Essay Writing Service http://StudyHub.vip/A-Critical-Review-Of-Rational-Choice-Th

1. Theories of Policy Making Process
POLM001
Victor Barraso Ibañez - MSc Public Policy
Queen Mary University of London
A critical review of the rational approach to policy-making’
This essay will critically review the approach of Rational Choice Theory
when applied to Public Policy. First it will analyse the main tenets
proposed by this approach to policy analysis such as the focus on the
individual as a rational decision maker and profit maximiser with complete
access to information and resources. As an abstract framework analysis of
human behaviour, it observes simple assumptions. By using scientific
methodology, the theory is able to provide testable hypothesis. This
bestows the theory a predictive leverage, which has made it highly
attractive for policy makers and policy analysis. Then the essay will
present Lindblom’s (1959) challenge to the framework, which he
considered too unrealistic. He argues, that in the real world of policy
making, decision makers do not possess the resources to follow this route.
Moreover, practical knowledge is superior to theoretical approaches,
something which policy makers should not be concerned with. Then, the
essay will review the position of Herbert Simon (1955). For Simon,
humans are economic as well as administrative. The essay will show that
Simon and Lindblom agree that political agents do not have total access to
information but also that they disagree on the causes. Simon argues that
there are many factors that influence decision makers that RCT does not
consider. After presenting these two different perspectives on rational
choice theory and how it should be interpreted, the essay will analyse
some characteristics of RCT, starting from its emphasis of capitalism
applied to policy making and then moving on to analyse how the
knowledge supporting RCT is elaborated. The essay will conclude arguing
that competition and maximising profit are not the optimal conditions to
base ones policy making upon.
Rational Choice Theory (RCT) emanates from economics. It aims to
provide an explanation for the human behaviour in terms of economic
rationality. It stresses the role of the individual as ‘benefit maximiser’
meaning, when presented with decision, individuals will take rational
actions. Therefore, making cost efficiency assessments will ensure that the
Page ! of !
1 9

2. Theories of Policy Making Process
POLM001
Victor Barraso Ibañez - MSc Public Policy
Queen Mary University of London
best possible outcome is achieved. Individuals, or political agents, have
full access to information and, according to their preferences, will favour
the decision that allows them the best possible outcome. Forester (1984)
explains that RCT is comprehensive and abstract, for which the decisive
factors are information which “is perfect, complete, accessible and
comprehensive. Time is infinitely available” (p.25).
This scientific approach to policy making process, aims to obtain an
abstract model of political analysis. These kinds of models tend to keep
simple assumptions. Researchers will propose hypothesis and test them
upon evidence (Wallace, 1971, cited in Andrew, 2007, p.161). For the
purpose of analysis, researchers assume that individuals have permanent
preferences. These preferences will determine which will be the most
favoured outcome. Moreover, analysis assumes that political agents have
the motivation of achieving the maximum profit.
This is effective in terms that it provides a framework and also has the
advantage of offering testable hypotheses. Those can be exported
elsewhere, delivering equal outcomes. This allows for possibilities of
transferability based upon empirical evidence and from this emanates its
predictive power. RCT aims for universalism, as successful hypotheses
could be applied to anywhere and these predictive capabilities within RCT
are highly desirable in political science. As is pointed out by Hindmoor
(2010) they “explain something without knowing everything”, therefore
providing a “great deal of explanatory leverage” (cited in Marsh and
Stocket, 2010, p.57).
Moreover, as it is pointed out by Etzioni (1967) that RCT offers a
framework of “widely held conceptions about how decisions are and ought
to be made” (as quoted in Smith and May, 1980, p. 148). This means that
rational choice theory provides a framework that is very efficient to
analyse, predict and provide a structure to which policy should be made.
However, when they are not explored in a laboratory environment and are
applied to reality, they might not be that efficient. Now that the main
characteristics of the RCT have been analysed. The essay will move to
analyse the examine the criticism that Lindblom makes.
Page ! of !
2 9

3. Theories of Policy Making Process
POLM001
Victor Barraso Ibañez - MSc Public Policy
Queen Mary University of London
Charles Lindblom (1959) argues that RCT offers a very narrow perspective
for how to achieve solutions for policy making. He defines it as root
analysis. By which for each problem there will be an assessment on every
factor that affects a policy. Accordingly only by scrutinising each possible
outcome and desired consequences, is it possible to make a decision.
Lindblom argues that this approach is too unrealistic. As in real life, policy
makers do not have enough time or resources to analyse in such detail.
Hence, it proposes that political agents follow the Branch analysis, that is
“continually building out from the current situation, step-by-step and by
small degree” (Lindblom, 1959, p.81 quoted in Howlett, 2009, p.147), to
form something deemed more effective.
Lindblom (1990) claims that substantive rationality, theoretical
knowledge, “should not be allowed to displace procedural rationality”(as
cited in Andrew, 2007, p.162). According to him, the lay expertise will
always be superior to theoretical frameworks (Lindblom, 1959, p.88).
Lindblom argues, contrary to what RCT assumes, that political actors have
limited access to information. He argues that information is in fact a
political asset. According to him, decision making processes take place in
a competitive environment where there are multiple competitors for
limited resources. Hence, as Forester (1984) explains, “ the problem of
gaining access to pristine information now gives way to a set of problems
about knowing what and who to trust, what and who can be relied upon,
what may be done in the face of misrepresentation, and so on” (p.27).
Lindblom argued that, because information is restricted and serves
political interests as they interact, policy makers will bargain for their best
possible outcomes. On this approach of pluralistic bounded rationality,
actors will trade their preferences over one issue, if a positive outcome
might possibly be gained on another. It can be argued that there would be a
possibility of achieving an equilibrium. There is a level from which
negotiators will not move beyond, know as a “policy horizon” (Warwick,
2006 as as cited in John, 2012, p.111). This policy horizon is the reason
why Lindblom argued that rather than creating policy, it is imposed upon
decision makers and is the result of the political environment. Hence, for
him, political agents when facing choices are left to “muddle through”
where “only incremental change, or change at the margins” are possible
Page ! of !
3 9

4. Theories of Policy Making Process
POLM001
Victor Barraso Ibañez - MSc Public Policy
Queen Mary University of London
because “a restricted number of policy alternatives is reviewed and only
limited number of consequences is envisaged and evaluated” (Smith and
May, 1980, p.150). The essay has analysed how Lindblom disagreed with
RCT on the practical matters of the acquisition of knowledge or
information. He considered this to be incomplete and, because it is a
politic asset, difficult to obtain. Moreover, he argues that political actors
are in constant competition, therefore political change is only possible by
gradual implementations. The essay will analyse now the criticism from
Simon who proposed an approach different to that of Lindblom.
Herbert Simon (1955) argues that there are constrictions that dominate
rational human behaviour on decision making. Political agents have
limited and incomplete access to information and will reach the optimal
decision by using their judgement upon limited knowledge (Satz and
Ferejohn, 1994, p. 73). Hence, the outcome is bound to the context in
which the individual is set within. It might be true that humans are
“economic” (Simon, 1955, p.99) beings and therefore they aim for the best
possible decision, however, it is not possible to achieve maximum benefit
all of the time. Therefore, the argument follows, that it is better to see
political actors as “marginal utility maximisers”. As Satz and Ferejohn
(1994) explain, “computational and information gathering costs of
maximizing are simply too high; in many cases people "satisfice"
instead” (p.73). This term, coined by Simon that combine satisfy and
suffice, to refer to an action of searching for the best available option
without optimal resources available. Because of this, Simon argues that
actors are “administrative” persons (Parson, 1995, p.301). Consequently,
in the practical world of politics, RCT loses its predictive powers because
there is an “incomplete and fragmented nature of knowledge” (Simon,
1957: 81-109 as cited in Parson, 1995, p. 277), there will be unintended
consequences that were impossible to predict.
Simon, considered that the political actor, in opposition to rational choices
suggestion, is a fallible actor. Each individual will have motivations, a set
of interest that they will pursue independent of if those are clearly stated or
not. They will also moderate their beliefs and endogenous factors, at the
personal level, such as moral values and the validity of RCT as being
universal, is confronted with the reality, which is directly related to their
Page ! of !
4 9

5. Theories of Policy Making Process
POLM001
Victor Barraso Ibañez - MSc Public Policy
Queen Mary University of London
particular habitat. Jenson and Merand (2010) clarify “motives are
situational because the logic of practice is grounded in social context” (p.
84). Moreover, external factors also affect decision makers. The
environment on which the policy is developed is open to the influence of
others. Policy, does not take place in vacuum (Hofferbert (1974, cited in
John, 2012, p.85).
Policy makers do not act on their own. By focusing on the choice of the
individual, RCT ignores others factors that affect human behaviour, such
as networks. Decision makers have relationships and create networks.
Those networks influence how problems are resolved in a socially
differentiated environment and the “strategies of decision making must
take that encompassing, variable and complex social environment into
account” (Forester, 1984, p.27).
As many more factors are required, predictive leverage of the theory
further diminishes. Simon argues that policy makers develop contact with
other agents and those agents influence them. They function in an open
environment rather than one closed and free from interference. Moreover,
they then collaborate with others political agents. On the process of
decision making, they might not follow ideal patterns of rational
behaviour. (Werner and Wegrich, 2007, p.44).
The essay has reviewed the position of bounded rationality presented by
Simon. He has presented political actors with limited access to information
and resources. However, in opposition to Lindblom, he argues that
cooperation is possible. Agents, he states, are open to influence and they
might not behave in a rational manner as RCT proposes. Now the essay
will analyse how RCT has reached such a predominant position in public
policy and whether this is a positive development.
The economic roots of the RCT implement values and notion from
Capitalism into the policy making process. Public policy is focused upon
solving the problems that arise in our modern society. Perhaps,
competition and profit maximisation, to name a few, are not the most
desirable patterns to achieve solutions. Furthermore, RCT has a component
of the self-fulfilling prophecy. As it was illustrated by Marwell and Ames
(1981), “teaching students about the basic principles of economics made
Page ! of !
5 9

6. Theories of Policy Making Process
POLM001
Victor Barraso Ibañez - MSc Public Policy
Queen Mary University of London
them more likely to act in a self-interested manner” (adapted from Marsh
and Stoker, 2010, p.56). Consequently, preaching to the public that
political agents are more interested in pursuing their own interests rather
than the public good (Downs, 1957, p.27) might further erode confidence
in democratic processes. This scientific model from economics, when
applied to social sciences or politics, should take into account many factors
that are left behind from the most predominant positions of rational choice
theory such as cultural values, historical context and power structure
among others. Furthermore, the main obstacle for the rational choice
theory approach is that human behaviour is not always rational. That
which is considered rational in abstract might not be rational in practice.
That might be the reason for John (2012) to argue that the main
characteristic of the “rational actor model is the lack of good applications
to public policy” (p.102).
On the other hand, the driving force behind scientific knowledge is that it
enjoys a “legitimacy authority” ( Andrew, 2007, p.162). Although
scientific methodology is driven by evidence, in social science there are
many contestable notions. Most of the time these are reflections of the
“current consensus” (Andrew, 2007, p.162) and since academia is an
“elite-based knowledge” (Andrew, 2007, p.162), it might argue that
ideological frameworks play a crucial role on which information is
disseminated, and which is not. As Hindmoor (2005) notes, “neoliberal
governments saw in rational choice theory a fertile source of arguments
and policy ideas” (as cited in Marsh and Stoker, 2010 p. 56). There is not a
system in place that will ensure “objectivity” as in equal representation of
all the perspectives in academia, so predominant ideas might have an
advantage. Because Academic journals use anonymous “practices of peer
review”(Andrew, 2007, p.162), they might act as gatekeepers of
dissemination of knowledge that is not compelling to the most favoured
cannon.
This presents a further issue. As Campbell mentions, ideas or ideologies
that enjoy a predominant position “exert long-term effects on policy
making by becoming embedded in the law and institutionalised in
administrative procedures, programs, and bureaucracies” (2002, p.31).
Therefore, if the above statements are taken into account and since rational
Page ! of !
6 9

7. Theories of Policy Making Process
POLM001
Victor Barraso Ibañez - MSc Public Policy
Queen Mary University of London
choice theory enjoys a preponderant position in Public Policy, it might be
argued that neoliberalist ideas which praise higher value in cost-efficiency
over general welfare are, or might become, an embedded part of the public
policy.
It is argued that this reality depends on perception. Rational choice theory
obtains preferences of the individuals by defining external factors.
However, other approaches argue that that is the context on which those
individuals are defining their preferences. This means that “the way we
think about the the world makes the world as we perceive it” (Saurugger,
2013, p.890). Moreover, empirical and theoretical evidence has
demonstrated that “how a message is framed affects attitudes and
behaviour as much as its contents does” (Druckman, 2004, as cited in
John, 2012, p.118). Consequently, if Public Policy is framed upon rational
choice theory, where agents value more the personal benefits, than the
general benefit of society as a whole, it might create change within
attitudes and behaviours that will reflect the values of competitive markets.
Capitalist systems are prone to injustice and inequality.
This essay has concluded that, although Rational Choice Theory enjoys a
dominant position among public policy scholars, it might be right to argue
that this could be counteractive to its ultimate objective which is to provide
solutions to the complex problems of society. The essay arrived at this
conclusion by analysing the approach of bounded rationality presented by
Simon, who, although concerned with the limitations of RCT, aims to
improved rather than to propose a valid alternative. The essay has analysed
the criticism that Lindblom makes of the rational choice framework, which
he considers to be unrealistic and inferior to the practical expertise of
policy makers.
In opposition to the collaborative notion that Simon argues dominates the
pragmatic decision maker, Lindblom argues that there is a competition
between multiple agents where change is possible, only on the margins of
the policy making process. The essay reviewed the conditions in which
Rational Choice Theory aims to provide an analytical framework for the
policy making process, using testable hypothesis that confer the theory
with its predictive powers, which is one of the most appealing factors of
the rational choice theory.
Page ! of !
7 9

8. Theories of Policy Making Process
POLM001
Victor Barraso Ibañez - MSc Public Policy
Queen Mary University of London
Bibliography
* Andrews, . C., (2007) ‘Rationality in Policy Decision-Making, in
Fischer F.; Miller G., and Sidney, M.; (eds.) Handbook of Public Policy
Analysis, CRC Press. Boca Raton, FL
* Campbell, J. (2002). ‘Ideas, politics, and Public Policy’, Annual Review
of Sociology, 28, pp. 21-38
* Dowding, K. (1991) Rational Choice and Political Power. Edward Elgar:
Aldershot
* Forester, J., (1984) ‘Bounded Rationality and the Politics of Muddling
Through’, Public Administration Review 44: 23-30
* Hindmoor, A., (2010) Rational Choice in Marsh, D. and Stoker, J. (eds.)
Theory and Method in Political Science. Palgrave Macmillan,
Basingstoke
* Howlett, M.; Ramesh, M.; Perl, A.; (2009) “Studying Public Policy ,
Policy Cycles & Policy Subsystems”, 3rd Edition, Oxford
University Press, Canada, Ontario
* Jenson, J. and Mérand, F. (2010) ‘Sociology, institutionalism and the
European Union’, Comparative European Politics 8 (1): 74-92.
* John, P., 2012 Analysing Public Policy. Routledge: Oxon.
* Lindblom, C., (1959) The Science of ‘Muddling Through”, Public
Administration Revive, 19 (2) pp. 79-88
Page ! of !
8 9

9. Theories of Policy Making Process
POLM001
Victor Barraso Ibañez - MSc Public Policy
Queen Mary University of London
* Parsons, W. (1995) Public Policy. An introduction to the theory and
practice of policy analysis, Edward Elgar: Aldershot
* Satz, D., Ferejohn, J., 1994. Rational Choice and Social Theory, The
Journal of Philosophy, 91 (2) pp. 71-87
* Saurugger, S. (2013). ‘Constructivism and public policy approaches in
the EU: from ideas to power games’, Journal of European Public
Policy, 20 (6), pp. 888-906
* Simon, H., (1955) ‘A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice’, The
Quarterly Journal of Economies, 69 (1), pp.99-118
* Smith, G.; May, D. (1980) ‘The Artificial Debate between Rationalist
and Incrementalist Models of Decision-Making’, Policy and
Politics 8: 147-161
* Werner, J. and Wegrich, K. (2007). in in Fischer F.; Miller G., and
Sidney, M.; (eds.) Handbook of Public Policy Analysis, CRC
Press. Boca Raton, FL
Page ! of !
9 9