Social Construction and Public

¶ … Constructionist Policy Design Approach Policy design approach can be described as mechanisms or measures that are utilized to develop and implement policies in light of specific goals. These goals provide the specific issues that need to be addressed by the policy during implementation. According to Schneider & Ingram (1997), some of the most essential components of public policy include problem definition, goal articulation, probable benefits, target population, policy directives or rules, and tools to be utilized in implementing the policy directives.

In most cases, policies are developed and established to help address some aspects of social behavior in order to enhance the quality of life and experiences of people. There are different policy design approaches that are utilized in the development and enactment of policies including the constructionist policy design approach. This approach suggests that policies are developed and implemented based on the social realities of citizens. This approach can be utilized in understanding why public policies usually fail to serve democracy, and comprehend social justice impacts of public policy.

Constructionist Policy Design Approach and Democracy The constructionist policy design approach was developed by Schneider and Ingram (1997) to explore how social realities shape public policies. Schneider & Ingram (1997) argue that social construction is the various measures through which social realities of the world are influenced and developed. Consequently, policy scholars believe that public policy is targeted towards the beliefs, stereotypes, and images that shape people's identities and link them with others within a social group that is likely to benefit or obtain burdensome policy.

Schneider & Ingram (1997) further contend that since social construction focuses on dealing with social realities, public policies are mainly geared towards addressing social problems and governance issues within the country. This essentially means that policy design in intrinsically intentional and normative since policies are developed and implemented to serve specific interests, values, and purposes. According to Burnier (1994), an individual's realities developed to become a specific social order because reality is viewed as a social construction.

One of the critical governance issues that need to be addressed through public policy is democracy, which is an important component in the establishment of political leadership. In many countries across the globe, political leaders are elected through a democratic process. Democracy is a term that literally means rule by the people, which implies that the majority have their way with regards to political decision making. While democracy provides an opportunity for the minority to express their thoughts and opinions, the will/wishes of the majority ultimately prevails.

The current form of democracy that is used in political decision making and leadership across the globe is representative democracy. In this case, people elect individuals to represent them in public governance through different political institutions or systems. Therefore, democracy essentially entails the implementation of the wishes/will of the majority or rule by the people and for the people. Governments and public policymakers are established/elected by the people in order to serve their (people) interests.

Throughout history, public policies have seemingly often failed to serve democracy as shown by the pervasive criticisms of public policies. The failure of public policies to serve democracy can be explained using different concepts such as Schneider and Ingram's constructionist policy design approach. In essence, the failure of public policy to reflect the wishes/interests of the people can be explained in several ways including the constructionist policy design approach.

While numerous policies have been adopted to help promote democracy or serve people's interests, they have failed to achieve this goal despite addressing some of the fundamental individual rights relating to political participation. In the United States, citizens have continued to express their dissatisfaction with the country's democracy though they have the right to vote, freedom of speech, and liberty to run for political office/positions.

Even though various public policies have been enacted to increase citizens' participation in governance, they have largely failed to serve the interests/wishes of the people. On one hand, public policies focus on promoting the involvement of citizens in political processes and decision making. On the other hand, these policies do not serve the other wishes/interests of the people because politicians enact policies that serve their own interests.

Through the constructionist policy design approach, one of the reasons society produces public policies that usually fail to serve democracy is the failure of the policies to meet people's expectations or interests. For instance, policymakers are expected to identify pressing issues in the society and formulate policies that help in dealing with the issues effectively. In some cases, policymakers develop and enact public policies that fail to address major issues in the society in an effective manner.

Social realities, which are the premise of social construction, shape people's expectations and interests. Public policies are established to help meet these interests and expectations in order to be considered effective. Public policies have failed to serve democracy because they are relatively incapable of meeting the needs, expectations or interests of the society. This is particularly true when the policies are considered from a governance perspective i.e. how public officials and institutions work towards meeting the interests and needs of people.

In this regard, public officials and institutions do not implement policies in a manner that effectively address the interests and expectations of the people. Consequently, the enacted policies fall short in serving the people's interests or meeting their expectations. As public policies fail to serve people's interests, they also fail to empower, enlighten, and involve the public (citizens) in self-government process (Soss, 1999). For example, economic development and labor policies have failed to offer long-term economic wellbeing to citizens in a manner that meets their expectations.

Actually, people are forced to struggle with increased income inequality because of relatively heavy taxation and regulatory policies (Schneider & Ingram, 1997). On the other hand, policies that are geared towards providing welfare have ended up generating economic dependency rather than ending poverty as they are intended. Due to this economic dependency, welfare receivers rely on initiatives/actions by public officials and institutions to survive, especially in light of tough economic times (Soss, 1999).

While politicians deliver speeches on enhancing the plight and predicament of welfare recipients during legislative debates and electoral campaigns, welfare policies are enacted and implemented in a manner that does not end poverty. The above examples demonstrate the discrepancy between the public policies and people's expectations. As long as these discrepancies continue to exist, public policies will continue falling short of serving democracy. While public policies are designed based on people's interests, the implementation is not carried out in a manner that addresses these interests and expectations.

From a social construction perspective, public policies do not effectively tackle the devastating social realities of people, which implies that they significantly fail to serve democracy, which is based on the will of majority of the people. The second explanation on why the society produces public policies that usually fail to serve democracy based on a social constructionist perspective is that policy designs seemingly discourage active citizenship (Schneider & Ingram, 1997).

In most cases, policy development processes are led by public officials and legislators who engage in huge debates regarding policy directives and intentions. During this process, the policy development measures are not necessarily driven by people interests, but are largely influenced by the wishes and desires of policymakers and legislators. While policymakers and legislators are mandated with the task of developing policies that enhance the lives of the citizens, they may fail to engage active citizen participation in the policymaking process.

Schneider & Ingram (1997) state that some societal contexts encourage the use of policy designs that promote antidemocratic tendencies, which are in turn harmful to democracy. The choice of such policy designs is influenced by the fact that policy designs are usually by-products of a vibrant historical process that incorporates social constructions of target populations, institutions, and power relationships. This implies that policymakers and legislators utilize their own social constructions of knowledge, institutions, target populations and power relationships.

The dependence on social construction of these factors may not necessarily reflect the current interests and expectations of people, which in turn makes the society to produce public policies that serve democracy. Therefore, the flawed public policies with regards to serving democracy can be attributed to the degenerative pattern of policy making processes and deceptive social constructions of people's interests and expectations.

Social Justice Impacts of Public Policy on Marginalized/Excluded Groups Soss (2005) contends that citizenship needs to be expanded to incorporate enabling and deserving social construction, which will provide the premise through which public policies are developed and implemented in a manner that enhances the wellbeing of marginalized or excluded groups. One of the mostly affected marginalized or excluded groups in public policy development is welfare recipients who have an unprecedented material stake in governmental actions (Soss, 1999).

Public policies have considerable impacts on marginalized or excluded groups based on the policy designs used in formulating policies. Through the constructionist policy design approach, policy design is based on social constructions of knowledge, target population, institutions, and power relationships. In this regard, policymakers formulate policies based on their own constructions of the social realities of target populations.

Therefore, policies are either formulated to provide benefits to advantaged populations since they are considered as powerful, positively constructed groups or to devise punishment to deviant populations, which are considered weak, negatively constructed groups (Schneider & Ingram, 1997). This essentially means that policy designs are inherently skewed towards serving the interests of the advantageous groups. The social constructionist policy design approach reveals the social justice impacts of public policy on excluded or marginalized groups by demonstrating the skewed nature of policy designs to either benefit advantageous groups or punish deviant groups.

Through this focus, policy designs seemingly fail to consider the plight of excluded or marginalized groups, which are in turn forced to be dependent on the actions of public officials and institutions for survival. Through the existing policy design approaches, the government and policymakers have engaged in passive construction of some groups of people or citizens as "undeserving and unentitled by omission" (Soss, 2005). Given this passive construction, the government and policymakers have developed public policies that actively stigmatize certain groups of citizens.

Therefore, one of the major social justice impacts of public policy on excluded and marginalized groups is active stigmatization of these groups. The active stigmatization is attributable to the fact that public policies are skewed towards benefit advantageous groups as well as the passive construction that some groups of people are undeserving and unentitled. According to Soss (2005), the negative social constructions by government and policymakers affect the social standing of some groups of people and lessen their capability to assume positive citizenship roles and responsibilities.

The second social justice impact of public policy on groups that are excluded and marginalized is discouraging political engagement through promoting the attribute of dependence among this people (Soss, 1999). This attribute emerges from the active stigmatization brought by negative social constructions and the fact that excluded/marginalized groups have relatively minimal political skills and resources. The view of dependent passivity that characterizes public policies towards excluded/marginalized groups has found its way into politics through policy designs and negative social constructions.

For instance, welfare policies have been shaped by the perception that welfare recipients are not functioning or competent citizens and therefore need to depend on actions by public officials and institutions. Additionally, individuals from excluded and marginalized groups are relatively withdrawn and dependent to an extent that they cannot fully engage in political activism. Therefore, welfare policies and political action reveal the social justice impact of public policy on marginalized and excluded groups through demonstrating how these policies discourage active political participation or engagement.

Link to Research Interest One of the arguments from Schneider and Ingram's constructionist policy design approach and Soss's article that is linked to my research interest is the assertion that policy designs are manipulated for political gain. This is an important area of research because of the influence of social construction in policy formulation and implementation processes. Existing literature has demonstrated that there is a positive relationship or association between social construction and public policies.

The need to examine this issue is influenced by the fact that public policies have been ineffective in addressing people's interests and expectations fully though they are formulated and implemented t deal with these issues. Through examining this issue, the research will help in highlighting the discrepancy between policy intentions and people's problems or issues. It is important to establish the reasons for public policies' failure to fully meet the needs, expectations, and interests of citizens.

Constructionist policy design approach by Schneider and Ingram provide insights on some of the major causes of this discrepancy, especially socially construction. In this case, Schneider & Ingram (1997) contend that policy designs are usually created through a vibrant process that incorporates social constructions. Based on this concept, policymakers formulate and implement public policies depending on their social construction of various factors such as targeted citizens, institutions, knowledge, and power relationships.

The social construction influence policymakers understanding of the social realities of citizens, which in turn affects the intentions or goals of a particular public policy. This essentially means that social construction is the premise for policy design and political participation. Given the significance of social construction in policy design, Schneider & Ingram (1997) argue that most of the existing policy designs contain some aspects of degenerative form of politics that are in turn utilized for political gain.

In this regard, policymakers utilize the degenerative form of politics towards social constructions of targeted citizens and issues that are strategically manipulated for political gains (Schneider & Ingram, 1997). The manipulation of policy designs for political.