In this week’s lead Precis, scholar Amanda Porter argues that policy feedback theory is a useful tool in the analysis of public policy because it helps analyst situation a policy within its particular historical and political context. She goes on to argue that policy feedback theory does not provide adequate insight in how one breaks away from a particular path, perhaps a negative one—such as the climate policy Porter presents as an example, once it has been established. I agree with Porter that this is perhaps one of the most important questions policy feedback theory can potentially address. How does one promote a change in path when the feedback processes are embedded? I would argue that perhaps one of the first steps is identifying how policy feedback constrains collective political engagement. After many years of studying Conditional Cash Transfer programs in Latin America, I would argue that the policy feedback of these programs actively dissuades beneficiaries from being politically engaged by shaping a notion of citizenship that places guilt for marginalization on the poor rather than a countries’ economic structure.
As Porter argues, the growing influence of policy feedback theory—or path dependency—in public policy analysis has enhanced the ability of scholars to situate policies within the contexts that they are formed, enacted and evolved. In his seminal piece, “Increasing Returns, Path Dependence and the Study of Politics”, Paul Pierson demonstrates the applicability of the common economic idea of increasing returns to the study of politics. He argues that interpreting a policy not only as a result of history but also a determinant of the future will enable scholars and practitioners to better understand how and why a particular policy path is constrained. In their work “Policy Feedback Theory” scholars Mettlerz and Sorelle discuss the evolution of the study of path dependence and policy feedback. They identify four major streams of policy feedback inquiry: 1) meaning of citizenship, 2) form of governance, 3) power of groups and 4) political agendas.
Utilizing this framework enables one to analyze a particular policy without ignoring the political context in which it was established, functions and evolves. In the case of Mexico’s CCT program PROSPERA, identifying and discussing the four streams of policy feedback provides insight into why the program, though inadequate in many ways, has not faced any serious community or elite opposition. I would argue that one of the critical ways in which PROSPERA constructs citizenship is through the use of strict conditionality policies, which require each member of a beneficiary household to take certain actions to remain eligible. The strict implementation of PROSPERA’s conditionally has created space for rent seeking and other abuses of power in the communities in which it is active. Despite the documentation of the programs negative consequences, little has been done to implement a system to reign them in (Gil-Garcia, 2016).
In contrast the the positive effects of social welfare programs on political engagement presented by Mettlerz and Sorelle, PROSPERA serves to the limit political engagement of program beneficiaries because of the low level of citizenship and dignity it, I would argue intentionally, imparts upon them. Interestingly enough, these types of conditions for welfare programs are often debated in the US—such as drug testing for food-stamp beneficiaries. However, they are harshly criticized for how they may infringe on both privacy and and freedom; two of the “quintessential American values”. Although the construction of citizenship is of utmost complexity, the aforementioned example, though simplistic, exemplifies why it matters. Policy feedback theory can therefore be utilized to support the argument that the de-construction citizenship is an essential first step on the path to re-constructing citizenship and changing policy paths.
External References
Gil-Garcia, Oscar. "Gender equality, community divisions, and autonomy: The Prospera conditional cash transfer program in Chiapas, Mexico". Current Sociology, Vol. 6. 2016.
As Porter argues, the growing influence of policy feedback theory—or path dependency—in public policy analysis has enhanced the ability of scholars to situate policies within the contexts that they are formed, enacted and evolved. In his seminal piece, “Increasing Returns, Path Dependence and the Study of Politics”, Paul Pierson demonstrates the applicability of the common economic idea of increasing returns to the study of politics. He argues that interpreting a policy not only as a result of history but also a determinant of the future will enable scholars and practitioners to better understand how and why a particular policy path is constrained. In their work “Policy Feedback Theory” scholars Mettlerz and Sorelle discuss the evolution of the study of path dependence and policy feedback. They identify four major streams of policy feedback inquiry: 1) meaning of citizenship, 2) form of governance, 3) power of groups and 4) political agendas.
Utilizing this framework enables one to analyze a particular policy without ignoring the political context in which it was established, functions and evolves. In the case of Mexico’s CCT program PROSPERA, identifying and discussing the four streams of policy feedback provides insight into why the program, though inadequate in many ways, has not faced any serious community or elite opposition. I would argue that one of the critical ways in which PROSPERA constructs citizenship is through the use of strict conditionality policies, which require each member of a beneficiary household to take certain actions to remain eligible. The strict implementation of PROSPERA’s conditionally has created space for rent seeking and other abuses of power in the communities in which it is active. Despite the documentation of the programs negative consequences, little has been done to implement a system to reign them in (Gil-Garcia, 2016).
In contrast the the positive effects of social welfare programs on political engagement presented by Mettlerz and Sorelle, PROSPERA serves to the limit political engagement of program beneficiaries because of the low level of citizenship and dignity it, I would argue intentionally, imparts upon them. Interestingly enough, these types of conditions for welfare programs are often debated in the US—such as drug testing for food-stamp beneficiaries. However, they are harshly criticized for how they may infringe on both privacy and and freedom; two of the “quintessential American values”. Although the construction of citizenship is of utmost complexity, the aforementioned example, though simplistic, exemplifies why it matters. Policy feedback theory can therefore be utilized to support the argument that the de-construction citizenship is an essential first step on the path to re-constructing citizenship and changing policy paths.
External References
Gil-Garcia, Oscar. "Gender equality, community divisions, and autonomy: The Prospera conditional cash transfer program in Chiapas, Mexico". Current Sociology, Vol. 6. 2016.