The paper “ Lindbloms Incrementalism, Baumgartner, and Jones’ Punctuated Equilibrium, Sabatier and Jenkins-Smith’ s Advocacy Coalition Framework” is a creative example of the assignment on social science. Incrementalism is a policy-making procedure that produces decisions only slightly different from those of past practice. It is also referred to as the science of muddling through in contrast to the model of the balanced all-inclusive ideal of planning. It is preferred by conservatives because they see it as safe. It is also a model that conserves system behavior. Almost all policy changes are incremental.
This means that there are barriers to significant policy changes. The reasons that make policy changes incremental are discussed below. One of the foremost factors that make incremental change vogue is the fact that any natural system faces various constraints. These constraints limit any significant policy change leaving room only for incremental change. Constrains are experienced in the financial areas, and also in other areas that are crucial to large organizations. It’ s noteworthy to consider that most policymakers and decision-makers in large organizations are averse to risks. This is because they are afraid that unanticipated changes will bring irreversible results.
Thus, they employ risk-averse strategies, and the result is that incremental changes occur in the organization (Lindblom 79-88). Incrementalism is preferred because, like inaction, it is known to consume fewer resources. Other systems consume large resources, and they are mostly unproven. Prospects of large budgetary deficits discourage policymakers from tackling organizational problems on a grand scale. There are some things that must happen for significant policy to occur in the incremental setup. It is imperative to understand that this type of management is being discussed in the realm of political science, and the public arena.
One of the things that have got to happen to set the wheels of Incrementalism in motion is the availability of constitutional checks and balances.
Baumgartner, Frank R. and Jones, Brian. Agendas and Instability in American Politics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1993.
Jenkins-Smith and Sabatier P. Dynamics of Policy oriented learning. New York: Bantam books, 1993.
Lindblom, E. The science of muddling through, Public Administration Review, 19. 2 (1959):79-88.
Zahariadis, N. Ambiguity, time and multiple streams, Policy Studies Review, 12.6 (1999): 71-89.