Policy entrepreneurship: A case study of the Maryland Governor's Commission on Welfare Policy

The dissertation addresses two questions: (1) Can one or more policy entrepreneur roles be identified in the policymaking process of welfare? and (2) does an economic model of policy entrepreneurship adequately explain leadership roles in the welfare policy process? Policy entrepreneurship can be viewed in the literature as a reaction to increasingly complex theories of the policy process (e.g., garbage can theory) that do not sufficiently allow for the role of individuals in innovation and policy change. The present study returns to the economic roots of policy entrepreneurship. Several apparently different definitions of the policy entrepreneur can be interpreted within a common framework based on classical and Schumpeterian economic theory. The policy entrepreneur in the "conventional economic model: (1) has clear, well-defined policy goals, (2) introduces innovative policy designs, and (3) uses different (others' and institutional venue) resources.; The economics-based model of policy entrepreneurship was tested against policy actor data from a case study of the 1993--1994 Maryland Governor's Commission on Welfare Policy (GCWP). Two Commission members were classified as policy entrepreneurs. The conventional economic model discriminates fairly well between entrepreneur and non-entrepreneur roles. Although not fully quantified, the Maryland policy actor data show a generally positive or direct association between economic model variables.; In response to the second research question, an "amended" model was developed in order to better understand the leadership contributions of entrepreneurs in welfare policy. The amended model takes as its premise a welfare policymaking environment characterized by high levels of ideological conflict and technological uncertainty. It suggests that entrepreneurs, in pursuit of their policy goals within public institutions, do more than propose technical policy ideas. They advocate "public ideas"---linking technical policy designs to public or social values. The amended model defines two types of policy entrepreneur roles: (1) value advocacy, and (2) bridging (of different policy designs and policy goals). When applied to Maryland case study evidence on the two policy actors classified as entrepreneurs under the economic model, the amended model implies a key differentiation of leadership roles in welfare policymaking. One policy entrepreneur performed a latent value advocacy role (tied to the social value of child economic security); the second entrepreneur performed a bridging role.