LIST OF PANELS

There is a paradox about decision in Policy Studies. Indeed, “decision” has progressively disappeared as a research question since 1970 and the focus has shifted from decision-making to policy-making studies (Lowi et Olson 1970). This shift followed controversies about the notion of decision-making in the 1960s, which was criticised for being a myth, rationalized a posteriori, which implied neglecting the processes preceding it including the definition of the problem at stake, the formulation of alternative solutions, the plurality of actors involved in multi-level processes, etc. (Schattschneider 1975; Bachrach et Baratz 1963; Cobb et Elder 1971; Rochefort et Cobb 1994). Yet, the actors involved in the policy process consider themselves as “decision-makers and see the “decision” as the essential moment in the policy process.

There is a second paradox in policy studies, which involves the neglect of the symbolic dimension of policies. Symbols are everywhere in politics – they are in fact more visible or at least more noticeable now than they had been in previous years : political actors and the media frequently use the adjective “symbolic” to characterize decisions. However, analysts of the policy process has neglected it for a long time. 

To go beyond this double paradox, we would like to question in this panel why the myth of the “decision” and of the “decision-maker” continues to be so important for the actors involved in the policy process and how this myth is built, framed, and staged by policymakers. Indeed, the notion of a “decisive” moment is constructed through discourse and gestures throughout all the policy process. This symbolic work also concerns the “decision-makers”, which are defined / identified by other actors - those who will develop their strategy in relation to the “decision-makers” they want to influence or fight against.

The panel will focus on the uses of the concept of “decision” and of "decision-makers" in the policy process and explore three main hypotheses. The first one considers that the “decision” and “decision-makers” can be analyzed as symbols, as mentioned above. Following Edelman’s argument about the symbolic uses of politics, we would like to consider them as a “meaning creation through political languages” which contributes to the political spectacle and the legitimacy of the government. The second hypothesis considers that the symbolic uses of language are not only a justification for the publicization and the legitimation of a policy a posteriori but also play an important role during the pre-decision processes (agenda-setting, policy formulation, etc.). The third hypothesis consider that the construction of the decision as the key moment in policy-making is also important for decision-makers as well as for the other actors involved. This panel will thus reflect on regimes of justification, on the importance of rationality and of political responsibility.

This panel welcome all empirical and theoretical papers which propose to better understand the symbolic uses of the "decision" in the policy process.