A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ATTEMPTS TO FORMULATE SOCIAL POLICY AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL IN THE USA, UNITED KINGDOM AND ISRAEL

Purpose. The tendency towards expansion of public social services and the growing public demands for social betterment have led to a seemingly irreversible growth in government involvement in the formulation of social policies. Over the past decade this tendency has led some governments to introduce (at the higest level) new organizational mechanisms designed to bring coherence to the policy making process and coordination in domestic and social programs. This study focuses on the experiences of three of these staff units: (1) the Domestic Council at the Executive Office of the President, United States; (2) the Inter-Ministerial System for Social Affairs at the Prime Minister's Office, Israel; and (3) Joint Framework for Social Policies in the Central Policy Review Staff, at the Cabinet Office, United Kingdom. This exploratory study examines the extent to which these units have fulfilled their own missions and what factors have accounted for the degree of success and influence achieved.;Findings and Conclusions. (a) A tripartite model for social policy making. The case studies confirmed that the elements of "Leadership," "Resources" and "Harmony" were vital and necessary in the process of social policy formulation. While all were found to be important because they are closely related and interdependent, the findings also suggested an order or hierarchy among them. "Leadership" was found to be the most essential component of the process, since leaders hold the potential power to set priorities and to make policies. Hence, a rational approach in employing the tripartite model would put the emphasis on "leadership"--the key factor in the process. (b) Social policy leadership. Social policy leadership at the national level requires involvement of the person who holds overall authority and power--the President or the Prime Minister. Thus, only if the head of the government is personally and closely involved in the process can a social policy-making unit meet the growing needs and demands in this area. In order to fulfill that role, the head of government needs to exercise political entrepreneurship, give social policy priority attention, and be motivated by a social ideology. (c) A staff unit for social policy. The establishment of the staff units in the three countries was generally accepted because of the recognition of the need to improve the policy-making tools available to the head of the government. The study has demonstrated, conceptually, the potential usefulness of the staff unit in social policy making at the national level. In practice, the units encountered difficulties (e.g., a lack of balance between political and professional expertise, between social and economic considerations, too low a profile assumed by the head of the unit) that hampered their contribution to the process.;Study Approach and Method. It was hypothesized that three themes would be especially important in the development of national social policy: (a) Leadership - the role of top political leadership in the formulation of social policies; (b) Resources - the importance of fiscal and budgetary issues and the skilled use of information and intelligence in determining needs and priorities in social planning; (c) Harmony - the need for coordination and consensus, based on a combination of interagency agreement within government and public support. These themes provide a tripartite analytical framework and serve as criteria for comparison and evaluation of the three case examples covered in the study. The data for the study were collected in two ways: (a) review and analysis of relevant documents and literature; and (b) extensive visits to the three countries and interviews with past and present officials and observers of the governments.