International Relations theorists have seldom accepted the role of individual actors in political and strategic decision making processes when governing a state. Decisions would be analyzed on the final result, rather than the process that led up to it. Alison and Harper's Bureaucratic Politics Model presents foreign policy and political decision making as a 'game'. Through this model, we are provided with a deeper and more analytic framework of the decision-making process; The actions of the government, the actions of actors, and the implementation of the final decision.
The game consists of 'players', the senior players and the junior players. The senior players are those actors who have major political standing and dominate the decision games. The junior players are those who are held with the responsibility of implementing the decisions of the senior players. Everyone in this political framework has an 'interest', and with this interest comes the need for the player to negotiate with other players of differing interests, so that there is a level of compromise and understanding for the most effective governing.
As stated earlier, there is a need for the most effective governing, and according to Alison and Harper, this will come about only after extensive deliberating, and the acceptance of arriving at a different 'face of the issue'. This discoordination and clashing of interests may be the reason that implementation of government decisions still remains ineffective, and each of the players need to be able to debate their concerns and be understanding of another players interests . Agreement, accommodation and compromise at the 'senior player' level will make the decision easier to implement for the 'junior players', which is the only way to win the game.
This extensive internal deliberative process is how policies are shaped and then implemented in the real world. It is a good framework to use to think about bureaucratic politics.
ReplyDelete"Decisions would be analyzed on the final result, rather than the process that led up to it"
ReplyDeleteKhalid, what you have stated is true because even if the intentions behind an action are completely different, the way the world and the actors in the international arena judge a state is based on the final 'outcome.' It is these actions which provide some sort of predictability in the actions of certain states and it is this which ultimately leads to their standing in world politics.