…we must continue to try to understand the policy process – however irrational or uncontrollable it may seem to be – as a crucial first step towards trying to secure effective policy making.
The imperative for constructive engagement put succinctly by Michael Hill in The Public Policy Process, 5th Ed (2009). It’s much easier to say what you’re against than to try to be part of the process – with all the risks that entails.
I think the big issue here is the definition of the framework of feasible policy. It is easier to oppose that propose – that’s a given – and those who constantly oppose need to be challenged about their proposed policy. But there is a different form of futility – proposing policy that is simply not feasible within current policy frameworks – an equally easy position to take. The challenge then is defining the framework, as this will change as people with different political and philosophical positions form the framework. The framework itself can therefore be considered dynamic; creating a grey area where proposed policy may be feasible within a future framework, but not within the present one. The quality of the analytical skills of the policy analyst is tested when defining the domains of feasible and near-feasible policies