Brian W. Hogwood

In Search of the Issue-Attention Cycle

This article seeks to establish whether an issue-attention cycle of the type described by Downs for policy relating to the environment is typical of all policy areas in the United States. Downs introduced the concept of the issue-attention cycle based on his perception of the ecology issue rather than on a quantitative analysis of issue salience. This article uses changes in U.S. federal government organizations as an indicator of policy activity. Organizational activity within policy areas is indeed found to take a cyclical form, with the timing differing for different policy areas. It is, however, necessary to go beyond Downss differentiation between policy attention and subsequent waning of political interest. Organizational initiation may be followed by a lack of any organizational activity, but it is more typically followed by periods of organizational succession (that is, replacement of the original initiations). The periods of highest organizational activity in a particular policy area are normally, but not universally, their periods of highest relative policy salience compared to total government organizational activity. Changes in organizational activity are related to changes in the salience of issues in public opinion. Peak periods of organizational activity occur either during the period of peak public concern with an issue or in the period immediately after that peak in public concern.

The dynamics of policy change: Policy succession

This paper suggests that the policy model assumed by most writers on policy analysis neglects the implications of the fact that most “new” policies in contemporary Western political systems are in fact replacing old policies, and that this is increasingly likely to be the case. Similarly, the recent interest in “policy termination” is partly misplaced since it fails to follow through adequately the implications of the fact that most policy terminations lead to policy succession. Accordingly, there is a need to study and analyse the processes involved in policy succession. This paper places policy succession in the context of policy change, sketches a model which describes the distinctive features of the policy succession process, outlines the various kinds of policy succession which occur, and draws out some implications for policy makers resulting from the increasing importance of policy succession.

The Machinery of Government, 1979-97

The aspect of the machinery of government which is arguably of least signi®cance, although it attracts the largest headlines, is reallocation of functions between central government departments. At ®rst, Mrs Thatcher did not appear to be particularly interested in changing the machinery of government in central government departments as a means of promoting the policies she favoured. Subsequently she made relatively few changes compared to the frenetic activity of the mid-1960s to the mid-1970s, but they were signi®cant ones, and some continued to work their way through, or in turn be subsumed, after 1990. Rather than give a blow-by-blow list of changes, certain key themes are summarized here.

The 'pondlife' of executive agencies: Parliament and informatory accountability

Agencies attract the attention of MPs unequally. In focusing upon ‘informnatory responsibility’, as a prerequisite of ministerial responsibility in an era of executive agencies, the article reveals that there is no simple model or pattern of informatory responsibility, whether measured by parliamentary questions, letters from MPs, or extent of contact between ministers and agencies. Those agencies which attract the sustained interest of MPs often require elaborate mechanisms of response to deal with the sheer volume of questions and requests for information. In tumrn, this may have pathological organisational consequences for working practices and staffing tasks particularly if the agency is responsible for policy delivery in a politically sensitive area. Conversely, those agencies which attract little or no interest from MPs raise the neglected question of what does ministerial responsibility ‘mean’ in these circumstances? The article concludes that a more exacting perspective of inforinatory accountability is needed: one that places the emphasis not only upon the regularity of the flow of information and upon the consistency of explanation to parliament, but also takes into account the interactions of agencies and their ‘constituencies of accountability’.

A reform beyond compare? The next steps restructuring of British central government

Abstract This article sets out a series of conditions for the successful transfer of an organizational or policy initiative from one country to another. It then assesses whether recent developments in the organization of British central government provide a model for transfer to other European countries which have also been concerned with a separation between policy‐making functions and execution through service delivery agencies. The article concludes by suggesting caution in attempting to use the Next Steps initiative in Britain as a model for transfer to other European countries, since it lacks a valid theory of administration, has no clear operational blueprint to copy, is not the sole method used by British government itself, and would not necessarily map well on to countries with different relationships between ministers, agencies, the core bureaucracy and the legislature.

Devolution: The English dimension

To argue that there is an existing unaccountable ‘regional tier’ in England is an oversimplification. A Labour government would not move quickly to place the bodies about which it expresses concern under the direct executive control of directly or indirectly elected regional bodies. Labours proposals neglect some crucial issues, such as delimiting boundaries. The proposals would lead to multiple sources of demands for reporting and scrutiny rather than providing a simple solution to concerns about accountability.

Problems of applying a programme approach to intergovernmental policy delivery

One set of problems facing anyone trying to track public expenditure programmes is how to handle the intergovernmental aspects. This can be illustrated by Rose and Daviess study of public expenditure in Britain. Amongst these problems are changes to the system of grants from central government to local authorities and transfers of functions between local and central government. There are also problems in the consistency with which Rose and Davies use central government grant or all of relevant expenditure in devising programmes. As a result, Rose and Davies findings about local government expenditure programmes lack consistency over time or between programmes. These discrepancies occur in what in some cases are the largest programmes in their policy area, so they also undermine the empirical and theoretical conclusions drawn about policy change as a whole in Britain. Alternative approaches and data may provide a more meaningful tracking of policy change.

Shaping Policy through the Courts: (2) The European Dimension

This is the second of a pair of articles on the role of the courts in shaping British public policy. The first article, in the previous issue of this journal, dealt with the British courts. This article examines how British public policy is shaped by two quite distinct systems of law and courts; first, the European Convention on Human Rights, and, second, the European Communities and the work of the European Court of Justice.

Shaping Policy Through the Courts: (1) The British Courts

This article centrally argues that the courts in Britain play a role in laying down general rules which is, on occasion, equivalent to the role of Parliament and the legislative process. The next issue will carry a companion piece by Brian Hogwood on the courts and the EEC and the European Convention on Human Rights.