The Dynamics of Agenda-Setting: The Case of Post-Secondary Education in Manitoba by Kelly Saunders A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies of The University of Manitoba ln partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Faculty of Education University of Manitoba Winnipeg Copyright @ 2006 by Kelly Saunders THE UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES COPYRIGHT PERMISSION The Dynamics of Agenda-Setting: The Case of Post-Secondary Education in Manitoba BY Kelly Saunders A Thesis/Practicum submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies of The University of Manitoba in partial fulfillment of the requirement of the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Kelly Saunders @ 2007 Permission has been granted to the Library of the University of Manitoba to lend or sell copies of this thesis/practicum, to the National Library of Canada to microfilm this thesÍs and to lend or sell :opies of the film, and to University Microfilms Inc. to publish an abstract of thÍs thesis/practicum. This reproduction or copy of this thesis has been made available by authority of the copyright owner solely for the purpose of private study and research, and may only be reproduced and copied as permitted by copyright laws or with express written authorization from the copyright owner. Abstract The field of public policy analysis has long been a point of interest in the social sciences. Yet while we may know a fair bit about how policies are implemented or evaluated in terms of their impact on society, we know less about how they came to be issues on the government's agenda in the first place. While there may be any number of issues swirling around a government at any point in time, only some of these issues get acted upon in the form of a policy outcome. Moreover, on any given issue there may be a number of policy options from which to choose. Why do decision-makers decide to select one alternative over another? Together, these pre-decisional processes of agenda setting and alternative specification represent relatively unchartered territory within policy analysis. The focus of my research project is the formulation of post-secondary education policy in Manitoba from 1988 to 1996; the period extending from the election of the Progressive Conservative government of Gary Filmon to its decision to establish the Council on Post-Secondary Education. Utilizing the multiple streams model of agenda-setting developed by Kingdon (1995), I explore those factors that motivated the Filmon government to decide in the first place to take action on post-secondary education, and secondly, to do so in the manner of the creation of the Council on Post-Secondary Education. ln pafticular, I analyze Kingdon's three process streams of politics, problems and policies, the actors that comprised the policy subsystem at the time, and the wider context within which these processes occurred. This qualitative study utilizes a case study approach, and is based on a triangulated research design that includes: . elite interviews with some of the key actors comprising the post-secondary education policy subsystem in Manitoba during the period from '1988 to 1996; . archival research of government documents, Hansard, briefs submitted to the University Education Review Commission, media reports, and other relevant primary sources; . an extensive literature review of the relevant scholarly research in the areas of post-secondary education; agenda setting and policy analysis; social constructivism; New Public Management; educational politics; policy borrowing; ideology; globalization; and multiple streams theory. It is anticipated that the research findings will help inform not only issues related to the wider processes of agenda-setting and alternative specification within governments, but the formulation of post-secondary education policy in particular. Acknowledgements The completion of this thesis would never have happened without the support and guidance of my wonderful Committee, comprised of Dr. Ben Levin, Dr. Paul Thomas and Dr. David Morphy. ln particular, I owe a huge debt of gratitude to Dr. Levin, the chair of my Committee, who never wavered in his belief in me and in this project. I will be forever grateful to you for your constant encouragement and friendship throughout these past several years. Thank you from the bottom of my heart. Dedication I dedicate this thesis to my son, Hunter Goodon, who continues to inspire me everyday with his courage, tenacity and love of life. You are my hero, buddy. lll Table of Contents Chapter 1: lntroduction Page 1 Chapter 2: Methodology Page 18 Ghapter 3: Processes and Actors Page 37 Chapter 4: The Larger Context - Globalization Page 73 Chapter 5: The Larger Context - The Climate of ldeas Page 100 Chapter 6: General Trends in Educational Reform Page 147 Ghapter 7: The Politics of Education Policymaking in Canada Page 'lB0 Chapter 8: Telling the Story: Prioritizing Page 220 Post-Secondary Education in Manitoba Chapter 9: Conclusion Page 345 Bibliography Page 375 1V Chapter 1 : lntroduction Public policies - those measures and decisions (and in some cases, non- decisions) that governments undertake in response to a problem - affect all of our lives in one form or another. Whether it be in the form of a program designed to increase the number of Aboriginal students attending university or a surcharge placed on gasoline purchases, few of us can escape from the actions of governments. Policies help define what is relevant to society and represent the public expression of the values and beliefs we hold as a community. Given their impact, it is not surprising that the examination of public policy has long fascinated political scientists. Yet, while the field of policy analysis has grown and developed over the years, a key question remains: where do public policies come from? At any given time there are dozens of issues and problems swirling around a government, yet only some of these issues get responded to in the form of a policy output. How do decision makers decide which of those problems in society merit attention and which ones don't? ln the words of Kingdon (1995), how do we know when an idea's time has come? For many of us, policies are seen as "things that just happen"; the inevitable conclusion in a series of events that make sense within the larger context (Anderson, 1975; Levin, 2001). Hence, a plane crash sparks a review of aviation safety policies or the election of a new government brings about a review of spending policies in the health care field. This sense of inevitability seems especially pertinent in contemporary times, where such macro-level variables as globalization, the ideology of the New Right, citizen demands for more accountability and the dominance of managerialist-inspired ideas within the public administration field suggest a certain convergence in policymaking across post-industrialized states. We are not surprised then when governments implement policies designed to reform the public sector, or tighten the line on program spending. ln light of these global trends, these kinds of measures seem to be just good common sense; a logical reaction to the circumstances of the time. Yet, while these economic and social variables may help inform our understandings of government action in some areas, they do not tell the whole story. "Sometimes, conditions accepted as inevitable or unproblematic may come to be seen as problems while damaging conditions may not be defined as political issues at all" (Edelman, 1988, p. 12). While at times the political process may be as logical and straightfon¡rard as these variables suggest, the rationale for why governments choose to do some things and not others, and the manner in which they choose to do so, is often fuzzy and unpredictable. As Ball (1998; 1990) argues, public policymaking is inevitably a process of bricolage, of borrowing and copying bits and pieces of ideas from here and there in an attempt to find anything that looks like it might work. "Most policies are ramshackle, compromise, hit and miss affairs, that are re-worked, tinkered with, nuanced and inflected through a complex process of influence, text production, dissemination and, ultimately, re-creation in contexts of practice" (Ball, 1998, p.126;1990). ln order to get a better understanding of why some problems get acted on and why others fail to capture the attention of decision-makers, a number of political scientists have attempted to break down the policymaking process into a series of discrete stages or cycles (Lasswell, 1951; Brewer, 1974; Jones, 1984; Anderson,1975; Howlett and Ramesh, 1995). Typically, this process is seen as comprising the following phases. identifying a problem; considering the various policy alternatives from which a choice is to be made; making an authoritative choice amongst those specified alternatives by passing laws or regulations; implementing the policy; and evaluating its outcomes (Brooks and Miljan, 2003; Kingdon 1995). The value of this kind of middle-range theoretical approach over grand theory models is that it allows each stage of the process to be investigated in greater depth on its own. While the linearity suggested by the cycles model is in many ways an aftificial construct (in reality, public policymaking is often ad hoc and idiosyncratic), it facilitates our understanding of where public policies come from by breaking down the complexity of the process into a limited number of manageable steps. ln addressing the broader question of how governments decide that an idea's time has come, we need to draw our attention to the first two stages of the policy process, the identification of problems that the government views as important, and the specification of the various policy solutions. This first stage is commonly referred to as "agenda-setting". The government agenda is the list of subjects or problems on which decision-makers have decided to take action.