Essay代写：Rational and irrational conflicts in public policy making－r51due

下面为大家整理一篇优秀的essay代写范文- Rational and irrational conflicts in public policy making，供大家参考学习，这篇论文讨论了公共政策制定中的理性和非理性冲突。政策制定作为政策过程的首要环节，是政策科学的核心问题。按照传统的政策学观点，我们应该在政策制定中排除非理性干扰，以理性的视角去构筑政策规划。对于个体决策者而言，他们的决策是在一种既包含理性又包含非理性的有限理性下作出的。而对于群体决策者来，他们对于政策问题的判断可能来自对于客观事实的理性分析，也可能来自于自身经验、直接等感性认识。正是由于这种同构，导致在公共政策制定中的理性和非理性的冲突究竟何者在公共政策中更重要。

Public policy formulation process is decision makers with the help of various technical means to influence policy problem of complex environment, information and other objective factors in processing, classification, integration, processing, and finally form the policy process, rather than completely decided by the decision makers take head, therefore, policy making process is a kind of rational choice dominate the behavior of the process. However, in reality, policy making is often seriously disturbed by many uncertain factors, and due to the limited cognitive ability of decision makers, there is a certain degree of irrationality in policy making. Although some scholars have sharply criticized the irrationality of government choice behavior, due to the development of policy science, they tend to accept the methodology of new institutional economics and non-mainstream economics, and advocate to study the formulation, implementation and evaluation of policies under the premise of limited rationality and information asymmetry.

Management guru drucker once said: "some of the most effective managers I've ever met use logic and reasoning, while others rely mainly on foresight and intuition. There are those who make decisions easily, and there are those who suffer when they move. This passage indicates that management is a kind of dual energy activity of human, which has both rational and irrational components.

In English, there are two expressions of rationality: rationality and reason. The former generally refers to the general mental ability to control regulatory behavior and abstract thinking, while the latter generally refers to the ability to reason narrowly. Rationality can be intuitively understood as the type of human behavior, which is characterized by observing things in the way of logical reasoning. If interpreted from the literal meaning, rational, with the basis of clear logic of thinking, through deliberation, calm reason, not easy to expose subjective feelings and other characteristics. Rational behavior usually refers to people's behavioral choice under the influence of some rational factors, which is proposed under the premise of calm and objective. Simon, who proposed the theory of bounded rationality, believes that the concept of rationality should be divided into the substantive rationality of economic discussions and the process rationality of psychological discussions. What the rational person of cognitive psychology does is to make his or her decisions in a procedural and reasonable manner, based on existing knowledge and means. The rationality in the public policy making mentioned in this paper refers to that the policy-makers give full play to the awareness of policy issues, and the policy formation mainly relies on the methods of analysis, judgment and treatment. Rationality in the process of policy-making is reflected in the aspects of technology, empirical evidence, reasoning, rationality and logic, which are mostly connected with methods, means and purposes.

The pure irrational behavior refers to people's response to the environment under the irrational drive of intuition, instinct, belief and emotion. From the perspective of psychology, the perceptual consciousness in the form of feeling, perception, representation and emotion cannot be as clear as the rational thinking in the form of concept, judgment and reasoning. In most cases, people's choice behavior is mainly governed by relatively vague perceptual consciousness, which is because people's conscious activity usually stays at the perceptual level, and this kind of bottom perceptual level consciousness activity will lead to irrational behavior in the pure sense. The broad sense of irrationality also includes the act of writing "optimally" in the absence of utility despite logical thinking. For example, Simon's understanding of irrationality as "any deviation from utility maximization" actually refers to irrational behavior in a broad sense. In contrast to reason, irrationality is active, dynamic and restless, and irrational factors are not limited by any logical rules. They often show unpredictable fluctuations or emotional impulses, such as instinct, intuition, inspiration, will and mysterious experience. The irrationality in public policy making discussed in this paper refers to the fact that policy makers fail to give full play to their cognition of policy issues, and their policy formation is mainly based on intuition, experience, external stimulus and so on.

Since middle period of last century, people started from the overall perspective to explore the change of organization operation pattern, the change in the future but by some dynamic and is unknowable, changing demand, the opportunity and choose the mix of factors, such as to take advantage of this change and get benefits, or less pay the price in the risk, the number of parameters and factors to consider, very much, this is even more need to intuitive judgment and feeling. Based on this view, the so-called non-deterministic environment is actually a subjective phenomenon based on individual perceptual knowledge. To be precise, uncertainty lies in the visible and invisible difference between the amount and kind of information required to complete a task and the amount and kind of information available. This perceptual difference is not an objective quantity, but determined by the individuals involved, which obviously represents the rich experience of the individuals. In this way, uncertainty is defined as something directly related to the individual decision maker, and this correlation is more important for their "mental state", that is, irrational factors.

Many objective factors in the process of policy-making have restricted the rational play of policy-making. For example, the timeliness of the policy, the problem to be solved by the policy is not static and isolated, but constantly changing, which requires the attention to the timeliness of the policy making and quick solutions to the current problems. In this way, policy makers are required to reduce the complexity to a certain extent and make timely policy solutions based on existing experience, intuition and even inspiration to make perceptual judgments on problems. In addition, the cost of policy-making, the limited cognitive ability of policy-makers and other objective factors all restrict the rationality in policy-making, leading to certain irrational factors in policy-making.

Nothing in the world is absolute, except the sentence itself. Although according to the traditional view of policy science, we should exclude the irrational interference in policy making and construct policy planning from a rational perspective. However, it is undeniable that the rational and irrational isomorphism of human decision-making behavior is an objective reality, and it has time continuity and space co-existence in the process of decision-making behavior. For individual decision makers, their decisions are made in a limited sense that contains both rationality and irrationality. For group decision makers, their judgment on policy issues may come from rational analysis of objective facts, as well as their own experience and direct perceptual knowledge. It is precisely because of this isomorphism that the rational and irrational conflicts in public policy making are more important.

As the first stage of policy process, policy making is the core of policy science. This process is directly related to the success or failure of the whole policy process. Therefore, it is necessary to make a comprehensive analysis and rational judgment on policy issues in policy formulation. We should not only understand the policies themselves, but also see the mutual relations, mutual influence and mutual restriction between the policies. It is also necessary to make scientific predictions on future trends, programme implementation results and their impacts, and take necessary precautions against possible negative effects of policies. Only in this way can we ensure that the public policies formulated can effectively solve policy problems and promote social development. Therefore, only a rational public policy making process can guarantee the stability, durability and effectiveness of policies. However, this kind of technical economic rationality is based on the hypothesis of "broker", under which it is relatively easy and clear to separate rationality from irrationality. However, as the rational analysis based on "brokers" is quite different from the reality, some scholars believe that the research on rational behavior is based on the normative research of economics, and its purpose is to point out the most reasonable result for people in a rational sense, instead of describing people's real behavior rules. "Our theory is a normative theory, not a empirical one," says game theorist susaney. At least this theory formally and explicitly addresses the question of what each person in the game should do in order to most effectively advance its own interests, rather than what he should actually do in this type of game. Therefore, the rationality in policy making leads to the simplification and simplification of policy objectives. Second, irrationality in public policy making is unavoidable

Reason is indispensable to human beings. People cannot exist without reason. But, when the rational feverishly pushing up to the "inevitability" and "omnipotent" status, negation and discard human irrational elements such as emotion, desire, will, and treat it as an objective and the embodiment of truth, and the rational measure everything, all deduction, deduction even human history, it is precisely to the opposite of its irrational, is bound to cause people to its profound reflection and criticism. The stoics in the history of ancient Greek philosophy believed that reason should, if possible, completely suppress emotions in order to achieve spiritual tranquility. According to Plato, reason is the highest attribute and power of human soul, and it should dominate human passion and desire. Obviously, both of them emphasize the absolute status and power of rationality, and believe that irrational factors such as emotion and desire are unreliable. They are obstacles to people's rationality, and they derogate people's emotions and desires. There is no denying that man should and can be rational. However, human beings are not purely rational animals, human beings have seven emotions and six desires, and human beings are rich in emotions and desires. In the process of human understanding and transforming the world, not only rational thinking plays a role, but also non-rational factors such as emotion, will, inspiration, belief and subconscious play an important role. When rationalism is in vogue, people gradually realize that the irrational factors in people's mind also have to play a role. In contrast to the highly complex and volatile social environment in which contemporary public policy is made, the knowledge and information available to anyone, no matter how exceptional, to support his or her decision-making behavior is limited. More importantly, humans as emotional higher animals, its decision-making behavior is not completely controlled by the rational, also will be affected by emotion, deep psychological motivation, religious fervor, value faith and so on the many kinds of irrational factors, individual experience, intuition, inspiration and other rational factors also play an important role in the decision.

In modern society, public policy making is different from individual decision making, and various interest groups and the public are playing an important role. We strongly advocate the democratization of policy making. In addition to implementing the political rights that citizens should enjoy in accordance with the law, an important purpose is to pay attention to the interests of the group to restrict the interests of the individual, to compensate for the limitation of the individual rationality, and to restrict the role of the individual irrationality. However, it must be seen that humans, as social animals, sometimes show a kind of group irrationality. Collective unconsciousness, group dementia and so on are the description of this group irrational phenomenon. Once motivated, this herd irrationality has few external forces to restrain it in the short term. This phenomenon is not only revealed by modern psychology, but also confirmed by numerous examples in reality. Recalling the mass frenzy in the unprecedented "cultural revolution" that took place in our country more than 30 years ago, we can feel the uncontrollable force of the group irrationality. Although for a society, the phenomenon of group irrationality only occurs in a few times, once it appears, it will have a significant impact on the formulation of public policies.

A more prominent example of the rational and irrational opposition in public policy making is the opposition between theory and experience. In public policy making, decision makers may encounter the situation that the policy plans analyzed by theory and those obtained by experience are mutually contradictory, which is the biggest headache for decision makers in public policy making. Faced with such problems, the choice of scheme is often very difficult. This is, of course, an extreme case. And in public policy making, the creation of any policy options are also not purely depend on rational or irrational, because regardless of the individual or group decision makers of decision-making behavior is a complicated process with reason and unreason, even from the point of view of behavior results is irrational choice, also contain more or less some rational composition. This makes the rationality and the irrationality in the public policy making appear both mutually opposites, also mutually integrates. Rationality ensures the accuracy of policies in the objective world, while irrationality ensures the effectiveness of policies in the real world. Rationality constantly corrects the irrational policy program, while irrationality in turn constantly improves the rational policy program.

To sum up, rationality and irrationality in public policy making are not separate, nor are there only conflicting sides. Therefore, in the public policy making, we should not unilaterally pursue rationality and deny the irrational role, which oversimplifies the complexity of solving the real world problems. Of course, the decision cannot be made entirely by the decision makers, which will lead to blind empiricism. This has left many painful lessons in our modern history. At the same time, we should face up to the conflict between rationality and irrationality in public policy making, and see the integration of rationality and irrationality. This special relationship between rationality and irrationality is utilized in policy making so that the policies formulated are scientific and humanized, effectively solve social problems and achieve policy goals.

想要了解更多英国留学资讯或者需要英国代写，请关注51Due英国论文代写平台，51Due是一家专业的论文代写机构，专业辅导海外留学生的英文论文写作，主要业务有essay代写、paper代写、assignment代写。在这里，51Due致力于为留学生朋友提供高效优质的留学教育辅导服务，为广大留学生提升写作水平，帮助他们达成学业目标。如果您有essay代写需求，可以咨询我们的客服QQ：800020041。