Theories of agenda-setting have important implications for how we understand governance and policy change

 

GOVERNANCE AND POLICY_ ‘Theories of agenda-setting have important implications for how we understand governance and policy change.’
Name:
Course:
Affiliation:
Instructor’s Name:
Date:








	Agenda setting explains why decision makers particularly governments and legislators pay attention to particular policies and not others. This paper looks into agenda setting, how it affects governance and policy change. Agenda setting is used to explain why some issues are considered during decision-making processes at a given time. This essay sets out the concept of agenda setting in government and policy change. Different theories of agenda setting will explain implications of agenda in understanding governance and change. Agenda setting will be viewed in the eyes of the media, through public opinions and how it affects governance and policy change. 
	Agenda-setting is a process that involves competition among different issues to gather the attention of the public, media professionals and policy experts. It reduces the number of issues and subjects that get public attention. Agendas can be systemic or institutional. Systemic agendas are known as macro agendas and comprise of issues and subjects that the government may consider to put into action and place on the public agenda. Institutional agendas are micro and consist of issues that decision makers consider. 
	Agenda-setting studies show how decision makers disproportionately focus on and deal with some issues while ignoring others. This disequilibrium has attracted a wide range of explanations. Some show how individuals and institutions process information in a way that will reduce the number of issues addressed at any given time. Some portray how organization of some institutions allows prompt addressing of some issues over others. There are explanations that the public influence the political system to shift attention to a different direction. Research on agenda setting shows a clear distinction among the issues at hand. Cobb and Elder argue about how issues carry a magnitude and they can attract attention from policy makers triggering a response from the policy makers (Junk and Blatter 2010, p 13). 
	In agenda setting, leadership and governance use information to acquire a favorable policy position. Manipulation of issues and information attracts attention from governance and policy makers. The policy makers’ attention is prone to change based on public interest and so policy action can change. Emergence of new issues and agendas can change or alter existing policies resulting in a significant change in governance and policymaking process. Policy makers and political systems identify issues and act upon those that have immediate relevance and urgency. Public policy is then produced based on the issues. This leads to overestimation of the highlighted issues with other issues being neglected.  This creates the idea of information processing (Green-Padersen and Wilkerson 2006, p 1039).
	Studies on agenda setting show how the definition of an issue as a problem will determine political responses on policies. The punctuated equilibrium theory in agenda setting explains the policy change in public and political systems and subsystems.  It is an alternative to the incrementalism, It however lacks the model for policy choice. The theory shows how political responses to issues change with the way the public and the politicians view the issues. Arguments on policy reforms can bring in new issues into the picture causing ultimate policy image change. Research on policy change in the U.S. politics shows how alterations in the defining issues can change policymaking. The punctuated equilibrium theory shows how institutional policymaking multiplies the punctuated dynamics in diffusion of responses and innovations. Diffusion in policy will only occur when there are no barriers to policy change (Green-Padersen and Wilkerson 2006, p 1053). 
	The media play a key role in agenda-setting. The media have the responsibility of bringing issues to the attention of the public. The media can focus on a particular issue giving it more attention. The public will in turn consider the issue important. When the media focus on a particular topic say road safety, climate change or environment, they influence the public to think about the focused issues. There has been a relationship between the media and the civil society over time (Junk and Blatter 2010, p 28). The media have shown a significant impact on the political decisions and policies made by governments. The renowned news channel CNN covered the intervention of the US in Iraq. The coverage had an impact on political decisions and policies on the situation in Iraq. The news channel has been used on other numerous occasions to trigger attention and responses from the public and the political elites. International media has been used to trigger sympathy and intervention of the western governments particularly on