Agenda setting in policy analysis: exploring conflict for a case of water resources management in the Philippines

Exploring policy conflicts and debates is one way in which policy analysts can certify that their research agendas incorporate the questions and problems that their clients, policy makers, are interested in. This paper describes the application of two methods for conflict exploration, namely analysis of options and argumentative analysis, using a case study on water resource management in the Philippines. It shows that both methods offer complementary insights that are helpful in formulating an agenda for policy analysis activities.

[1]  D. Lutz,et al.  Paradoxes of Rationality: Theory of Metagames and Political Behavior , 1973 .

[2]  Wil A. H. Thissen.  Issue formulation in a multi-actor context: a five-step approach , 2000, Smc 2000 conference proceedings. 2000 ieee international conference on systems, man and cybernetics. 'cybernetics evolving to systems, humans, organizations, and their complex interactions' (cat. no.0.

[3]  M. Acreman.  Towards the sustainable management of groundwater-fed catchments in Europe. , 2001 .

[4]  D. Kolb,et al.  Planning in the Face of Power. , 1988 .

[5]  Amer Obeidi,et al.  Canadian bulk water exports: Analyzing the sun belt conflict using the graph model for conflict resolution , 2002 .

[6]  Masahide Horita.  Folding Arguments: A Method for Representing Conflicting Views of a Conflict , 2000 .

[7]  Slobodan P Simonovic.  Global water dynamics: issues for the 21st century. , 2002, Water science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research.

[8]  L. Hermans,et al.  Linking actors and models for water policy development in Egypt: Analyzing actors and their options , 2002 .

[9]  L. H. Wegner,et al.  Planning the Netherlands' Water Resources , 1985 .

[10]  S. Toulmin.  The uses of argument , 1960 .