Macquarie University

Division of Humanities
Department of Politics & International Relations

POL 374 - Australian Governments and Public Policy

Semester 1, 2008
(Internal and External Students)

1. Overview

This unit surveys recent literature of public policy studies and policy analysis and
examines the complex processes of governmental policy making. Questions are raised
about the state in contemporary society and the distribution of power in the unfolding
stages of policy development, implementation and evaluation. The course draws on
analytical literature from a variety of sources, but its empirical content is supported
throughout by Australian examples. Knowledge of the institutions of Australian
government is important for the unit.

The study of policy processes requires both a broad understanding of the relationships
between state and society and a detailed scrutiny of the way in which decisions and non-
decisions come about and are captured in (in)action. Case study material is used in the
unit as a way of delineating broad issues with empirical material.

The subject has a practical focus because policy-making is the stuff of much social and
political action and is the day-to-day activity of individuals working in particular jobs.
At the same time, it is a critical study that requires us to specify and to test the
assumptions and frames of reference we bring to our understanding of policy-making
processes. Particular themes will include what the actors do, how expert they are and
how much influence they have.

2. Objectives of Unit

1. To locate political aspects of the study of public policy within a stream of national and
international analysis and to stimulate critical thinking about key problems.

2. To develop an understanding of linkages between theoretical perspectives on public

policy and policy processes within contemporary Australian government.

3. To encourage reflection on possible connections between the study of public policy

and the world of work.

4. To develop generic skills appropriate to study in the humanities, including

independence and critical judgment, advanced communications skills, library and
information retrieval skills and the development of a critical consciousness.

1
3. Convenor/Tutors

Course convenor and external tutor:

Dr Geoffrey Hawker, Room W6A 421

Phone 9850 8885 (direct) 9850 8869 (Politics office)
Email: through online (Blackboard) facility

Course co-convenors and internal tutors:

Richard Mills, Room W6A 421

Phone as above or 0402 85 27 12
Email: through online (Blackboard) facility

Dr Stephen Mutch Room W6A 421

Phone 9850 8885 (direct) 9850 8869 (Politics office)
Email: stephenmutch@ozemail.com.au

4. Unit requirements

a. Classes

The course is arranged around a series of weekly lectures (one hour on Mondays) and
seminars (two hours, either Monday or Tuesday). Times and rooms:

Lecture: Monday 1pm W5C 220

Seminars: Monday 4-6pm X5B 134
or Tuesday 12noon - 2pm E8A 386
or Tuesday 4-6pm C4A 320

Any additional seminar times required by enrolment numbers will be notified in class and
on the Online facility. Attendance at lectures is expected and attendance at seminars is
compulsory. Failure to meet these requirements may result in failure of the unit.

b. Assessment

The four components of assessment include a number of short summaries of allocated

readings, a seminar presentation by each student in turn, an essay and a final exam.

1. Short summaries (10%)

In each of Weeks 3 to 12, students are required to produce a 300-word summary of one of
the weekly seminar readings, to be handed in at the seminar. Allocation of summary
readings will be made in Week 2. Two of these 10 summaries will be marked at random
at the end of the semester and are worth a maximum of 10% of your total mark.

2
External students: As for internal students, an allocation of readings will be invited in
Week 1, for return (via the Blackboard) in Week 2. The weekly summaries will then be
returned via Blackboard in the following weeks. Notification of the two summaries
selected for assessment will be made in Week 13.

2. Class exercise (20%)

Individual presentation on a topic - to be selected by students in Week 2 from the topics
listed for Weeks 3 – 12 below. NB There are no presentations in Week 5. This
requires a brief oral presentation to the class (about 10-15 minutes) and the submission at
the class of a short summary of the points made. This is worth a maximum of 20%, 10%
for the oral part and 10% for the written part. The written summary should be in dot
point form, extending to not more than one typed A4 page. References should be
included, and these may be on a second page. There will normally be two presentations
each week, allowing approximately 40 minutes class discussion for each topic. The topic
chosen may be useful for essay preparation.

External students: As for internal students, a selection of topics will be invited in Week
1. Your choice of topic should be notified (via the Blackboard) in Week 2. Papers need
to be returned via Blackboard before the end of the week following the week of the chosen
topic. Note that there is reading but no topic to be chosen in Week 5. For external
students, a longer length of paper is required to compensate for the lack of a class
presentation: two typed A4 pages (about 500 words in dot point format).

3. Essay (35%).
Questions and some suggested readings will be circulated in Week 1. Length of the essay
is 3,500 words (plus or minus 10% without penalty) and should be lodged in the boxes
set aside for that purpose in building W6A by the end of Week 9. All work must have a
Division of Humanities cover sheet, signed by the student. You will lose 10% of your
mark for each week or part of a week if it is late. Late work will not receive written
comments.

External students: As for internal students, but submit your essay through COE in the
cover provided.

4. Final exam (35%). This will consist of short questions drawn from the lectures and
seminars (and associated readings) and a choice of short essay questions. The format will
be explained further in class.

It is not necessary to pass each element of the assessment in order to pass the unit, but all
elements of assessment must be attempted in order to pass.

Involvement in public policy means writing such things as letters, submissions, research
papers and newspaper articles. Well-written pieces get read and acted on; badly written
ones are likely to be unpersuasive. Therefore, there will be considerable focus in this
course on high standards of writing. Written work should be presented with a minimum

3
font size of 12, double spaced, numbered and stapled pages, and using either the Harvard
or the Oxford referencing system, not both. List your bibliography on a new page and list
only the sources you have quoted.

5. Plagiarism

The University has defined plagiarism in its rules: “Plagiarism involves using the work of
another person and presenting it as one’s own.” Plagiarism is a serious breach of the
University’s rules and carries significant penalties. Information about plagiarism can be
found in the Handbook of Undergraduate Studies, on the Web at
http://www.student.mq.edu.au/plagiarism/, and on the Division cover sheet, which you
must sign before you submit your assignments. If in doubt consult your lecturer or tutor.

6. Grading

The grading used in the unit follows current University practice of High Distinction (HD),
Distinction (D), Credit (C), Pass (P), Conceded Pass (P) and Fail (F). The University has
a set of guidelines on the distribution of grades across the range from Fail to High
Distinction that is designed to ensure comparability across the University. Raw marks or
grades are given on each assessment task as part of the learning feedback and the marks
or grades are combined into a raw score in the unit. However, the raw score is only an
interim stage in the calculation of the final grade. A scaling process is used to convert the
raw scores to the final scaled marks (standardised numerical grades) using the guidelines
for grading as moderators. The scaled marks indicate that students have satisfied the
criteria for inclusion in a particular performance band and rank them by performance
within that band. The scaling process preserves the rank order of the marks but there is
no simple arithmetical relationship between the raw marks and the scaled marks. The
relationship is likely to differ between units and between the different performance bands
within the same unit.

7. Reading

1. Books

There is no set text for this unit. Instead the book of readings for the unit should be
purchased from the University Coop Bookshop. Note that the core readings for the unit
are contained in this book of readings, and the reading lists under the seminar topics
below show these core readings with an *. Most weeks also show additional readings
that are not contained in the book of readings, partly because it would become too large
but partly also to encourage a discerning approach to further reading.

Some of the additional sources (generally those drawn from scholarly journals) are
available from the database section of the Library homepage, and others may be posted

4
on the online (Blackboard) facility of the unit. Of course you should pursue your own
reading, often working from the footnotes provided in these various sources, especially if
you are preparing a tutorial topic or an essay.

The following books are useful as background:

* Althaus, C, Bridgman, P and Davis, G (2007, 4th edn.) The Australian Policy
Handbook

* Colebatch, H K (2002) Policy

*Considine, M (2005) Making Public Policy: institutions, actors, strategies

*Davis, G, Wanna, J, Warhurst, J and Weller, P (1993) Public Policy in Australia

* Fenna, A (2004) Australian public policy

* Hill, M (2005) (4th edn.) The Public Policy Process

* Howlett, M and Ramesh, M (2003) (2nd edn.) Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles
and Policy Subsystems

*Michael, E J (2005) Public Policy: The Competitive Framework

Radin, B (2000) Beyond Machiavelli: policy analysis comes of age

Those marked * are available on Library Reserve.

2. Journals

The most relevant academic journals containing useful articles for seminar discussion and
for the essay are:

Australian Journal of Political Science

Australian Journal of Public Administration
Canberra Bulletin of Public Administration
Governance: An International Journal of Policy and Administration
Public Administration (UK)

Some of these may be available on-line. Check the “Journal Finder” of the Library
Catalogue. Older issues may be available only in hard copy and recent issues only on-
line. Many other journals of relevance can be located by searching the databases of the
Library catalogue.

5
3. Websites

Many Websites can provide relevant material for the unit but please be careful in using
material from the Web (unsourced material is not always reliable) and always cite Web
sources fully (showing author, title of the article or piece, the Web address and the date
accessed). Some useful sources include:

Commonwealth government departments, accessible through www.gov.au. The NSW

state government also has a general access point: www.nsw.gov.au.

The research papers of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Library are worth checking:
www.aph.gov.au/library.
Check the work of Parliamentary committees for at least the federal and NSW state levels
on Web pages, eg http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/index/htm.

The two most useful non-government Websites on Australian public policy issues are -

Australian Policy Online: www.apo.org.au; and

The Drawing Board: An Australian Review of Public Affairs:

www.econ.usyd.edu.au/drawingboard.

Many public policy think tanks such as the Centre for Independent Studies and The
Australia Institute have their own Websites and can usefully be explored. Seminar
discussions will allow some exchange of information about useful sites.

8. Online Program

The POL374 Website is at http://online.mq.edu.au. It contains a bulletin board for

discussion points that can be read by other students, and a private email facility that
enables you to send mail to the lecturer, your tutor, or to other students. Material relating
to the unit (such as this handout) is also available.

Check the website regularly and frequently for reading updates and other information.

9. Teaching Program

The lecturer introduces a topic each week covering issues listed below (the lecture hour).
From Week 3, each member of the class in turn is expected to make a presentation (see
4.b.2 above) on one of the questions listed below in the two-hour seminar.

At the first seminar (Week 2) it will be important for members of the class to be ready
to nominate their preferred topic.

6
 Part 1: The Context of Public Policy

WEEK 1 (February 25)

Lecture
Course and unit overview
Discussion of course and assessment
Public Policy as a discipline
The policy cycle
The actors and institutions
Theories of explanation and decision-making

Seminar
No seminar in Week 1

Background reading

* Colebatch, H K (2005) "Policy analysis, policy practice and political science",

Australian Journal of Public Administration, 64, 3
* Howard, C (2005) "The policy cycle", Australian Journal of Public Administration, 64, 3

WEEK 2 (March 3)

Lecture
Theories of the State
The failure of government?
The welfare state/opportunity society

Seminar
Allocation of seminar topics for Weeks 3 – 12
Discussion of Week 1 lecture
Discussion of the readings for Week 1 and 2.

* Wanna, J and Weller, P (2003) “Traditions of Australian governance”, Public

Administration, 81, 1, March

* Sturgess, G (1996) “Virtual government: what will remain inside the public sector”,
Australian Journal of Public Administration, 55, 3, September

Keating, M and Weller, P (2001) “Rethinking government's roles and operations”, in

Davis, G and Weller, P (eds.), Are You Being Served?

7
 Part 2 The Policy Cycle

WEEK 3 (March 10)

Lecture
Agenda setting and analysis
Framing the problem
Tools and instruments of analysis

Seminar
a. The Republic: how did the issue of a republic come to be high on the policy agenda in
the 1990s? How might it return?

* Bridgman, P and Davis, G (1998), Australian Policy handbook, [1st ed.], Allen and
Unwin chapter 4, "Identifying Issues".

* Extract from Turnbull, M (1993), The Reluctant Republic, William Heinemann.

* Sampford, C and Brown, A J (2004), “Go Global, Think Local”, in Hudson, W and
Brown A J (eds.), Restructuring Australia; regionalism, republicanism and reform of the
nation-state, Federation Press.

b. Climate change: to what extent did scientific evidence influence policy makers to
grapple with climate change? Why do you think this was so?

Rochefort, DA and Cobb, R W (1994) "Problem definition" in Rochefort, DA and Cobb,

R W (eds.) The politics of problem definition Chapter 1

Buckley, R. et al. (2007) Climate Response: Issues, Costs and Liabilities in Adapting to
Climate Change in Australia Griffith University

Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet (2007) Australia's climate change policy

WEEK 4 (March 17)

Lecture
Decision-making
Theories
Actors and institutions

Seminar
a. How can determined policy entrepreneurs make a difference in policy formulation?
What are the limits to their activities? Can general rules be formulated for others to use?

8
* Mutch, S (2002) “Public policy revolt: saving the 2001 Australian Census”, Archives
and Manuscripts, 30, 2 (November), 26-44.

* Mackenzie, C (2004) “Policy entrepreneurship in Australia: a conceptual review and

application”, Australian Journal of Political Science, 39 2 (July), 367-86.

Hawker, G (2006) “Ministerial consultants and privatisation: Australian federal

government 1985-88”, Australian Journal of Politics and History, 52, 2

b. What are the costs and benefits of the federal system in Australia? What changes has
Kevin Rudd made and how effective do you think they will be?

Wilkins, R (2004) "Federalism: Distance and Devolution", Australian Journal of Politics

and History, 50, 1

Castles, F G and Uhr, J (2007) "The Australian welfare state: has federalism made a
difference?", Australian Journal of Politics and History, 53, 1

Bennett, S "The politics of the federal system", Research Brief no. 4, Parliamentary
Library, Canberra, 2006–07.

WEEK 5 (March 24 - Easter Monday)

Note: There is no lecture on 24 March because of Easter Monday and no tutorial that day
or the next (Tuesday 25th). Instead, read and consider the lecture notes (on the Web) and
the readings, and use the remaining time to begin or continue work on your essay.

Lecture
Policy Implementation: why is it so difficult?

* Pressman, J and Wildavsky, A (1984) (extract) Implementation, 3rd ed., Oakland Press

* Higgins, V (2004) “Government as a failing operation: regulating administrative

conduct ‘at a distance’ in Australia”, Sociology, 38, 3: 457-76.

May, P. (2003) ‘Policy Design and Implementation’ in Peters, G and Pierre, J eds.
Handbook of Public Administration
Short, D (2003) "Reconciliation, assimilation and the indigenous peoples of Australia"
International Political Science Review 24, 4, October 2003

P Saunders and J Walter (eds.) (2005) Ideas and Influence: Social Science and Public
Policy in Australia NSW Press. Chapter on indigenous affairs

Bessant, J and Wilkinson, A (2006) "Principles of developing indigenous policy making",

AJPA, 65, 1

9
WEEK 6 (March 31)

Lecture
Policy evaluation and administrative review
Technical and political approaches to evaluation
Intelligence, weapons of mass destruction and the war in Iraq

Seminar
a. Select an evaluation of public policy that was ‘political’ in nature and explain its
success or failure; or select for explanation an evaluation of public policy that was
‘technical’ in nature and explain its success or failure.

* Waller, M (1992) "Evaluating policy advice" Australian Journal of Public

Administration, 51, 4

* Simon Chapman, "Unravelling gossamer with boxing gloves: problems in explaining

the decline in smoking", British Medical Journal, 307 (1993), 429-32.

* Weller, P and Stevens, B (1998) "Evaluating policy advice: the Australian experience",
Public Administration 76, Autumn

Mills, R (forthcoming) "John Howard, Weapons of Mass Destruction and the Public's
Right to Know."

b. Consider the relevance of academic contributions on evaluation to Australia's foreign

aid programs.

Althaus, C, Bridgman, P and Davis, G (2007) The Australian Policy Handbook

Ch 11 Evaluation

Hughes, H (2003) "Storm warning: Can the Solomon Islands be rescued?", Policy, vol 19,
no 2, Winter 2003

O'Connor, T (2003) "Australian aid: sustainable for whom?" Dialogue, vol 22, 3/2003

AusAID (2007) Papua New Guinea -Australia Development Cooperation Strategy 2006-
2010

(Mid Semester Break)

Part 3 The Actors and Institutions

WEEK 7 (April 21)

Lecture
The governmental executive, Cabinet and Ministers

10
Seminar
a. Prime Ministerial power: has Australia moved to a de facto presidential system? Will
Kevin Rudd be different from John Howard?

* Manne, R (2004) “The Howard years: a political interpretation”, in Manne, R (ed.), The
Howard Years

* Tiernan, A (2006) “Advising Howard: interpreting changes in advisory and support

structures for the Prime Minister of Australia”, Australian Journal of Political Science,
41, 3, 309-24.

* Goldfinch, S and Hart, P (2003) “Leadership and institutional reform: engineering

macroeconomic policy change in Australia”, Governance, 16, 2 (April), 235-70.

Van Onselen, P and Errington, W (2007) "Locating John Howard's political success",
Australia Quarterly, vol 79, no.2, 2007

Weller, P (2007) Cabinet Government in Australia 1901-2006 especially Chapter 14

Walter, J and Strangio, P (2007) No, Prime Minister especially Chapter 3,

"Institutionalising pre-eminent leaders"

b. How are Ministers accountable?

* Considine, M (2002) "The end of the line? Accountable governance in the age of
networks, partnerships and joined-up services", Governance 15, 2

Wilkins, P (2002) "Accountability and joined-up government", Australian Journal of

Public Administration, 61, 1

WEEK 8 (April 28)

Lecture
The Public Service - role, influence and values
The management of the Public Service and economic rationalism
Public Service reform

Seminar
a. To what extent if any has Public Service reform led to politicisation of its senior ranks?

* Extract from Wilenski, P S (1986) "Administrative reform: general principles and the
Australian experience", in Public Power and Public Administration, Sydney: Allen and
Unwin.

11
Weller, P and Wanna, J (1997) "Departmental secretaries: appointment, termination and
their impact", Australian Journal of Public Administration, 56, 3: 13-25.

Podger, A (2007) ‘What Really Happens: Department Secretary Appointments, Contracts

and Performance Pay in the Australian Public Service’, Australian Journal of Public
Administration, 66, 2

Shergold, P (2007) ‘What Really Happens in the Australian Public Service: An

Alternative View’, Australian Journal of Public Administration, 66, 3

Podger, A (2007) "Response to Peter Shergold", Australian Journal of Public

Administration, 66, 4

Briggs, L (2007) "Public Service Secretaries and their independence from political
influence: the view of the Public Service Commissioner", Australian Journal of Public
Administration, 66, 4

b. How is the Public Service accountable?

* Weller, P (2001) (extract) Australia's Mandarins – Frank and Fearless?

* Spry, M (2001) "The appointment, removal and responsibilities of public sector chief
executives in Australia", Australian Journal of Public Administration, 60, 4

Mulgan, R (2000) "Accountability", Public Administration 78, 3: 555-574

Richardson, J (2000) "Defenceless Secretaries", Canberra Bulletin of Public

Administration, 97

WEEK 9 (May 5)

Lecture
Parliamentary committees, Ministerial Advisers and Committees of Inquiry

Seminar
a. Identify a committee or inquiry that changed government policy and explain what it
did.

* Capling, A and Nossal, K R (2003) “Parliament and the democratization of foreign

policy: the case of Australia’s Joint Standing Committee on Treaties”, Canadian Journal
of Political Science, 36, 4: 835-55

Verrier, J. (2007) ‘Parliament and Foreign Policy’ in Cotton, J and Ravenhill, J (eds.),
Trading on Alliance Security: Australia in World Affairs 2001-2005

12
b. Evaluate the difference that the institution of ministerial advisers has made to policy-
making in Australia.
* Maley, M (2002) “Conceptualising advisers’ policy work: the distinctive policy roles of
ministerial advisers in the Keating Government, 1991-96”, Australian Journal of
Political Science, 35, 3: 449-70.

Holland, I (2002) “Accountability of ministerial staff?”, Research Paper, No 19 of 2001-

2002, 18 June 2002, Department of the Parliamentary Library (www.aph.gov.au/library).

Hollway, S (1996) "Departments and Ministerial Offices" in Disney, J and Nethercote, J

R (eds.), The house on Capital Hill

Keating, M. (2003) ‘In the wake of “A Certain Maritime Incident”: Ministerial Advisers,
Departments & Accountability’, Australian Journal of Public Administration, 62, 3: 92-
98
Walter, J (2006) “Ministers, minders and public servants: changing parameters of
responsibility in Australia”, Australian Journal of Public Administration, 65, 3

WEEK 10 (May 12)

Lecture
Think tanks, pressure groups and the community

Seminar
a. Consider the work of the Centre for Independent Studies on the environment, and
assess how that typifies the use and influence of think tanks.

* Maddox, M (2004) “Think tanks”, Chapter 8 in God Under Howard: The Rise of the
Religious Right in Australian Politics

* Marsh, I (2000) 'Gaps in policy-making capacities: interest groups, social movements,

think tanks and the media', in Keating, M (ed.), Institutions on the Edge? Capacity for
Governance

Glover, D (2000) “Policy: the new 'hard' politics" in For the People: Reclaiming our
Government: Labor Essays 2001

Mendes, P (2005) "Australian neoliberal think tanks and the backlash against the welfare
state", Australian Journal of Political Economy 51, 1

Keen, S (2006) "NGOs in policy", in H K Colebatch (ed.) Beyond the policy cycle

Staples, J (2007) "NGOs out in the cold: Howard Government policy towards NGOs"
Working paper No 8, UNSW Faculty of Law Research Series, 2007

13
b. "The failures of state intervention and the negative impacts of the subsequent capture
of public policy by market-based rationality have created the political space for the (re-)
emergence of community based ideas" (Hess and Adams 2001: 17). Assess this claim
with reference to one or two specific policy areas.

* Hess, M and Adams, D (2001) “Community in public policy: fad or foundation?”,

Australian Journal of Public Administration, 60, 2: 13-23.

* Adams, D "Usable knowledge in public policy", Australian Journal of Public

Administration, 63, 1: 29-42.

Bishop, P and Davis, G (2002) "Mapping public participation in policy choices"

Australian Journal of Public Administration, 61, 1

Carson, L., S. White, C. Hendriks and J. Palmer (2002) ‘Community Consultation in

Environmental Policy Making’ Australian Review of Public Affairs, 3(1): 1-13
Curtain, R (2003) "What role for citizens in developing and implementing public policy?
Part 1" Canberra Bulletin of Public Administration, June

Irvin, RA and Stansbury, J (2004) "Citizen participation in decision making: is it worth

the effort?" Public Administration Review 64, 1

Crase, L, Dollery, B and Wallis, J (2005) ‘Community consultation in Public Policy’,

Australian Journal of Political Science, 40 (2): 221-237

WEEK 11 (May 19)

Lecture
The media, public opinion and open government

Seminar
a. Analyse the sources of public opinion and evaluate the extent to which the government
should take public opinion into account.

McAllister, I and Ravenhill, J (1998) "Australian attitudes towards closer engagement

with Asia", Pacific Review, vol 11, no 1, 1998

Sparrow, J (2003) ‘Weapons of Mass Disaffection: The Media, the right and the War on
Terror’, Overland 131: 6-13.

Coopes, A et al. (2007) "Official Spin: Censorship and Control of the Australian Press
2007" Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance [see www.creative.org.au ]

14
b. Outline and explain the policies of your party affecting freedom of information and
open government from the perspective of (a) the responsible minister in the current
federal government or (b) the opposition shadow minister;

* Bushell-Embling, D (2006), “FoI – the International Situation”, AQ - Journal of

Contemporary Analysis, 78, 6 (November-December), 30-4.

* Paterson, Moira (2004) “Transparency in the Modern State: Happy Birthday FoI! Or
Commiserations?”, Alternative Law Journal, 29, 1 (February), 10-14.

* Young, Sally (2003) “Killing Competition: Restricting Access to Political

Communication Channels in Australia”, AQ - Journal of Contemporary Analysis, 75, 3
(May-June), 9-15.

Capling, Ann and Nossal, Kim Richard (2001), “Death of Distance or Tyranny of
Distance? The Internet, De-territorialization, and the Anti-Globalization Movement in
Australia”, Pacific Review, 14, 3: 443-465

Rudd, K and Ludwig, J (October 2007) Government information: Restoring trust and
integrity, Australian Labor Party

Part 4 Synthesis

WEEK 12 (May 26)

Lecture

Environmental Policy
To illustrate the policy cycle, the actors and the institutions, using the Resource
Assessment Commission as a model

Seminar
a. What is special and what is not special about environmental policy-making? (Interpret
‘policymaking’ broadly to cover any or all stages of the ‘policy cycle’.)

* Yencken, D (2002) “Governance for sustainability”, Australian Journal of Public

Administration, 61, 2: 78-89.

* Tisdell, J G (2003) "Equity and social justice in water doctrines", Social Justice
Research, 16, 4: 401-416.

* Kellow, A and Niemeyer, S (1999) "The development of environmental administration

in Queensland and Western Australia: why are they different?", Australian Journal of
Political Science, 34, 2: 205-22.

15
* Mills, R (1994) “The Resource Assessment Commission: policy advice and who to
believe”, in Weller, P (ed.), Royal Commissions and the Making of Public Policy.

b. Do you think Australia should use nuclear power to produce energy for peaceful
purposes?

Lowe, I (2007) "Reaction time: climate change and the nuclear option", Quarterly Essay
No. 27

Baker, G (2007) "Australia's uranium", Parliamentary Library Research Note, 26 March

2007, no. 17

Macintosh, A and Hamilton, C (2007) "Attitudes to nuclear power: are they shifting?"
Research Paper No. 43, The Australia Institute

WEEK 13 (June 2)

Lecture
Review
Theories of explanation (reprise)
Examination preview

Seminar

a. The strengths and weaknesses of the social science approach to public policy

* Lasswell, HD (1951) “The Policy Orientation”, in Lerner, D and Lasswell, HD (eds.)

The Policy Sciences, Stanford University Press.

* Head, B (2005) “Governance” in Saunders, P and Walter, J Ideas and Influence: Social
Science and Public Policy in Australia

John, P (2006) "Explaining policy change" in Budd, L, Charlesworth, J and Paton, R

(eds.) Making policy happen

16