1 ANTICIPATORY POLICYMAKING: WHEN GOVERNMENT ACTS TO PREVENT PROBLEMS AND WHY IT IS SO HARD A dissertation presented by Rob A. DeLeo to The Department of Political Science In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the field of Political Science Northeastern University Boston, Massachusetts September, 2012 2 ANTICIPATORY POLICYMAKING: WHEN GOVERNMENT ACTS TO PREVENT PROBLEMS AND WHY IT IS SO HARD by Rob A. DeLeo ABSTRACT OF DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science in the Graduate School of Northeastern University September, 2012 3 ABSTRACT Public policy analysts and political pundits alike tend to describe the policymaking process as a purely reactive sequence in which government develops solutions for clearly evident and identifiable social problems. While this depiction holds true in many cases, it fails to account for instances in which public policy is enacted in anticipation of a potential future problem. Whereas traditional policy concerns manifest themselves through ongoing harms and ills, “anticipatory problems” are projected to occur sometime in the future, and it is the prospect of their catastrophic impact that generates intense speculation in the present. This thesis sets out to answer the following questions: What kinds of issues on the contemporary scene fall into this category of “anticipatory”? What are the means by which such issues gain entrance onto the agenda, what forms of political conflict are they associated with, what kinds of policy actions do they prompt, and how are those policies implemented? Finally, to what extent can key patterns of anticipatory policymaking be recognized as distinctive from activity in other areas of public policy development? Three substantive topics will be analyzed in depth, from the initiation to conclusion of the policy cycle: (1) nanotechnology; (2) the H5N1 avian influenza; and (3) global warming. All are important issues with possible ramifications not only for the United States, but for other members of the international community as well. A concluding chapter also explores the role of anticipation as a tool in the continuing effort to “reinvent,” or improve, the performance of government. 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation is the culmination of a lifetime’s worth of support, guidance, and mentorship. As such, the number of friends, family members, and colleagues worthy of acknowledgement is far too innumerable to list. I would like to extend my sincerest gratitude to Professor David A. Rochefort. Professor Rochefort has been instrumental in every professional milestone I have achieved during my tenure at Northeastern University. He has come to represent not only a mentor but also a close friend. Professor Rochefort embodies everything I strive to be as a scholar and individual. I would also like to extend sincere appreciation to Professor Christopher Bosso and Professor John Portz. Professors Bosso and Portz devoted a considerable amount of time and energy as part of my dissertation committee, and I am extremely grateful for their help. In addition, I want to recognize the important values instilled in me by my loved ones. To my father, thank you for teaching me the value of hard work. Your example has shown me that anything is possible, as long as you put your mind to it. To my mother, thank you for giving me the intellectual curiosity that fuels my passion for academic work. Without your untiring interest in my ideas—however crazy they may be—I never would have tapped the creativity needed to produce this thesis. To gram, thank you for teaching me to “never give up.” To my sister, thank you for teaching me the power of compassion. To Olga, thank you for giving me the confidence needed to survive the trials and tribulations of the academic world. And, of course, to Jenny, thank you for teaching me how to be human. While all of the above values are laudable unto themselves, it is through your love that I have found balance. 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract 2 Acknowledgments 4 Table of Contents 5 List of Figures 7 Chapter 1: Anticipation and Public Policy 8 Chapter 2: Toward an Anticipatory Policy Type 22 Anticipation and the Policy Process 23 Policy Typologies 30 The Policymaking Cycle 48 The Road Ahead: An Outline of Forthcoming Case Studies 68 Chapter 3: No Small Matter: Balancing the Risks and Benefits of Nanotechnology 72 Dimensions of the Problem 74 Discourse of Conflict 78 Agenda Setting, Policy Formulation, and Enactment 89 Establishing a Nanotechnology Research Infrastructure 91 Agenda Catalysts 106 Asserting Risk 110 Agenda Catalysts 125 Implementation and Evaluation 128 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 133 National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health 139 (NIOSH) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 141 Conclusion 143 Chapter 4: An Ounce of Prevention: Bird Flu, Swine Flu, and the Politics of Pandemics 145 Dimensions of the Problem 146 Discourse of Conflict 152 Agenda Setting, Policy Formulation, and Enactment 159 2003-2008: Agenda Setting and H5N1 Avian Influenza 162 Agenda Catalysts 179 2009: Agenda Setting and H1N1 Swine Influenza 186 Agenda Catalysts 196 Implementation and Evaluation 201 Conclusion 213 6 Chapter 5: Too Hot to Handle: Policy Failure and Global Warming 215 Dimensions of the Problem 218 Discourse of Conflict 229 Agenda Setting, Policy Formulation, and Enactment 239 Agenda Catalysts 257 Implementation and Evaluation 262 Conclusion 275 Chapter 6: Conclusion 278 Anticipation: A Distinctive Policy Type 279 A. Problem Definition 282 B. Agenda Setting 284 C. Policy Formulation 288 D. Policy Design 290 E. Policy Implementation 292 F. Policy Evaluation 295 Anticipation: The Road to Better Government? 297 Institutionalizing Futurism 303 Congress 303 Executive Branch 305 Understanding of Problem Indicators 306 Bibliography 308 7 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2-1: Orienting Conceptual Framework for Case Studies 71 Figure 3-1: Number of Nanotechnology Mentions in the Congressional Record, 1997-2004 93 Figure 3-2: Number of Nanotechnology Mentions in Congressional Hearings, 93 1997-2004 Figure 3-3: Number of Stories Published in The New York Times on Nanotechnology, 108 1997-2004 Figure 3-4: Number of Nanotechnology Mentions in the Congressional Record, 2005-2012 111 Figure 3-5: Number of Nanotechnology Mentions in Congressional Hearings, 2005-2012 112 Figure 3-6: Number of Stories Published in The New York Times on Nanotechnology, 128 2005-2012 Figure 4-1: Number of Avian Influenza Mentions in the Congressional Record 163 Figure 4-2: Number of Avian Influenza Mentions in Congressional Hearings 164 Figure 4-3: Number of Bills Containing the Term “Avian Influenza” 165 Figure 4-4: Avian Influenza Cases and Deaths 181 Figure 4-5: Number of Stories Published in The New York Times on Avian Influenza 183 Figure 4-6: Number of New Swine Influenza Cases By Month in 2009 187 Figure 4-7: Number of Swine Influenza Deaths By Month 188 Figure 4-8: Number of Swine Influenza Mentions in the Congressional Record 189 Figure 4-9: Number of Swine Influenza Mentions in Congressional Hearings 190 Figure 4-10: Number of Swine Influenza Policies Relative to Avian Influenza Policies 191 During “Peak” Legislative Sessions Figure 4-11: Number of Stories Published in The New York Times on Swine Influenza 200 Figure 5-1: Number “Global Warming” or “Climate Change” Mentions in the 247 Congressional Record Figure 5-2: Number of “Global Warming” or “Climate Change” Mentions in 247 Congressional Hearings Figure 5-3: Number of Stories Published in The New York Times on Climate Change 261 Figure 6-1: A Typology of Anticipatory/Nonanticipatory Policymaking 280 Figure 6-2: Proposed Features of Anticipatory Policy Process 296 8 – Chapter 1 – Anticipation and Public Policy On April 14, 2010, several thousand men and women descended on historic Boston Common in protest of what they called a government “spending spree” as well as the looming threat of tax increases (Qtd. in Finucane and Schweitzer 2010, para. 1). This rally represented the latest in an ongoing series of nationwide public demonstrations spearheaded by the Tea Party, a populist political movement calling for smaller government and lower taxes along with a host of other targeted legislative initiatives, such as repealing the 2010 health care system overhaul (Finucane and Schweitzer 2010). While polls have demonstrated that Tea Party supporters are overwhelmingly Republican (according to one, nearly 77% of the Tea Party’s membership voted for McCain in 2008), many of the movement’s leading members have indicated the Tea Party is critical of government in general and should not be construed as a purely partisan attack on the Obama Administration (Brown 2010). The Boston rally culminated with a 21-minute speech by former Republican Vice Presidential Candidate Sarah Palin, who for several months had been on a tour—the “Tea Party Express”—touting the movement’s anti-government platform. “Americans now spend 100 days out of the year working for government before we even start working for ourselves,” Palin decried, in an attempt to evoke the same anti-government fervor that had spawned the original Boston Tea Party in 1773. “It is time to remind [elected officials] that government should be working for us, we should not have to work for government. That is why there are more and more patriots every day standing up and speaking out” (Qtd. in Finucane and Schweitzer 2010, para. 2). The populist undercurrents that led to formation of the Tea Party movement are, in many ways, as old as the country itself. Steps away from the site of the 2010 rally, Charles Sprague, a participant in the original Tea Party and a soldier in the Revolutionary War, lies at rest in Boston’s Central Burying Ground. Sprague and his fellow revolutionaries had rallied against what they saw as 9 a broken system of governance marked by autocratic rule and, most importantly, taxation without representation.