Political Science

Incrementalism can be broadly defined as a generalized method of adding small changes to an entire project. For example, building a canal can be accomplished by successively routing waterways (say averaging seven lines daily). Every step in the addition process is both logical and necessary. For example, suppose a project requires the construction of a large, 3-direction superhighway. The contractor may opt to finish one section of the project, and successively adding the other two routes in three years time. Note that the highway is partially opened to accommodate the public. Each successive step is a reference to the project itself. In public policy, incrementalism refers to the mode of change by which small-scale policies are crafted over time in order to either affect a larger policy change or force general policy changes.

Incrementalism is a variation in the rational model approach. Some industrial sociologists   argued that incrementalism is the forerunner method used in the factory system   although this assertion is largely unverified. In essence, the logic of incrementalism both as method and policy framework is based on the external analysis of cost and benefit. Commissioning a large project incurs large costs for the commissioning company. Indeed, if the odds are great, the project will be finished beyond the prescribed period of completion. To lessen the effects of budget exhaustion, the company may opt to construct successive sub projects as part of the larger project.

Incrementalism is a de jure fact in American policy-making. Progressive taxation, for example, is used to adjust the distribution of income in the society. Increasing income tax by 4 annually for the top 40 of American society redistributes wealth to the bottom 30 by about 1.33 trillion dollars (in two years time). The danger with incrementalism is quite obvious. It is difficult for the policy-maker to determine whether an addition is logical and necessary. In many cases, the increment deters public welfare   often destroying structures which previously yielded benefit to prescribed stakeholders. In short, this framework is not an absolute, logical approach to strategic decision making.

Pluralism is a concept which denotes the peaceful co-existence of varying interests and political opinion in the state. In liberal democracies, the primary characteristics of pluralism are as follows 1) adherence to the liberal democratic framework of interest-aggregation, 2) plurality of political parties and interest groups, 3) diversity of the public decision making models, 4) attachment of the state to the interests of its citizens, and 5) plurality of political functionalism. Liberal democracy is inherently a self-adjusting political framework. Interest aggregation is possible because the framework provides conjunctive basis for the existence of political parties. Hence, political parties are the primary modes of interest aggregation. Now, these interests are transformed into policies. Because interests vary, the method by which they are transformed into policies must also vary. Here, political functionalism provides sectoral groups the opportunity to test adjunctive ideas into a concrete political action plan.
     
Elitism is a belief that those individuals who belong to the elite are the most capable and effective in adopting and implementing public policies. The characteristic of this framework are as follows 1) belief in limited leadership, 2) the decision making process as tool for governance and control, and 3) reference to technocracy. The main criticism against this framework is that the elite are often more concerned with the aggregation of their own interests, at the cost of the state.
       
The state-centric model is as old as the structural functionalist approach in the social sciences. Its main propositions are as follows 1) the state is an active participant in international relations, 2) decision making process in the international arena is bounded by the principles of sovereignty and national self-determination, 3) international agencies are merely appendages of development, and 4) the state is both absolute and supreme in its own right.
       
A critical examination of these frameworks reveals that pluralism and the state-centric model are not mutually exclusive (in many cases, compatible). A state characterized by pluralism and elitism does not exist, as the two frameworks are mutually exclusive. It is quite impossible to assume a plurality of interests where the interests of the elite are assumed to be both supreme and necessary.

Terms Defined
1) Infinite Regress. This refers to a resulting proposition if the truth of proposition (1) requires the support of proposition (2), and so on and so forth. This infinite series of conjunctive propositions are bounded in cycle, and even in irrationality.

2) Legitimation. This is the means of providing legitimacy. In Western democracy, legitimacy is acquired through the electorate process   the electorate empowers the political party to enact changes in the society.

3) Policy Communities. This is a set of interest groups that have a stake in a certain policy area. These communities are often cooperative by nature   an adaptive mechanism for enhancing aggregated interests.

4) Federalism. This is a system of government characterized by a federal-state government divide. Two forms of government are present the federal government and the state government (granted with self-autonomy).

5) ComprehensiveRational Policy Making. A broad set of policies aimed to affect radical or significant changes in the society. The component parts of this policy are both rational and compatible.

6) Incrementalism. This is a generalized method of adding small changes to an entire project. In public policy, this is a method of significance incrementation.

7) Pluralism. This is a belief in the peaceful coexistence of interests within a state. It is assumed that modes of interest aggregation are both democratic and efficient by nature.

8) Cost-benefit Analysis. A general method used to assess whether benefits exceed cost or otherwise. If benefits exceed costs, then the project or policy is undertaken.

9) Elitism. This is a belief that those individuals who call themselves elite are the most capable and effective modes of governance. Interest in this case is narrow.

10) State-centric Model. This is a framework which holds that state are the main participant in international relations. As such, the state is both absolute and supreme in its own right.