The Pross Policy Community Model
The previous sections explained that policymaking is a complex process that involves various stakeholders working together to influence policy outcomes. In his book “Group Politics and Public Policy,” Dalhousie University Professor Paul Pross outlined his theory of the “policy community.” According to Pross, “policy communities are “groupings of government agencies, trade organizations, media people, and individuals, including academics, who, for various reasons, have an interest in a particular policy field and attempt to influence it.” This section explores the concept of the policy community and its significance within the policy-making landscape. Insights from Professor Pross and other relevant sources are used to unravel the dynamics of the policy community.
The policy community refers to a network of individuals, organizations, and institutions that participate in and exert influence over the policy-making process. These stakeholders possess diverse perspectives, interests, and expertise, engaging in ongoing interactions and exchanges related to policy development and implementation. The policy community model aids in conceptualising the interactions involved in determining government policy.
The policy community is a network of stakeholders who work together to shape policy outcomes. The community thrives on the sharing of knowledge, research, and data, which contributes to well-informed policy decisions. Equipped with expertise, resources, and extensive networks, stakeholders in the policy community passionately advocate for specific policy positions, amplifying their voices within the corridors of power. The policy community often unites around shared objectives, rallying together to address societal challenges or advance specific policy agendas. Stakeholders within the policy community maintain collaborative relationships, working together to achieve common goals and values.
Pross emphasises the need to view each policy community as a unique entity with its own internal dynamics and power structures within the larger political system. His research illuminates the complex relationships, rivalries, and alliances among those involved in the policy community, all of which play a role in determining how policies are ultimately implemented.
The complex web of power relations among stakeholders is examined by Pross, examining how certain actors wield more influence or have greater access to decision-makers than others. The formation of coalitions and alliances within the policy community as stakeholders come together to pursue common goals or address specific policy issues is also highlighted. Policy learning is another important aspect of the community, where stakeholders exchange information, expertise, and experiences to shape policy outcomes.
Canadian lobbyist registries provide a wealth of information regarding lobbyists’ objectives, targets and communications. Each registry makes a distinction between types of lobbyists. As noted in Chapter 1, “in-house” or “corporate” and “organisational lobbyists” far exceed the professional hired gun “consultant lobbyists.” This data appears to support the assertion that groups are at the core of policy development.
Understanding the dynamics of the policy community is essential for anyone seeking to influence policy in Canada. Viewing the various players, both inside and outside government, as part of a dynamic entity helps make sense of the way things work. It allows for the identification of key actors, power dynamics, areas of collaboration, and contention on a case by case basis within a subset of government policy. Every area of government, such as health care, taxation, social policy, trade, and the environment, will have a community that leads its own policy creation. There will be smaller communities under the larger sector policy community, and these will often rise and fall depending on the specifics of the important issues of the day.
The policy community model provides valuable insights into the organisational dynamics within government, highlighting the presence of silos and the limited awareness of departments regarding activities in other areas of the same government. While the perception of a well-structured monolithic government may prevail, the reality is that departments often operate within their own spheres of responsibility, leading to a lack of awareness regarding unrelated subjects within their own government.
The heavy workloads and resource constraints faced by ministers and their staff necessitate a focus on their specific areas of responsibility, which further contributes to the siloed nature of government operations. Consequently, they may have a better understanding of developments in related subject areas outside their own government than of unrelated issues within their own jurisdiction.
