The Process of Approving the Constitution is Best Described as

Principle or protocol to guide decisions and achieve rational outcomes

is a deliberate organization of guidelines to guide decisions and achieve rational outcomes. A policy is a argument of intent and is implemented every bit a procedure or protocol. Policies are more often than not adopted by a governance body within an organization. Policies can assistance in both
decision making. Policies used in subjective decision-making normally assist senior management with decisions that must be based on the relative merits of a number of factors, and as a consequence, are often hard to exam objectively, e.g. piece of work–life balance policy… Moreover, Governments and other institutions take policies in the form of laws, regulations, procedures, administrative actions, incentives and voluntary practices. Frequently, resource allocations mirror policy decisions.

In dissimilarity, policies to assist in objective decision-making are unremarkably operational in nature and can exist objectively tested, e.g. password policy.[1]

The term may apply to government, public sector organizations and groups, as well as individuals, Presidential executive orders, corporate privacy policies, and parliamentary rules of lodge are all examples of policy. Policy differs from rules or law. While the law can compel or prohibit behaviors (e.g. a constabulary requiring the payment of taxes on income), policy merely guides deportment toward those that are most probable to achieve the desired outcome.[2]

Policy or policy study may as well refer to the process of making important organizational decisions, including the identification of different alternatives such as programs or spending priorities, and choosing amongst them on the basis of the bear on they will take. Policies tin exist understood as political, managerial, financial, and administrative mechanisms bundled to reach explicit goals. In public corporate finance, a critical accounting policy is a policy for a firm/company or an industry that is considered to have a notably loftier subjective element, and that has a material affect on the fiscal statements.[
citation needed





The intended furnishings of a policy vary widely co-ordinate to the organization and the context in which they are made. Broadly, policies are typically instituted to avoid some negative effect that has been noticed in the organisation, or to seek some positive benefit.[
citation needed

Corporate purchasing policies provide an example of how organizations attempt to avoid negative effects. Many big companies have policies that all purchases above a sure value must be performed through a purchasing process. By requiring this standard purchasing process through policy, the arrangement can limit waste product and standardize the manner purchasing is washed.[
citation needed

The Country of California provides an case of benefit-seeking policy. In recent years, the numbers of hybrid cars in California has increased dramatically, in part because of policy changes in Federal law that provided USD $ane,500 in tax credits (since phased out) likewise as the use of high-occupancy vehicle lanes to hybrid owners (no loew hybrid vehicles). In this case, the organization (land and/or federal regime) created an effect (increased ownership and use of hybrid vehicles) through policy (revenue enhancement breaks, highway lanes).[
citation needed



Policies frequently have side furnishings or unintended consequences. Because the environments that policies seek to influence or manipulate are typically complex adaptive systems (east.g. governments, societies, large companies), making a policy change tin can take counterintuitive results. For example, a government may make a policy determination to raise taxes, in hopes of increasing overall revenue enhancement revenue. Depending on the size of the tax increase, this may have the overall effect of reducing tax revenue past causing uppercase flight or by creating a rate so loftier that citizens are deterred from earning the money that is taxed. (See the Laffer curve.)[
citation needed

The policy formulation process theoretically includes an attempt to assess every bit many areas of potential policy impact every bit possible, to lessen the chances that a given policy volition have unexpected or unintended consequences.



Instance of the policy cycle concept.

In political science, the
policy bicycle
is a tool used for analyzing the development of a policy item. It tin can besides be referred to as a “stagist approach”, “stages heuristic” or “stages approach”. It is thus a rule of thumb rather than the actual reality of how policy is created, but has been influential in how political scientists looked at policy in full general.[4]
Information technology was developed as a theory from Harold Lasswell’southward work.

Harold Lasswell’southward popular model of the policy cycle divided the process into seven distinct stages, asking questions of both how and why public policies should be made.
With the stages ranging from (ane) intelligence, (2) promotion, (3) prescription, (4) invocation, (5) application, (vi) termination and (7) appraisal, this procedure inherently attempts to combine policy implementation to formulated policy goals.

One version by James Due east. Anderson, in his
Public Policy-Making
(1974) has the following stages:

  1. Agenda setting (Problem identification) – The recognition of certain subject as a problem demanding farther government attention.
  2. Policy formulation – Involves exploring a variation of options or culling courses of action available for addressing the problem. (appraisal, dialogue, formulation, and consolidation)
  3. Decision-making – Government decides on an ultimate course of activity, whether to perpetuate the policy condition quo or alter it. (Decision could exist ‘positive’, ‘negative’, or ‘no-activity’)
  4. Implementation – The ultimate decision made earlier will be put into practice.
  5. Evaluation – Assesses the effectiveness of a public policy in terms of its perceived intentions and results. Policy actors attempt to determine whether the course of activeness is a success or failure by examining its impact and outcomes.
Popular:   Entrar Al Edificio Que Estã¡ Al Lado Del Banco Popular

An eight step policy bicycle is adult in detail in
The Australian Policy Handbook
by Peter Bridgman and Glyn Davis: (now with Catherine Althaus in its quaternary and 5th editions)

  1. Consequence identification
  2. Policy analysis
  3. Consultation (which permeates the unabridged process)
  4. Policy instrument evolution
  5. Building coordination and coalitions
  6. Program Design: Decision making
  7. Policy Implementation
  8. Policy Evaluation

The Althaus, Bridgman & Davis model is heuristic and iterative. It is
intentionally normative
description needed

and not meant to be
clarification needed

or predictive. Policy cycles are typically characterized as adopting a classical approach, and tend to describe processes from the perspective of policy decision makers. Accordingly, some postpositivist academics challenge cyclical models as unresponsive and unrealistic, preferring systemic and more than complex models.[seven]
They consider a broader range of actors involved in the policy space that includes civil order organisations, the media, intellectuals, think tanks or policy research institutes, corporations, lobbyists, etc.



Policies are typically promulgated through official written documents. Policy documents frequently come with the endorsement or signature of the executive powers within an organization to legitimize the policy and demonstrate that information technology is considered in force. Such documents oftentimes accept standard formats that are particular to the organisation issuing the policy. While such formats differ in form, policy documents usually incorporate certain standard components including:[
citation needed

  • A
    purpose statement, outlining why the organization is issuing the policy, and what its desired effect or outcome of the policy should exist.
  • An
    applicability and scope
    statement, describing who the policy affects and which actions are impacted by the policy. The applicability and scope may expressly exclude certain people, organizations, or actions from the policy requirements. Applicability and scope is used to focus the policy on but the desired targets, and avert unintended consequences where possible.
  • An
    effective date
    which indicates when the policy comes into strength. Retroactive policies are rare, just tin can exist found.
  • A
    section, indicating which parties and organizations are responsible for carrying out individual policy statements. Many policies may require the establishment of some ongoing role or activeness. For instance, a purchasing policy might specify that a purchasing office be created to procedure purchase requests, and that this part would be responsible for ongoing actions. Responsibilities often include identification of any relevant oversight and/or governance structures.
  • Policy statements
    indicating the specific regulations, requirements, or modifications to organizational beliefs that the policy is creating. Policy statements are extremely diverse depending on the organization and intent, and may take nearly whatever course.

Some policies may contain additional sections, including:

  • Groundwork, indicating any reasons, history, ethical groundwork statements, and/or intent that led to the creation of the policy, which may be listed as
    motivating factors. This information is ofttimes quite valuable when policies must exist evaluated or used in cryptic situations, just as the intent of a law can exist useful to a court when deciding a instance that involves that constabulary.
  • Definitions, providing articulate and unambiguous definitions for terms and concepts found in the policy document.[
    citation needed



The American political scientist Theodore J. Lowi proposed four types of policy, namely
in his article “Four Systems of Policy, Politics and Choice” and in “American Business, Public Policy, Example Studies and Political Theory”. Policy addresses the intent of the organization, whether government, business, professional, or voluntary. Policy is intended to affect the “real” earth, by guiding the decisions that are made. Whether they are formally written or non, almost organizations take identified policies.[8]

Policies may be classified in many different means. The following is a sample of several different types of policies broken down by their outcome on members of the arrangement.[8]



Distributive policies extend goods and services to members of an organization, likewise as distributing the costs of the goods/services amidst the members of the organisation. Examples include government policies that impact spending for welfare, public education, highways, and public safety, or a professional system’south benefits plan.[8]



Regulatory policies, or mandates, limit the discretion of individuals and agencies, or otherwise compel certain types of behavior. These policies are generally thought to be best applied when good behavior tin can be easily defined and bad behavior tin can exist easily regulated and punished through fines or sanctions. An instance of a fairly successful public regulatory policy is that of a highway speed limit.[viii]



Constituent policies create executive power entities, or deal with laws. Constituent policies also bargain with fiscal policy in some circumstances.[8]



Policies are dynamic; they are not but static lists of goals or laws. Policy blueprints have to exist implemented, often with unexpected results. Social policies are what happens ‘on the ground’ when they are implemented, as well equally what happens at the decision making or legislative phase.[8]

Popular:   Mis Amigos 1 of 1 Conmigo Al Centro

When the term policy is used, it may also refer to:[8]

  • Official government policy (legislation or guidelines that govern how laws should exist put into operation)
  • Broad ideas and goals in political manifestos and pamphlets
  • A company or organization’s policy on a particular topic. For instance, the equal opportunity policy of a company shows that the company aims to treat all its staff as.

The deportment the organization actually takes may often vary significantly from stated policy. This deviation is sometimes caused by political compromise over policy, while in other situations it is caused by lack of policy implementation and enforcement. Implementing policy may have unexpected results, stemming from a policy whose achieve extends further than the problem information technology was originally crafted to address. Additionally, unpredictable results may arise from selective or idiosyncratic enforcement of policy.[eight]

Types of policy analysis include:

  • Causal (resp. non-causal)
  • Deterministic (resp. stochastic, randomized and sometimes non-deterministic)
  • Index
  • Memoryless (e.1000., not-stationary)
  • Opportunistic (resp. not-opportunistic)
  • Stationary (resp. non-stationary)

These qualifiers tin be combined, so i could, for example, have a stationary-memoryless-index policy.

Notable schools


  • Balsillie School of International Affairs
  • Blavatnik School of Government
  • Goldman School of Public Policy at the University of California Berkeley
  • London School of Economic science
  • King’s Higher London
  • The University of Chicago Harris Schoolhouse of Public Policy
  • Harvard Kennedy School of Government
  • Hertie Schoolhouse of Governance
  • Munk School of Global Diplomacy and Public Policy
  • Norman Paterson School of International Affairs
  • Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies
  • Princeton School of Public and International Affairs
  • Sciences Po Paris
  • University of Cambridge
  • University of Glasgow
  • Academy of Warwick
  • Paris Nanterre University



Induction of policies


In contemporary systems of market place-oriented economics and of homogeneous voting of delegates and decisions, policy mixes are usually introduced depending on factors that include popularity in the public (influenced via media and education as well as by cultural identity), contemporary economic science (such as what is beneficial or a brunt in the long- and near-term within it) and a general state of international competition (frequently the focus of geopolitics). Broadly, considerations include political competition with other parties and social stability as well every bit national interests within the framework of global dynamics.[ix]
additional citation(s) needed

Policies or policy-elements can be designed and proposed by a multitude of actors or collaborating thespian-networks in various ways.[10]
Alternative options as well as organisations and decision-makers that would be responsible for enacting these policies – or explaining their rejection – tin can be identified. “Policy sequencing” is a concept that integrates mixes of existing or hypothetical policies and arranges them in a sequential order. The use of such frameworks may make complex polycentric governance for the accomplishment of goals such as climate change mitigation and stoppage of deforestation more hands achievable or more effective, off-white, efficient, legitimate and rapidly implemented.[11]
additional commendation(s) needed

Contemporary ways of policy-making or decision-making may depend on exogenously-driven shocks that “undermine institutionally entrenched policy equilibria” and may non e’er be functional in terms of sufficiently preventing and solving issues, particularly when unpopular policies, regulation of influential entities with vested interests,[14]
international coordination and non-reactive strategic long-term thinking and management are needed.[15]
In that sense, “reactive sequencing” refers to “the notion that early events in a sequence prepare in motion a chain of causally linked reactions and counter-reactions which trigger subsequent development”.[16]
This is a concept separate to policy sequencing in that the latter may crave actions from a multitude of parties at different stages for progress of the sequence, rather than an initial “shock”, force-exertion or catalysis of bondage of events.

In the modern highly interconnected globe, polycentric governance has become ever more of import – such “requires a complex combination of multiple levels and diverse types of organizations drawn from the public, private, and voluntary sectors that have overlapping realms of responsibility and functional capacities”.[17]
Key components of policies include control-and-control measures, enabling measures, monitoring, incentives and disincentives.[11]

Science-based policy, related to the more narrow concept of prove-based policy, may take also become more of import. A review nearly worldwide pollution as a major cause of death – where information technology establish little progress, suggests that successful control of conjoined threats such as pollution, climate change, and biodiversity loss requires a global, “formal science–policy interface”, thousand. to “inform intervention, influence inquiry, and guide funding”.[18]
Broadly, science–policy interfaces include both science in policy and scientific discipline for policy.[xix]

Other uses of the term


  • In enterprise architecture for systems design, policy appliances are technical control and logging mechanisms to enforce or reconcile policy (systems use) rules and to ensure accountability in data systems.
  • In insurance, policies are contracts between insurer and insured used to indemnify (protect) confronting potential loss from specified perils. While these documents are referred to as policies, they are in actuality a form of contract – see insurance contract.
  • In gambling, policy is a form of an unsanctioned lottery, where players purport to purchase
    confronting a chosen number existence picked by a legitimate lottery. Or tin refer to an ordinary numbers game
  • In artificial intelligence planning and
    reinforcement learning, a policy prescribes a non-empty deliberation (sequence of actions) given a non-empty sequence of states.
  • In debate, the term “policy” is slang for policy or cantankerous-exam fence.
Popular:   The Election of 2008 Was Historically Significant for Women Because

See also


  • Blueprint
  • Distributive trend
  • Atomic number 26 triangle
  • Mandate (politics)
  • Overton window
  • Pattern language
  • Policy breach
  • Policy analysis
  • Policy Governance
  • Policy studies
  • Political scientific discipline
  • Program evaluation
  • Public administration
  • Public health
  • Public policy (law)
  • Public policy schools
  • Public services
  • Social contract
  • Social welfare
  • Social piece of work
  • Think tank



  1. ^

    Office, Publications. “What is policy”.
    . Retrieved
    fifteen April

  2. ^

    Voican, Mădălina (2008). “Regime’southward Role in Coordination of Decision- Making Process”.
    Revista de Științe Politics. Journal of Political Science
    (17): 26–31.

  3. ^

    Deleon, Peter; Steelman, Toddi A. (2001). “Making public policy programs effective and relevant: The role of the policy sciences”.
    Periodical of Policy Assay and Direction.
    (1): 163–171. doi:10.1002/1520-6688(200124)20:1<163::assist-pam2011>;2-w. ISSN 0276-8739.

  4. ^

    Nakamura 1987.

  5. ^

    Laswell, H(1971). A Pre-View of Policy Sciences. New York, Elsevier.

  6. ^

    Howlett, M. (2011) Designing public policies: principles and instruments. Routledge.

  7. ^

    Young, John and Enrique Mendizabal. Helping researchers become policy entrepreneurs, Overseas Development Institute, London, September 2009.
  8. ^









    Lowi, Theodore J. (July 1972). “Four Systems of Policy, Politics, and Choice”.
    Public Administration Review.
    (4): 298–310. doi:ten.2307/974990. JSTOR 974990.

  9. ^

    Birkland, Thomas A. (2 July 2019).
    An Introduction to the Policy Process: Theories, Concepts, and Models of Public Policy Making
    (v ed.). Routledge. ISBN978-1-351-02394-viii.

  10. ^

    Taeihagh, Araz (i June 2017). “Network-centric policy blueprint”.
    Policy Sciences.
    (two): 317–338. doi:10.1007/s11077-016-9270-0. ISSN 1573-0891. S2CID 157209343.

  11. ^



    Furumo, Paul R.; Lambin, Eric F. (27 October 2021). “Policy sequencing to reduce tropical deforestation”.
    Global Sustainability.
    4. doi:10.1017/sus.2021.21. ISSN 2059-4798. S2CID 239890357.

  12. ^

    Meckling, Jonas; Sterner, Thomas; Wagner, Gernot (December 2017). “Policy sequencing toward decarbonization”.
    Nature Free energy.
    (12): 918–922. Bibcode:2017NatEn…2..918M. doi:10.1038/s41560-017-0025-8. ISSN 2058-7546. S2CID 158217818.

  13. ^

    Pahle, Michael; Burtraw, Dallas; Flachsland, Christian; Kelsey, Nina; Biber, Eric; Meckling, Jonas; Edenhofer, Ottmar; Zysman, John (October 2018). “Sequencing to ratchet up climate policy stringency”.
    Nature Climate change.
    (x): 861–867. Bibcode:2018NatCC…8..861P. doi:x.1038/s41558-018-0287-six. ISSN 1758-6798. S2CID 92543128.

  14. ^



    “Timing is everything: Researchers reveal why the right sequence of policies is essential to slow deforestation”.
    Stanford University
    . Retrieved
    23 November

  15. ^

    Howlett, Michael (December 2009). “Procedure Sequencing Policy Dynamics: Beyond Homeostasis and Path Dependency”.
    Journal of Public Policy.
    (iii): 241–262. doi:10.1017/S0143814X09990158. ISSN 1469-7815. S2CID 155023873.

  16. ^

    Daugbjerg, Carsten (one April 2009). “Sequencing in public policy: the development of the CAP over a decade”.
    Journal of European Public Policy.
    (3): 395–411. doi:10.1080/13501760802662698. ISSN 1350-1763. S2CID 153785609.

  17. ^

    Carlisle, Keith; Gruby, Rebecca Fifty. (2019). “Polycentric Systems of Governance: A Theoretical Model for the Commons”.
    Policy Studies Periodical.
    (four): 927–952. doi:10.1111/psj.12212. ISSN 1541-0072.

  18. ^

    Fuller, Richard; Landrigan, Philip J; Balakrishnan, Kalpana; Bathan, Glynda; Bose-O’Reilly, Stephan; Brauer, Michael; Caravanos, Jack; Chiles, Tom; Cohen, Aaron; Corra, Lilian; Cropper, Maureen; Ferraro, Greg; Hanna, Jill; Hanrahan, David; Hu, Howard; Hunter, David; Janata, Gloria; Kupka, Rachael; Lanphear, Bruce; Lichtveld, Maureen; Martin, Keith; Mustapha, Adetoun; Sanchez-Triana, Ernesto; Sandilya, Karti; Schaefli, Laura; Shaw, Joseph; Seddon, Jessica; Suk, William; Téllez-Rojo, Martha María; Yan, Chonghuai (June 2022). “Pollution and health: a progress update”.
    The Lancet Planetary Health.
    half dozen
    (6): e535–e547. doi:10.1016/S2542-5196(22)00090-0. PMID 35594895. S2CID 248905224.

  19. ^

    “Science-Policy Interface Platform”.
    Major Group for Children and Youth
    . Retrieved
    10 July



  • Althaus, Catherine; Bridgman, Peter; Davis, Glyn (2007).
    The Australian Policy Handbook
    (4th ed.). Sydney: Allen & Unwin.

  • Blakemore, Ken (1998).
    Social Policy: an Introduction. Buckingham; Philadelphia: Open University Press.

  • Dye, Thomas R. (1976).
    Policy Analysis. Academy of Alabama Press.

  • Greenberg, George D.; et al. (December 1977). “Developing Public Policy Theory: Perspectives from Empirical Enquiry”.
    American Political Science Review.
    (iv): 1532–1543. doi:10.2307/1961494. JSTOR 1961494.

  • Heckathorn, Douglas D.; Maser, Steven M. (1990). “The Contractual Architecture of Public Policy: A Disquisitional Reconstruction of Lowi’s Typology”.
    The Journal of Politics.
    (4): 1101–1123. doi:10.2307/2131684. JSTOR 2131684. S2CID 154496294.

  • Jenkins, William (1978).
    Policy Analysis: A Political and Organizational Perspective. London: Martin Robertson.

  • Kellow, Aynsley (Summer 1988). “Promoting Elegance in Policy Theory: Simplifying Lowi’s Arenas of Power”.
    Policy Studies Journal.
    (4): 713–724. doi:10.1111/j.1541-0072.1988.tb00680.x.

  • Lowi, Theodore J.; Bauer, Raymond A.; De Sola Pool, Ithiel; Dexter, Lewis A. (1964). “American Business organization, Public Policy, Instance-Studies, and Political Theory”.
    Globe Politics.
    (4): 687–713. doi:10.2307/2009452. JSTOR 2009452.

  • Lowi, Theodore J. (1972). “4 Systems of Policy, Politics, and Choice”.
    Public Assistants Review.
    (iv): 298–310. doi:10.2307/974990. JSTOR 974990.

  • Lowi, Theodore J. (1985). “The Country in Politics”. In Noll, Roger K. (ed.).
    Regulatory Policy and the social Sciences. Berkeley: Academy of California Printing. pp. 67–110.

  • Müller, Pierre; Surel, Yves (1998).
    L’analyse des politiques publiques
    (in French). Paris: Montchrestien.

  • Nakamura, Robert T. (September 1987). “The textbook policy process and implementation research”.
    Review of Policy Research.
    (1): 142–154. doi:x.1111/j.1541-1338.1987.tb00034.10.

  • Paquette, Laure (2002).
    Analyzing National and International Policy. Rowman Littlefield.

  • Smith, G. B. (2002). “Typologies, Taxonomies, and the Benefits of Policy Classification”.
    Policy Studies Periodical.
    (3): 379–395. doi:10.1111/j.1541-0072.2002.tb02153.x.

  • Spitzer, Robert J. (June 1987). “Promoting Policy Theory: Revising the Arenas of Power”.
    Policy Studies Journal.
    (iv): 675–689. doi:10.1111/j.1541-0072.1987.tb00753.x.

Farther reading


  • G. Cummins, Linda (2011).
    Policy Practice for Social Workers: New Strategies for a New Era. Pearson. ISBN9780205022441.

  • Hicks, Daniel L.; Hicks, Joan Hamory; Maldonado, Beatriz (January 2016). “Women as policy makers and donors: female legislators and foreign aid”.
    European Journal of Political Economy.
    41: 46–lx. doi:x.1016/j.ejpoleco.2015.ten.007.

External links


  • Policy institutes at Curlie
  • “Policy Studies Organization”.

The Process of Approving the Constitution is Best Described as