Theft at the Public Till
Increasingly, the most valuable information in the government is the “expert policy analysis.” This is a variety of information that requires specialized knowledge to develop and analyze. The thick computer printout or the slick report from a think tank are apt images. Experts use their specialized knowl- edge and techniques to aid generalist policymakers in the decisionmaking process. These policy experts - the economist is the typical example -- do not just produce the numbers, they analyze and interpret data in support of policymaking. Expert policy information fuels vast government organiza- tions. But the quantity of information produced just leads to overload. And often what the experts insist is best conflicts with common sense. The difficulties in developing and analyzing expert policy information have produced a crisis of trust. When the conclusions drawn from expert information conflict with beliefs based on ordinary information and an individual’s experience, especially if the experts’ conclusions are counter- intuitive, the nonexpert may opt for disbelief. If the problem were merely an information gap between policy experts and the bulk of the population, then more communication might help. Yet instead of garnering support for policy choices, more communication tends to produce an “everything causes cancer” syndrome among ordinary citizens. More experts make more sophisticated claims and counterclaims to the point that the nonspecialist becomes inclined to concede everything and believe nothing that he hears. This rising public distrust of policy experts and their analyses provides fer- tile ground for a retreat into ideology, where the interpretation of ambiguity bears little connection to reality. As more information and analysis become available, the overload de- mands careful synthesis and translation. Even more important than simple overload, however, is that information is amenable to quite different inter- pretations. Our government manifests another syndrome of obsolescence due to the overspecialization and fragmentation of the policy planning and implementation process. We act as if finance can be separated from trade, defense from development, and social justice from the degradation of the environment. We have departments or agencies attempting to cope with each domain separately, often in direct competition with one another.
21
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online