SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2010 / Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 1

Insufficiency of linear model in public policy analysis: A complex model proposition

Kamu politikası analizinde doğrusal modelin yetersizliği: Karmaşık bir model önerisi

Süleyman ÇELİK
Pages
217–234
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

A learning and self adapting nonlinear organizational model with its technical and cultural strengths offers a bridge between policy making and implementation phases.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Public organizations have more complex and intense implementation processes especially in analyzing and addressing public policy problems.
📊
Key Findings & Data:One of the most critical problems of the practice of public policy analysis is the gap between the linearly and rationally designed public policies and nonlinearly operating environmental conditions.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:A learning and self adapting nonlinear organizational model with its technical and cultural strengths offers a bridge between policy making and implementation phases.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Public organizations have more complex and intense implementation processes especially in analyzing and addressing public policy problems. One of the most critical problems of the practice of public policy analysis is the gap between the linearly and rationally designed public policies and nonlinearly operating environmental conditions. This critical state requires nonlinear approaches that can close the gap between the given public policies and surrounding nonlinear conditions. A learning and self adapting nonlinear organizational model with its technical and cultural strengths offers a bridge between policy making and implementation phases.

Özet

Kamu kurumları, görevleri ile ilgili alanlardaki sorunları inceleme, çözümüne uygun politika geliştirme ve bu politikaları uygulama konusunda eskiden olduğundan daha yoğun ve karmaşık bir uygulama alanına sahiptir. Kamu politikası uygulamasında karşılaşılan sorunlar incelendiğinde, sorunun kaynağı, doğrusal rasyonel modellere göre tasarlanan politikalar ile doğrusal olamayan bir biçimde hareket eden uygulamadaki çevresel koşullar arasındaki farklar olarak ortaya çıkmaktadır. Bu durum, oluşturulan kamu politikaları ile uygulama arasındaki bağlantıyı sağlayabilecek doğrusal olmayan yaklaşımları gerektirmektedir. Öğrenebilen, geçmişten ders alan ve mevcut koşullara adapte olabilen örgütlenme anlayışı; teknik, kültürel ve örgütsel özellikleriyle oluşturulan kamu politikaları ile söz konusu politikaların uygulanması arasındaki farkı kapatabilecek niteliktedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇELİK, S. (2022). Insufficiency of linear model in public policy analysis: A complex model proposition. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 1, 217–234. https://ajindex.com/articles/506085

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Ackoff, R. L. (1974). Redesigning theFfuture: A Systems Approach to Societal Problems. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Allen, P.M. (1997). Cities and Regions as Self-Organizing Systems: Models of Complexity. London: Gordon and Breach. http://www.kli.ac.at/theorylab/AuthPage/A/AllenPM.html
  2. Argyris, C. (1992). Knowledge for Action: A Guide to Overcoming Barriers to Organizational Change, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Argyris, C. (1993). On organizational Learning. Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell Publishers.
  3. Axelrod, R. ve D. M. Cohen (1999). Harnessing Complexity: Organizational Implications of a Scientific Frontier, New York: Free Press.
  4. Aykaç, B. (1991). Yönetimin İyileştirilmesi ve Örgütsel Değişim, Amme İdaresi Dergisi, 24, (2). Byrne, D.S. (1998). Complexity Theory and Social Sciences, London: Routledge. Comfort, L.K. (1994). Risk and Resilience: Interorganizational Learning Following the Northridge Earthquake of January 17, 1997, Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 2 (3), 174-188.
  5. Comfort, K. L. (1999). Shared Risk: Complex Systems in Seismic Response. Amsterdam; New York: Pergamon. Deborah S. (1997). Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision Making, New York: W.W. Norton. Dryzek, J.S. (1983). Don't Toss Coins in Garbage Cans: A Prologue to Policy Design, Journal of Public Policy, 3, 345-368
  6. Dunn, W. N. (1994). Public Policy Analysis: An Introduction, (2nd Ed.) Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Dunn, W. N. (1997). Probing the Boundaries of Ignorance in Policy Analysis, American Behavioral Scientist, 40(3), 277-298.
  7. Gareth, M. (1997). Images of Organization, (2nd edition). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Kauffman, S.A. (1993). The Origins of Order: Self Organization and Selection in Evolution. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
  8. Kauffman, S.A. (1995).
  9. At Home in the Universe, New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
  10. Kiel, L.D. (1994). Managing Chaos and Complexity in Government. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
  11. Kiel, L.D. ve E. Eliot (Eds) (1996).
  12. Chaos Theory in Social Sciences, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
  13. Lindblom, C., & D.K. Cohen (1979). Usable Knowledge: Social Science and Problem Solving. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
  14. Lindblom, C. (1990).
  15. Inquiry and Change. New Haven, CT: Yale University Pres. White, M.C., K.M. Mathews, R.G. Long (1999). The Problem of Prediction and Control in Theoretical Diversity: The Promise of the Complexity Sciences, Journal of Management Inquiry 8(1), 17-31.
  16. Patton, C. V., ve D.