Abstract
The concept of incrementalism has been widely cited over the past three decades, yet it has not served as the basis for a cumulatively developing line of empirical and theoretical inquiry. As a result, the highly promising incrementalist framework has contributed surprisingly little to improving our understanding of how decision-making processes can better adapt to humans' cognitive limitations. One indicator of the lack of progress is that policy scholars have never made a sustained attempt to explain how practitioners can become better incrementalists. To see whether the concept's original formulation may be obscuring the way to further progress, we summarize and appraise four enduring criticisms of incrementalism: its alleged lack of goal orientation, conservatism, limited range of applicability, and negative stance toward analysis. While questioning the validity of the critics' claims, we nevertheless propose a way to reframe the incrementalist endeavor, with the intention of stimulating both its critics and defenders to get on with the task of learning more about how individuals, organizations, and societies can proceed relatively intelligently despite the fact that humans rarely have a good understanding of complex social problems and policy options.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ahrari, M. E.. (1987). ‘A paradigm of “crisis” decision making: The case of synfuels policy,’ British Journal of Political Science 17: 71–91.
Arrow, K. J. (1964). ‘Review of A Strategy of Decision by Braybrooke and Lindblom,’ Political Science Quarterly 79: 584–588.
Ascher, W. (1978). Forecasting: An Appraisal for Policy Makers and Planners. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Barber, Benjamin (1984). Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for a New Age. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Behn, R. D. (1988). ‘Management by groping along,’ Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 7: 643–663.
Berry, W. D. (1990). ‘The confusing case of budgetary incrementalism: Too many meanings for a single concept,’ Journal of Politics 52: 167–196.
Braybrooke, D. and C. E. Lindblom (1963). A Strategy of Decision. New York: The Free Press.
Bruder, P. T. (1975). ‘Lindblom reconsidered: A summary of the concept of disjointed incrementalism through partisan mutual adjustment and a review of its major criticisms.’ Unpublished manuscript.
Collingridge, D. (1992). The Management of Scale: Big Organizations, Big Decisions, Big Mistakes. London and New York: Routledge.
Davis, Otto A., M. A. H. Dempster, and Aaron Wildavsky (1974). ‘Toward a predictive theory of the federal budgetary process,’ British Journal of Political Science 4: 419–452.
Dempster, M. A. H. and A. Wildavsky (1979). ‘On change: Or, there is no magic size for an increment,’ Political Studies 27: 371–389.
Diver, C. S. (1983). ‘The optimal precision of administrative rules,’ Yale Law Journal 93: 65–109.
Dror, Y. (1964). ‘Muddling through: Science or inertia?’ Public Administration Review 24: 153–157.
Drucker. P. F. (1974). Management: Tasks, Responsibilities, Practices. New York: Harper and Row.
Dryzek, J. (1983). ‘Present choices, future consequences: A case for thinking strategically,’ World Futures 19: 1–19.
Dryzek, J. (1987). ‘Complexity and rationality in public life,’ Political Studies 35: 424–442.
Eisenhardt, K. M. and L. J. Bourgeois III (1988). ‘Politics of strategic decision making in highvelocity environments: Toward a midrange theory,’ Academy of Management Journal 31: 737–770.
Etzioni, A. (1967). ‘Mixed-scanning: A “third” approach to decision-making,’ Public Administration Review 27: 385–392.
Forester, J. (1984). ‘Bounded rationality and the politics of muddling through,’ Public Administration Review 44: 23–31.
Fredrickson, J. W. (1983). ‘Strategic process research: Questions and recommendations.’ Academy of Management Review 8: 565–575.
George, A. (1980). Presidential Decision Making in Foreign Policy: The Effective Use of Information and Advice. Boulder, CO: Westview.
Gifford, D. J. (1983). ‘Discretionary decisionmaking in the regulatory agencies: A conceptual framework,’ Southern California Law Review 57: 101–135.
Goodin, R. and I. Waldner (1979). ‘Thinking big, thinking small, and not thinking at all,’ Public Policy 27: 1–24.
Grandori, A. (1984). ‘A prescriptive contingency view of organizational decision making,’ Administrative Science Quarterly 29: 192–209.
Hanushek, Eric A. (1972). Education and Race: An Analysis of the Educational Production Process. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Hanushek, Eric A., and Lori L. Taylor (1990). ‘Alternative assessments of the performance of schools: Measurement of state variations in achievement,’ Journal of Human Resources 25: 179–201.
Hayes, M. T. (1987). ‘Incrementalism as dramaturgy: The case of the nuclear freeze,’ Polity 19: 443–463.
Hayes, M. T. (1992). Incrementalism and Public Policy. New York: Longman.
Hochschild, Jennifer L. (1984). The New American Dilemma: Liberal Democracy and School Desegregation. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Johnson, G. (1988). ‘Rethinking incrementalism,’ Strategic Management Journal 9: 75–91.
Jones, L. R. and F. Thompson (1984). ‘Incremental vs. comprehensive reform of economic regulation: Predictable outcomes and unintended consequences,’ The American Journal of Economics and Sociology 43: 1–17.
Kay, W. D. (1991–92). ‘The politics of fusion,’ Issues in Science and Technology 8: 40–46.
Lindblom, C. E. (1959). ‘The science of “muddling through”,’ Public Administration Review 19: 79–88.
Lindblom, C. E. (1965). The Intelligence of Democracy. New York: The Free Press.
Lindblom, C. E. (1979). ‘Still muddling, not yet through,’ Public Administration Review 39: 517–526.
Lindblom, C. E. (1977). Politics and Markets: The World's Political-Economic Systems. New York: Basic Books.
Lindblom, C. E. (1988). Democracy and Market System. New York: Norwegian University Press.
Lindblom, C. E. (1990). Inquiry and Change: The Troubled Attempt to Understand and Shape Society. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Lindblom, Charles E. and Edward J. Woodhouse (1993). The Policy-Making Process. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 3rd ed.
Logsdon, J. M. (1986). ‘The decision to develop the Space Shuttle,’ Space Policy 2: 103–119.
Lovell, R. D. and B. M. Turner (1988). ‘Organizational learning, bureaucratic control, preservation of form,’ Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Innovation 9: 404–425.
Lustick, I. (1980). ‘Explaining the variable utility of disjointed incrementalism: Four propositions.’ American Political Science Review 74: 342–353.
Manzer, R. (1984). ‘Public policy-making as practical reasoning,’ Canadian Journal of Political Science 17: 577–594.
Mayntz, R. (1983). ‘The conditions of effective public policy: A new challenge for policy analysis,’ Policy and Politics 11: 123–143.
McCurdy, Howard E. (1990). The Space Station Decision: Incremental Politics and Technological Choice. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Mintzberg, H. and J. Jorgensen (1987). ‘Emergent strategy for public policy,’ Canadian Public Aministration 30: 214–229.
Morone, J. G. and E. J. Woodhouse (1986). Averting Catastrophe: Strategies for Regulating Risky Technologies. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Morone, J. G. and E. J. Woodhouse (1989). The Demise of Nuclear Energy? Lessons for Democratic Control of Technology. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Nice, D. C. (1987). ‘Incremental and nonincremental policy responses: The states and the rail-roads,’ Polity 20: 145–156.
Pava, C. (1986). ‘New strategies of systems change: Reclaiming nonsynoptic methods,’ Human Relations 39: 615–633.
Premfors, R. (1981). ‘Review article: Charles Lindblom and Aaron Wildavsky,’ British Journal of Political Science 11: 201–225.
Pressman, Jeffrey, and Aaron Wildavsky (1973). Implementation. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Quinn, J. B. (1982). ‘Managing strategies incrementally,’ Omega 10: 613–627.
Schulman, P. R. (1975). ‘Nonincremental policy making: Notes toward an alternative paradigm,’ American Political Science Review 69: 1354–1370.
Schulman, P. R. (1980). Large-Scale Policy Making. New York: Elsevier-North Holland.
Shapiro, M. (1965). ‘Stability and change in judicial decision-making: Incrementalism or stare decisis?’ Law in Transition Quarterly 2: 134–157.
Spread, P. (1985). ‘Lindblom, Wildavsky, and the role of support,’ Political Studies 33: 274–295.
Starling, Grover (1991). ‘Making strategic decisions in high technology environments,’ Policy Sciences 24: 227–243.
Stone, Deborah A. (1988). Policy Paradox and Political Reason. Boston: Little Brown.
Stopford, J. M. and C. Baden-Fuller (1990). ‘Corporate rejuvenation,’ Journal of Management Studies 27: 399–415.
Underal, A. (1984). ‘Can we, in the study of international politics, do without the model of a state as a rational, unitary actor? A discussion of the limitations and possible fruitfulness of the model, and its alternatives,’ Internasjonal Politikk Temahefte I: 63–79.
Weick, K. E. (1984). ‘Small wins: Redefining the scale of social problems,’ American Psychologist 39: 40–49.
Witte, J. F. (1985). The Politics and Development of the Federal Income Tax. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press.
Woodhouse, E. J. (1988). ‘Sophisticated trial and error in decision making about risk.’ In Michael Kraft and Norman Vig, eds. Technology and Politics. Durham: Duke University Press.
Woodhouse, E. J., and David Collingridge (1993). ‘Incrementalism, intelligent trial-and-error, and political decision theory,’ in Harry Redner, ed. An Heretical Heir of the Enlightenment: Science, Politics and Policy in the Work of Charles E. Lindblom. Boulder, CO: Westview.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Weiss, A., Woodhouse, E. Reframing incrementalism: A constructive response to the critics. Policy Sci 25, 255–273 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138785
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138785