|Mause I 455ff
Policy field analysis/Vedung: Def Policy: is intended to help solve a social problem.
A widespread classification of policy instruments in political science is based on a tripartite typology of Vedung (1998)(1), according to which the instruments are classified according to their liability to recipients and not according to the nature of the measure itself.
Terminology of Vedung:
Def Sticks/Vedung: Regulatory instruments (sticks) describe every attempt by the government to regulate the behaviour of the population, companies and other state institutions by reducing available alternatives for action for individuals within society (cf. Meier 1985, p. 1 (2)). Regulatory instruments therefore include both the restrictions and the directives of an action.
Def Carrots/Vedung: financial/economic incentives.
They differ from regulatory mechanisms in the voluntary nature of their adoption. (Vedung 1998, p. 32.)
Def Sermons/Vedung: Persuasive instruments/Information: Influenced by arguments, information or knowledge. (Vedung 1998, p. 33).
Def Political addressee/Vedung: Actors who need to change their behaviour in order to solve the problem. A distinction is made between people affected by policy and policy beneficiaries.
Mause I 456
Def intervention hypothesis (3): (Unlike causal hypothesis) The intervention hypothesis determines how the causes of a social problem are mitigated by a policy and thus the problem is to be solved. (4) It therefore defines measures.
Causal hypothesis: specifies the cause-effect relationships and provides information on the addressees and the final beneficiaries. (5)
Performance and effect levels:
Def Output: the products of a policy with which one tries to change the behaviour of the actors.
Def Outcome: the corresponding change in behaviour of the actors.
Def Impact: the total of intended and unintended impacts. (6)
1. Vedung, Evert. 1998. Policy instruments: Typologies and theories. In Carrots, sticks & sermons: Policy instruments and their evaluation. Comparative policy analysis series, Hrsg. Marie-Louise Bemelmans-Videc, Ray C. Rist und Evert, Vedung, 21-58. New Brunswick 1998.
2. Kenneth J. Meier, Regulation politics, economics and bureaucracy, New York 1985.
3. Rossi, Peter H., Howard E. Freeman, und Gerhard Hofmann, Programm-Evaluation – Einführung in die Methoden angewandter Sozialforschung. Stuttgart 1998
4. D’Agostino, Jerome V. 2001. Increasing the role of educational psychology theory in program development and evaluation. Educational Psychologist 36( 2): 127– 132.
5. Peter Knoepfel & Werner Bussmann, Die öffentliche Politik als Evaluationsobjekt. In Einführung in die Politikevaluation, Hrsg. Werner Bussmann, Ulrich Klöti und Peter Knoepfel, S. 57. Basel/ Frankfurt a. M. 1997
6. Sager, Fritz, und Markus Hinterleitner, Evaluation. In Lehrbuch der Politikfeldanalyse. Lehr- und Handbücher der Politikwissenschaft, Hrsg. Klaus Schubert und Nils C. Bandelow, 3. Aufl., 437– 462. München 2014._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. The note [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition.
Policy instruments: Typologies and theories. In Carrots, sticks & sermons: Policy instruments and their evaluation New Brunswick 1998
Politik und Wirtschaft: Ein integratives Kompendium Wiesbaden 2018