Policy calibration and policy acceptability: assumptions, evidence, and practical implications
AbstractPolicy calibration is often described as a technical phase of policymaking after the most important aspects of the proposed policy have already been decided. In this article, we show that policy calibration also has an important political dimension because the acceptability of policies depen...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Taylor & Francis Group
2024-04-01
|
| Series: | Policy Design and Practice |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/25741292.2024.2342098 |
| _version_ | 1797198182934904832 |
|---|---|
| author | Arnošt Veselý |
| author_facet | Arnošt Veselý |
| author_sort | Arnošt Veselý |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | AbstractPolicy calibration is often described as a technical phase of policymaking after the most important aspects of the proposed policy have already been decided. In this article, we show that policy calibration also has an important political dimension because the acceptability of policies depends often more on concrete aspects of policies than on general policy views. We argue that understanding policy acceptability, i.e. attitudes to proposed policies, requires understanding the link between general and specific policy attitudes. The article starts with an illustrative example, showing how acceptability might change when policy becomes calibrated. It is followed by a summary of five theoretical approaches to the link between general and specific policy attitudes. These theories are confronted with empirical evidence. This article demonstrates that although attitudes to general principles of policy design are often hard to change simply by providing individuals with new information, it is easier to increase (or decrease) the acceptability of specific policies in that manner. This paradox might be explained by the relatively loose link between individuals’ attitudes to general policy principles and their attitudes to the specific use of policy tools. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-24T06:55:48Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-bf86afc916bf4bb89bbc27ca8c37f2c8 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2574-1292 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-24T06:55:48Z |
| publishDate | 2024-04-01 |
| publisher | Taylor & Francis Group |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Policy Design and Practice |
| spelling | doaj.art-bf86afc916bf4bb89bbc27ca8c37f2c82024-04-22T11:42:21ZengTaylor & Francis GroupPolicy Design and Practice2574-12922024-04-0111510.1080/25741292.2024.2342098Policy calibration and policy acceptability: assumptions, evidence, and practical implicationsArnošt Veselý0Faculty of Social Sciences, Charles University, Prague, CzechiaAbstractPolicy calibration is often described as a technical phase of policymaking after the most important aspects of the proposed policy have already been decided. In this article, we show that policy calibration also has an important political dimension because the acceptability of policies depends often more on concrete aspects of policies than on general policy views. We argue that understanding policy acceptability, i.e. attitudes to proposed policies, requires understanding the link between general and specific policy attitudes. The article starts with an illustrative example, showing how acceptability might change when policy becomes calibrated. It is followed by a summary of five theoretical approaches to the link between general and specific policy attitudes. These theories are confronted with empirical evidence. This article demonstrates that although attitudes to general principles of policy design are often hard to change simply by providing individuals with new information, it is easier to increase (or decrease) the acceptability of specific policies in that manner. This paradox might be explained by the relatively loose link between individuals’ attitudes to general policy principles and their attitudes to the specific use of policy tools.https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/25741292.2024.2342098Policy calibrationpolicy acceptabilitypolicy attitudessurvey experimentsprinciple-policy gap |
| spellingShingle | Arnošt Veselý Policy calibration and policy acceptability: assumptions, evidence, and practical implications Policy Design and Practice Policy calibration policy acceptability policy attitudes survey experiments principle-policy gap |
| title | Policy calibration and policy acceptability: assumptions, evidence, and practical implications |
| title_full | Policy calibration and policy acceptability: assumptions, evidence, and practical implications |
| title_fullStr | Policy calibration and policy acceptability: assumptions, evidence, and practical implications |
| title_full_unstemmed | Policy calibration and policy acceptability: assumptions, evidence, and practical implications |
| title_short | Policy calibration and policy acceptability: assumptions, evidence, and practical implications |
| title_sort | policy calibration and policy acceptability assumptions evidence and practical implications |
| topic | Policy calibration policy acceptability policy attitudes survey experiments principle-policy gap |
| url | https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/25741292.2024.2342098 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT arnostvesely policycalibrationandpolicyacceptabilityassumptionsevidenceandpracticalimplications |