigour into the
Not surprisingly then we are observing at pres- process. To that end Edwards (2001:4) adopts
ent policy mechanisms in which the adminis- the approach in order to gain the ‘benefit of
trator, or the public sector manager, assumes a breaking up the policy process into clear steps
more proactive role — a role which has the in order to manage the complexities of develop-
semblance of the rational decision-maker. ing policy in a systematic and rigorous manner’.
The proponents of the policy cycle model Edwards (2001:4) suggests that good
point out that ‘policy-making is not necessarily policy development processes will ensure that,
a purely rational or logical pursuit’ and that as far as possible, good outcomes emerge. She
‘electoral, budget and other considerations indicates that ‘a good policy process is a vital
often come into play’ (Edwards 2001). While underpinning of good policy development and,
there is recognition that political and other while good process does not necessarily
subjective elements occur within the process of guarantee good policy outcome, the risks of bad
the cycle, the focus is on the process per se and process leading to a bad outcome are very much
rationality is imbedded in that process — a pro- higher (quoting Michael Keating 1996:63).
cess which consists of a number of systematic While Edwards (2001:4) suggests that
and sequential steps that include issue identi- good processes are likely to yield good policy
fication, policy analysis, policy instruments, outcomes it is questionable whether the policy
consultation, coordination, decision, imple- cycle itself can provide an effective framework
mentation and evaluation (Bridgman and Davis for that. Is it not the case that the policy cycle
1998:24). The policy cycle, the authors suggest, proponents confuse ‘good’ policy outcomes
‘brings a system and a rhythm to a world that with effective processes? And is it not the case
might otherwise appear chaotic and unordered’ that good policy outcomes reflect the quality
although the authors indicate that it is a model or ‘goodness’ of the content of that policy and
— ‘an ideal worth striving for, if not always not merely the process of setting it in place?
attainable’ (1998:2). Arguably and with the benefit of hindsight
Edwards’ (2001:4) modification of Bridg- effective processes have set in place poor and
man and Davis’ framework also is a model for inappropriate policies. Conversely, a ‘good’
policy development but in this case it is not policy requires more than an effective process
simply an ideal ‘but a framework found most — good policy requires good content and good
useful in practice’ — a model in fact in which content does not necessarily result from an
the policy content is the outcome of a complex effective process.
process. Edwards (2001) identifies the follow- It is questionable whether the policy cycle
ing steps in the development of policy : model can resolve highly controversial and con-
• Identify issues tentious issues. It is questionable whether the
– Problem defined policy cycle can replace the ‘play of power’ —
– Problem articulated the political contest of determining ‘who gets
• Policy analysis what’. Furthermore it is highly questionable
– Collect relevant data and information whether the policy cycle can accommodate that
– Clarify objectives and resolve key
questions political contest — certainly community con-
– Develop options and proposals sultation will not suffice. Community consulta-
• Undertake consultation tion fails to address how controversy over
• Move towards decisions allocation of resources or location decisions are
• Implement reached. Indeed, community consultation may
• Evaluate provide little more than a wish list of those con-
This model consists of a series of sequential sulted and fail to arrive at solutions and concrete
steps which guides policy development — both policies.
content of policy and process. Indeed, this model While community consultation is an impor-
is not dissimilar to the rational decision-making tant part of the policy cycle model, and may
model questioned by Simon (1955) and Lind- smooth processes once the important decisions
blom (1959) and other pluralists some 50 years have been made, it does not explain adequately
earlier. how contentious decisions are made and it is
© National Council of the Institute of Public Administration, Australia 2003
68 Everett

simplistic to suggest that the content of difficult Formal requirements including an environ-
policies can be arrived at by adopting this mental impact statement and subsequent
approach. inquiry had been met and approval was formally
While there is little doubt that there are given by the incumbent state government.
benefits associated with community consulta- In June 1977, however, the Botany Bay
tion, neither the policy cycle approach nor com- location was formally abandoned and a decision
munity consultation, as outlined by Bridgman announced to build a coal loader at Port Kembla
and Davis (1998), can address effectively the despite the fact that the latter location had some
complexity of decision-making and how significant economic and environmental
particular issues emerge on the political agenda disadvantages as well as operating restrictions.
and the means of their ultimate solution. Indeed, These included:
as Davis et al. (1993) argued, ‘major public • the cost of the Port Kembla facility
policies are the outcome of a complex round of exceeded the proposed Port Botany loca-
negotiation between interests, choices between tion — $250m compared with approxi-
values and competition between resources … mately $85m in Port Botany (Everett 1988).
there are no single ‘best’ options for any player Not only was the Port Kembla option more
in this game, for the ‘best’ outcome depends on costly, unlike the Port Botany option it was
what others do and what deals are possible’. to be funded from the public purse;
Everett (1988), in her study on coal trans- • the Port Kembla location required signifi-
port infrastructure location, indicates that the cant capital expenditure for associated road
content of policy was a result of an intense politi- and rail upgrades as well as the Balmain
cal contest between uncompromising vested loader;
interests where the position of the antagonists • the Port Botany loader was designed to be
was adopted as part of an election platform in environmentally friendly in so far as it had
the impending state government election. It is covered stockpiles and rail only receival
unlikely that the most concerted effort at whereas Port Kembla had open stockpiles
community consultation and the most rigorous and road and rail receival facilities; and
application of the policy cycle model could • the Port Kembla location was subject to
have resolved the controversy surrounding the draught and tidal restrictions — Botany
following case study and indeed other issues Bay could accommodate vessels up to
which become politicised and are consequently 200 000 dwt 1 while Port Kembla was
resolved in the political arena. restricted to 120 000 dwt.
The ‘Play of Power’
Case Study: Coal Loading
Infrastructure Location — Port The decision to locate the loader at Port Kembla
Botany and Port Kembla was the outcome of an intense political contest
which was seen as ‘the biggest and most con-
In 1974 a consortium of coal companies certed resident protest Sydney had ever seen’
proposed the development of a coal loader as (Sanders 1984:143). The campaign was cohes-
part of the new Botany Bay port and industrial ive and well coordinated and received favour-
complex. The proposal was in response to rapid able media coverage. Opponents put forward
growth in NSW export coal following the oil environmental and ecological arguments; their
shock in the early 1970s. At the time NSW coal concern about a decline in property values;
was exported through the Port Kembla and traffic congestion, pollution, etc.
Balmain coal loaders and the Carrington Basin The most powerful and effective means of
loader in Newcastle. The capacity of these influencing policy-makers, however, was in
facilities was limited, however, and constituted their voting capacity when some 70 local
a constraint on industry growth (Everett 1988). organisations campaigned against the govern-
The Botany Bay development had wide- ment in a number of marginal seats. The incum-
spread industry support and that of the appro- bent Coalition government appeared unper-
priate government decision-making agencies turbed while the Labor Party (ALP) identified
including the Maritime Services Board of NSW with concerned residents and lobby groups and
and the State Pollution Control Commission. pledged that, if elected, it would impose a
© National Council of the Institute of Public Administration, Australia 2003
The Policy Cycle: Democratic Process or Rational Paradigm Revisited? 69

moratorium on further development of Botany process outlined in the policy cycle. The real
Bay and would reassess the entire port develop- benefit in those instances is the smoothing of
ment program. The ALP was prompted by the the process and anticipating and/or removing
fact that if it was to win government it was crucial any perceived obstacles. It is unlikely, however,
to retain Labor-held marginal seats around that the policy cycle can replace the political
Botany Bay, to win the Liberal-held seat of contest, or resolve issues which become conten-
Hurstville as well as the Independent-held seat tious and are politicised.
of the Blue Mountains (Everett 1988:161). Kane and Bishop (2002:87) further point
The ALP was elected to office and the Wran out that community consultation, while being
government was installed in 1976 and in accord- beneficial in some instances, certainly is not
ance with its election promise coal loading appropriate for universal application as there
development in the bay ceased and Port Kembla are distinct limitations to its application. It
was subsequently announced as the location appears unlikely, for example, to constitute a
for the new coal loader. comprehensive inquiry in which alternative
options are fully considered. Indeed, essential
The Policy Cycle, Community questions generally raised in these inquiries
Consultation and Contentious Policy concern issues such as whether project X should
Content or should not proceed. Furthermore, in those
instances orthodox and established interests are
The case study on the location of coal transport frequently over represented and judgments tend
infrastructure is not an isolated event. Freeway to be made based on only a narrow range of
location, high-rise development and airport factors, and those interests selected for con-
expansion inter alia are all subject to processes sultation are likely to be those influential ones
likely to be resolved in the political arena. It is capable of influencing the process itself.
most unlikely that the case study presented Kane and Bishop (2002) argue that there
could have been resolved applying the policy exists a further likely problem in this approach
cycle approach. Replacing the ‘play of power’ — the confusion associated with the nature and
with community consultation would have failed purpose of consultation itself. Undoubtedly
to reach a compromise among a number of adopting a community consultation approach
incompatible interests including coal compan- creates the illusion of a democratic process. But
ies, the incumbent state government, an opposi- there is the tendency to perceive consultation
tion party keen to win office and willing to adopt as an exercise in policy determination by the
the opponents’ cause as part of its election plat- public rather than as public input into a process
form, trade unions, environmental lobby groups, ultimately decided upon by the elected
as well as voters in a number of key electorates. decision-makers. The result of this confusion is
The policy cycle approach would appear a tendency to misunderstand or overestimate
to be incapable of resolving most policy issues what public consultations can achieve, and a
steeped in controversy. Indeed Bridgman and failure to make a distinction between occasions
Davis (1998) use Sydney’s new airport location when such consultations are useful and
as a hypothetical case study applying the policy occasions when they must give way to explicit
cycle model. This is perhaps a less than political contest.
appropriate choice for a case study applying
the policy cycle model as a major reason for Concluding Comments
non-action in this instance over a prolonged
period of time has been the fact that all commun- There is no doubt that more effective processes
ities consulted declined to have the airport in will enhance policy and policy-making but it
or near their communities. Clearly, to date the is a mistake to see the policy cycle or the ‘policy
application of the policy cycle approach has development framework’ (Edwards 2000) as
failed to resolve the issue of Sydney’s airport anything other than a mechanism that smooths
location. a process once decisions have been made, or a
Arguably, if policy issues are relatively mechanism to handle relatively uncomplicated
straightforward a solution may be reached by matters. This, in one sense, should not come as
way of consulting with the community and the a surprise, for, as Vigor (2002) has soundly
© National Council of the Institute of Public Administration, Australia 2003
70 Everett

argued, bureaucrats and public administrators References

do not make the paradigm — they implement it
— and in this case the paradigm is government Bridgman, P & G Davis 1998 Australian Policy
policy and the focus of the administrator is a Handbook, Allen & Unwin, Sydney.
mechanism which smoothly sets this in place. Dahl, RA 1961 Who Governs?, Yale University Press,
Not surprisingly then the policy cycle is process New Haven.
oriented but it is erroneous to confuse this Davis, G, J Wanna, J Warhurst & P Weller 1993 Public
process with the actual content of decision and Policy in Australia, Allen & Unwin, Sydney.
policy-making. Edwards, M 1998 ‘The Demise of the Policy
It is naïve, furthermore, to suggest that Management Review: The Device for Evaluating
policy issues are determined on the basis of Policy Process’, AJPA 57(4).
equity and that resources are distributed in a Edwards, M 2001 Social Policy, Public Policy — From
fair and equitable manner as implied in the Problem to Practice, Allen & Unwin, Sydney.
model. Policies and policy directions are a result Everett, SAM 1988 ‘The Location of Transport
of a struggle among stakeholders for resources Infrastructure and the Policy-making Process:
and their allocation and distribution is unlikely Port Terminals and Modal Networks for NSW
to be on the basis of equity — rather these are Export Coal in the Post 1970s’, unpublished PhD
likely to be determined by political clout and Thesis, University of Wollongong.
expedience. Goodin, RE & HD Klingemann eds 1996 A New
Arguably some issues can be resolved Handbook of Political Science, Oxford University
applying the policy cycle model but it is crucial Press, Oxford.
to distinguish between matters that are amenable Kane, J & P Bishop 2002 ‘Consultation and Contest:
to a consultative process and those that have to The Danger of Mixing Modes’, AJPA 61(1).
be dealt with primarily as power plays. Applying Lindblom, CE 1959 ‘The Science of Muddling
a policy cycle and community consultation Through’, Public Administration Review 19(2).
approach to a contentious issue which is Lindblom, CE 1979 ‘Still Muddling, Not Yet Through’,
unlikely to be resolved in any manner other Public Administration Review 49.
than by way of a political contest, as is exem- Lukes, S 1978 Power: A Radical View, Macmillan,
plified by the attempt to locate Sydney’s new London.
airport, is likely to lead to failure. Lukes, S ed. 1986 Power, Blackwell, Oxford.
Sanders, W 1984 ‘Sectoral Politics and Urban Develop-
ment — the Case of Port Botany’ in P Williams
Note ed. Conflict and Development, Allen & Unwin,
1. Deadweight tonnage — the weight of the vessel Sydney.
including cargo and bunker. Self, P 1985 Political Theories of Modern Govern-
ment: Its Role and Reform, Allen & Unwin,
London.
Simon, H 1955 ‘A Behavioral Model of Rational
Choice’, Quarterly Journal of Economics 65.
Vigor, G 2002 The Politics of Mobility: Transport, the
Environment and Public Policy, Spon Press,
London.

© National Council of the Institute of Public Administration, Australia 2003