T08P09 - Critical Policy Perspectives in Asia

Topic : Policy Discourse and Critical Policy Research

Panel Chair : Piyapong Boossabong - piyapong@msu.ac.th

Objectives and Scientific Relevance of the panel

The technocratic policy approach is not the only one that influences the development of policy studies in Asia. Critical policy perspectives are also shaded light on as a consequence of the limitations of the aforementioned approach in the real-world policy. Such perspectives are not simply categorized, but their commons are on making a critique of top-down policy making. They raise a question on the legitimacy of the conventional policy experts and their nuts and bolts. According to Fischer (2016), critical policy perspectives can be perceived as the ‘postpositivist’ movement in public policy founded on an interpretive understanding of social science. They depart form Marxism and Habermas’s critical theory, which attempts to critique scientism and technocracy. Their role is “to monitor or be on the alert for social shifts and to discursively explore and interpret their meanings through processes of critical deliberation and argumentation” (Ibid, p.98). He gives an example of the argumentative perspective as one of critical perspectives, which is now focused by some Asian scholars (e.g. Fischer & Boossabong, forthcoming; Li & He 2016). Without too specific conceptualization, this panel welcomes a wide-range of critical lens on policy studies in Asia (e.g. the perspectives that critique mainstream policy approaches and pay attention to the bottom-up policy making, the governance turn in public policy both in national and local scales, the role of local knowledge in policy analysis etc.). The paper should address; how and why critical policy perspectives are emerged in different Asian contexts? Are they useful?, and if so, in which way? It is also worth learning their success and failure in either making a critique or proposing the alternatives.

 

References

Fischer, F. 2016. What is critical? Connecting the policy analysis to political critique. Critical Policy Studies, 10(1), pp.95-98.

Fischer, F. and Boossabong, P. forthcoming. Deliberative Policy Analysis. Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy, ed. J. Dryzek. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Li, Y. and He, J. 2016. Exploring deliberative policy analysis in an authoritarian country. Critical Policy Studies, 10(2), pp.235-246.

Call for papers

The technocratic policy approach is not the only one that influences the development of policy studies in Asia. Critical policy perspectives are also shaded light on as a consequence of the limitations of the aforementioned approach in the real-world policy. Such perspectives are not simply categorized, but their commons are on making a critique of top-down policy making. They raise a question on the legitimacy of the conventional policy experts and their nuts and bolts. According to Fischer (2016), critical policy perspectives can be perceived as the ‘postpositivist’ movement in public policy founded on an interpretive understanding of social science. They attempt to critique scientism and technocracy. Their role is “to monitor or be on the alert for social shifts and to discursively explore and interpret their meanings through processes of critical deliberation and argumentation” (Ibid, p.98). He gives an example of the argumentative perspective as one of critical perspectives, which is now focused by some Asian scholars (e.g. Fischer & Boossabong, forthcoming). Without too specific conceptualization, this panel welcomes a wide-range of critical lens on policy studies in Asia (e.g. the perspectives that critique mainstream policy approaches and pay attention to the bottom-up policy making, the governance turn in public policy, the role of local knowledge in policy analysis etc.). The paper should address; how and why critical policy perspectives are emerged in different Asian contexts? Are they useful?, and if so, in which way? It is also worth learning their success and failure in either making a critique or proposing the alternatives.

 

References

Fischer, F. 2016. What is critical? Connecting the policy analysis to political critique. Critical Policy Studies, 10(1), pp.95-98.

Fischer, F. and Boossabong, P. forthcoming. Deliberative Policy Analysis. Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy, ed. J. Dryzek. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Export PDF