Policy sciences

As the gap between the haves and have-nots widens, the call for reform in higher education in the United States intensifies. Policy actors, philanthropists, and academics from across the political spectrum work on various policy solutions, creating a policy environment that is complex and often contentious. Incrementalists claim that major policy reform is unlikely since unknown variables and inexplicable events can stall or dismantle policy initiatives. In such environments, policy entrepreneurs—those individuals who advocate for policy innovation, work for change, and help shape policy solutions from within and without government—try to break through the barriers of incremental politics. As important as this role is to the influencing and structuring of higher educational policy, it has not yet been explored. This study fills this gap in the extant literature by cataloging the characteristics and skills that enable higher education policy entrepreneurs at the state and national levels to persevere and accomplish sustainable and innovative higher education reforms over time.

The purpose of this study of policymaking on violence against women in the United States was to examine beliefs about the causes of violence against women through alternative theoretical lenses in order to compare competing theories of problem definition. An initial multidisciplinary review of the roots of the problem indicated that public policy on violence against women, specifically the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) of 1994, was limited in its response. The primary components of VAWA were to further criminalize violent physical abuse and educate law enforcement and the courts to address violence after it had occurred. The application of three competing theoretical perspectives on socio-cultural beliefs about sexuality, the limits of government, and sexual violence as a means of maintaining male domination yielded new information about the nature of the problem. With this information, interviews were conducted with the federal policymakers who drafted VAWA, local practitioners in programs pertaining to violence against women, and focus groups with citizens, survivors and perpetrators of domestic violence. This dialogue provided a check on the researcher's biases and unique perceptions on sexuality, intimate violence and the role of government. A written questionnaire using pertinent questions from the 1992 National Election Studies was used to determine whether the opinions of the focus groups were representative of national opinion on these issues. The research confirmed the working hypothesis that VAWA was limited due to the socio-cultural nature of the problem. The participants identified some common misperceptions about intimate violence. The research also revealed a difference between men's and women's trust of government. The participants' testimony moderately supported the proposal that male dominance is preserved through sexual violence. The study implies that policymaking on violence against women must address the roots of the problem in the socio-cultural system where people obtain their beliefs. This may not be possible through government policy because the state is limited in its ability to change that system.

Academic public administration (APA) supposedly provides theoretic and programmatic guidance for bureaucratic public administration (BPA). But in reality, a relationship best characterized as a gap between "theory" (APA) and "practice" (BPA) is deemed to exist between the two social practices. Scholars who have analyzed APA theoretic literature ascribed the theory-practice problematic to methodological inadequacies, the implication being that investment in appropriate social science methods would enhance the intellectual rigor and social utility of APA discursive works. To provide a much richer perspective on the theory-practice problematic, this study conceptualizes theoretic discourses as social actions. When scholars theorize, they invariably want to get things done, thus they are involved in social actions linked to some purposes, interests, and issues. As individuals with disciplinary affiliations and commitments, APA scholars bring purposes and interests to their work. So, what kinds of purposes underpin APA theoretic works? Since actions are meaningful within social practices, a corollary question is: What disciplinary influences constrain or authorize APA discourse, and why? To answer the questions posed: first, a discourse analytic method is utilized to analyze textual cohorts (i.e., authorial intentions, issues, themes, genre forms, and methods) in symposia articles published in five mainstream APA journals over a fifteen-year period. Second, a conceptual framework for understanding the disciplinary conditions authorizing and restricting theoretic discourse is outlined using the parameters of practice theory. Discourse analysis and practice theory are complimentary methodological and analytic tools. Discourse analysis focuses on discourse systems, whereas practice theory seeks to explain the relationships that obtain between human actions and social systems. In other words, discourse-practice approach focuses on the individuals' choices of discursive activities and explains how these choices are shaped by the social practices within which the discursive activities unfold. Using insights from practice theory, a speculative perspective relating the failure to reconfigure the discipline's telos in light of changed objective conditions is offered as the basis for the theory-practice problematic in academic public administration.

The dominant definitions of sustainability are too various and neglect essential elements necessary for effective sustainability discourse. This project considers what current understandings of sustainable development mean to those who subscribe to them and how those understandings affect public policy for sustainable development. I begin by presenting a timeline on the evolution of the term 'sustainability'. Then, I offer narrative policy analysis as a methodological tool for investigating communities of meaning with contending views on sustainability. This provides a foundation for the analysis of case studies using Harrisonian Sustainability Narratives-efficiency, equity, and ethics-as lenses through which three corresponding U.S. case studies are explored, each representing different levels of analysis-corporate, state, and individual. First, the Business Roundtable, a lobbying organization comprised of the CEOs of top U.S. companies exemplifying the efficiency narrative, claims that the problem of sustainable development can be addressed through free markets, which continually increase eco-efficiency and encourage technological advancement. Next, the Environmental Protection Agency, a state organization mandated to protect water and air and to manage toxic and solid wastes and representing the equity narrative, sees the problem of sustainable development as ensuring the just distribution of natural limits so as to reduce the impact of those limits on individuals within communities. Lastly, the ethical anthropology of Anna Peterson, philosopher of religion, points to the power of ethical narratives in creating wide-scale changes to our ideas about humanness and human nature as they relate to our relationship with our environment for sustainability.

Public administration addresses issues that competing and aligning groups determine to be meaningful enough to address. However, there seems to be no shared universally objective ways of remedying anything. Everything is up for argument. Additionally, attempting to solve one set of problems often creates other connected problems and/or unintended consequences. So, public work ever [sic] never ends. This dissertation's purpose was to contribute a new theoretical understanding of the experience and practice of public administration. Its research addressed if and how a grounded existential theoretical framework could emerge that would help practitioners and scholars understand and describe public administrative efforts and experiences. Currently, there is no existential theory of public administration. This dissertation sought to initiate work in that direction. This dissertation employed a grounded theory methodology to collect information from Senior Executive Service (SES) members, to analyze the information for emerging concepts and theoretical relevance through constant comparison, and to discover/construct a theoretical framework for understanding public administrative efforts and experiences. "The grounded theory approach is a general methodology of analysis linked with data collection that uses a systematically applied set of methods to generate an inductive theory about a substantive area" (Glaser, 1992, p. 16).