Top » Teaching » Policy Process and Negotiation

Policy Process and Negotiation

2015 Winter Term

Wed.: 13:00-14:45
Admin. #2, Lecture Room 3.


Masahiro -Masa- Matsuura, Ph.D., Associate Professor

Hideaki Shiroyama, Professor

Course description:

This course provides an introductory overview of theory and practice of public policy processes.

Its first part cultivate essential understanding of policy processes. It starts with an overview of canonical theories on policy processes, such as incrementalism, agenda setting, implementation, and bureaucracy. In each class we will also discuss about the variety of policy process depending on the cultural and institutional contexts and the role of knowledge in the policy process. This course will cover recent trends, such as policy transfer and new public management, as well. In order to put these theories in a context, the course will discuss policy-making processes, such as bureaucracy and recent reforms, in Japan as well from comparative perspective. This segment of the course is structured around pre-class readings and in-class discussions. Students are asked to present a synthesized summary of their assigned readings in the class.

The latter half of the course will deal with strategic policy-making techniques. It starts with an overview of negotiation theory as the foundation for the strategic management of stakeholders. Then students are asked to engage in case-based exercises to improve their communication and policy design skills.

Teaching Methods

Class participation is crucial. Each student is asked to review the assigned article/chapter (total number of articles to review per each student depends on the class size) and present its summary in the class. The instructor will facilitate the student discussion so that everyone in the classroom will have the basic theoretical understanding of theories for public policy processes and negotiation.

In each class, students will take a short quiz regarding the article discussed in the previous class.

During the semester, each student is asked to submit two short essays (2 pages) related to course readings. Students, particularly whose first language is not English, are encouraged to develop professional writing skill through these essays. At the end of the semester, students will be asked to submit another short essay (approx. 5 pages) that reflects on actual public policy cases using the literature reviewed in this course.


Class participation, in-class presentations, two mid-term short essays, mini-quiz, and term paper.

Class Schedule

9/16 Introduction to the course

9/23 No class

Part I: Policy Processes (7 lectures 9/30-11/11)

9/30 Incrementalism, Agenda Setting, and Problem Definition (MM)

Kingdon, J. (1995). Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies (2nd Ed.). New York, NY: Addison-Wesley. Chapter 9.
Lindblom, C. (1959). The Science of "Muddling Through", Public Administration Review, 19 (2), pp. 79-88.
Stone, D. (1988). Policy Paradox: the art of political decision making. New York, NY: W.W. Norton. Chapter 6.
Suggested readings:
Downs, A. (1972). "Up and down with ecology - the 'issue-attention cycle'," Public Interest, 28, pp. 28-50.
Lindblom, C. (1979) "Still muddling, not yet through," Public Administration Review, 39, pp. 517–526.

10/7 Policy Processes (HS)

Dunn, W. (2004). Public Policy Analysis: An Introduction (3rd Ed.), Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall). Chapter 2 (Policy Analysis in the Policy-Making Process)
Bardach, E. (1981). Problems of Problem Definition in Policy Analysis, Research in Public Policy Analysis and Management, 1, pp. 161-71;
Dunn, W. (2004). Public Policy Analysis: An Introduction (3rd Ed.), Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall). Chapter 3 (Structuring Policy Problems); or
Stone, D. (1989). Causal Stories and the Formation of Policy Agendas, Political Science Quarterly 104 (2), pp. 281-300.

10/14 Institutional Design and Policy Transfer (MM)

Argyris, C. (1992). On Organizational Learning. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell. Chapter 1.;
DiMaggio, P. and Powell, W. (1983). The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Rev., 48, pp. 147-160.; or
Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons. New York, NY: Univ. of Cambridge. Chapter 3.
Dolowitz, D. and Marsh, D. (2000). Learning from Abroad: The role of policy transfer in contemporary policy-making. Governance, 13(1), pp. 5-24.;
Goldfinch, S. (2006). Rituals of Reform, Policy Transfer, and the National University Corporation Reforms in Japan. Governance, 19(4), pp. 585-604.; or
Rose, R. (1991). What is Lesson-Drawing, Journal of Public Policy, 11, pp. 3-30.

10/21 Science Policy (MM)

Funtowicz, S. and Ravetz, J. (1993). Science for the Post-Normal Age, Futures, 25(7), pp. 739–755.
Pielke, R. (2007). The Honest Broker: Making sense of science in policy and politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Chapter 2.
Stirling, A. (2010). Keep it complex. Nature 468, pp. 1029–1031.

10/28 Policy Processes in Japan (MM)

Freeman, L. A. (2000). Closing the Shop: Information cartels and Japan's Mass Media. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press. Chapter 3.
Schwartz, F. (1998). Advice and Consent: The politics of consultation in Japan. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Chapter 2.
Schwartz, F. and Pharr, S. (eds.) (2003). The State of Civil Society in Japan. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Introduction.
Westney, E. (1987). Imitation and Innovation: The transfer of Western organizational patterns to Meiji Japan. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Chapter 1

11/4 Theory on Democracy, Participation, and Deliberation (MM)

Arnstein, S (1969). A Ladder of Citizen Participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35, pp.216-224.
Barber, B. (1984). Strong Democracy: Participatory politics for a new age. Berkeley, CA: University of California. Chapter 9.
Guttman, A. and Thompson, D. (1996). Democracy and Disagreement. Cambridge, MA: Belknap. Chapter 2.
Hendriks, C. (2006). When the Forum Meets Interest Politics: Strategic Uses of Public Deliberation. Politics and Society. 34(4), pp. 571-602.
Peattie, L. (1968). Reflections on Advocacy Planning, Journal of the American Planning Association, 34 (2), pp. 80 – 88.
Reich, R. (ed.) (1988). The Power of Public Ideas. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Chapter 6.
Schön, D. and Rein, M. (1994). Frame Reflection: toward the resolution of intractable policy controversies. New York: Basic Books Chapter 2.

11/11 Japanese Policy-making Processes (HS)

no case discussion, lecture and quiz only

Part II: Negotiation (4 lectures, 11/18 - 12/9)

11/18 Introduction to negotiation analysis (MM)

Position and Interests
Fisher, R. and Ury, W. (1991). Getting to Yes. NY: Penguin. Chapter 3.
Lax, D. and Sebenius, J. (1987). Manager as Negotiator, NY: Free Press. Chapter 4.
Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA)
Lax, D. and Sebenius, J. (1987). Manager as Negotiator, NY: Free Press. Chapter 3.
Suggested readings:
Shell, R. (1999). Bargaining for Advantage, NY: Penguin. Chapter 2 and 6.
Fisher, R. (1985). Art and Science of Negotiation, Harvard. Chapters 3 and 4.
Two party, single issue negotiation exercise

11/25 Mutual-Gains Negotiation (MM)

Lax, D. and Sebenius, J. (1987). Manager as Negotiator, NY: Free Press. Chapter 5.
Suggested readings:
Ariely, D. (2008). Predictably Irrational: The hidden forces that shape our decisions. New York, NY: Harper.
Cialdini, R. (1993). Influence: The psychology of persuasion. New York, NY: Morrow. Chapter 2.
Gray, B. (1989). Collaborating: Finding common ground for multiparty problems. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Chapter 1.

12/2 Negotiation Simulation Exercise (two party, two issue) (MM)

Simulation instruction (to be distributed via e-mail)

12/9 Negotiation in the Public Policy Context (MM)

Susskind, L. and Cruikshank, J. (1987). Breaking the Impasse. New York, NY: Basic Books. Chapter 3.
Carpenter, S. L., & Kennedy, W. J. D. (1988). Managing Public Disputes: A practical guide to handling conflict and reaching agreements. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Chapter 2 [no need to review the case descriptions]
Suggested readings:
Forester, J. (1999). The Deliberative Practitioner: Encouraging participatory planning processes. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Putnam, R. (1988). "Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games." International Organization. 42, pp 427-460.
Susskind, L. (1999). “A Short Guide to Consensus Building” (pp. 3-57) In Susskind, L., McKearnan, S. and Thomas-Larmer, J. (Eds.) The Consensus-Building Handbook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

12/16 Wrap-up of the course