The Political Economic Sources of Policy Non-design, Policy Accumulation, and Decay in Policy Capacity

• Published date: 01 July 2023
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/00953997231162522
• Author: M.Kerem Coban
• Date: 01 July 2023
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997231162522

Administration & Society

2023, Vol. 55(6) 1035 –1065

© The Author(s) 2023

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/00953997231162522

journals.sagepub.com/home/aas

Article

The Political Economic

Sources of Policy

Non-design, Policy

Accumulation, and Decay

in Policy Capacity

M.Kerem Coban1

Abstract

This article problematizes the political economic drivers of policy (non-)

design, instrument choice, and how prolonged non-design could trigger

policy accumulation with serious implications for policy capacity. Focusing

on the currency crisis-induced economic crisis in Turkey and relying on

elite interviews and secondary resources, it argues that the design space,

which is defined by the interactions between the credit-led growth model

and the growth regime that prioritizes loose monetary and bank regulatory

policies for higher economic growth rates, led to haphazard crisis response.

Prolonged non-design in response to the crisis triggered policy accumulation

and decay in systemic and organizational policy capacity.

Keywords

policy non-design, policy capacity, policy accumulation, political economy of

policymaking, crisis management

1Kadir Has University, Istanbul, Turkey

Corresponding Author:

M.Kerem Coban, Department of Political Science and Public Administration, Kadir Has

University, Istanbul 34083, Turkey.

Email: kerem.coban@khas.edu.tr

1162522AAS0010.1177/00953997231162522Administration & SocietyCoban

research-article2023

1036 Administration & Society 55(6)

Introduction

Public policy scholarship provides various answers to the drivers of policy

design and instrument choice: technical/knowledge orientation (i.e., instru-

mentality), political orientation (Capano & Lippi, 2017), institutional

arrangements (Linder & Peters, 1989), the context (i.e., design space)

(Mayntz, 1987), whose various constellations define the design space wherein

policy (non-)design and instrument choices occur (Curley et al., 2020; Feiock

& Yi, 2018; Feiock et al., 2008; Peters, 2002; Howlett & Ramesh, 1993).

Furthermore, scholars have noted that policy design might not even be the

concern of the decision-makers (i.e., non-design) (Peters, 2018; Howlett &

Mukherjee, 2014) let alone them targeting effectiveness (Peters et al., 2018).

Still, we do not know much about the political economic drivers of policy

(non-) design and instrument choice, even if there have been calls for linking

public policy scholarship with comparative political economy scholarship

(John, 2018). In a similar vein, the emerging growth models and regimes

strand in comparative political economy scholarship points to the need for

studies that would examine how “economic developments shape political

interests and how do these interests feed into policy making” (Stockhammer

& Kohler, 2022, p. 15; Baccaro & Pontusson, 2016, 2022; Hassel & Palier,

2021).

This article addresses the disconnect between comparative political econ-

omy and public policy literatures. To this aim, it highlights the political eco-

nomic drivers of policy (non-)design and instrument choice. The article

focuses on the currency crisis-induced economic crisis between 2018 and

early 2022 in Turkey. This crisis period is useful as a critical juncture that

illustrates the role and impact of political-economic factors driving policy

non-design and instrument choice to make sense of a period of a major crisis

and the executive’s crisis response. Furthermore, the focus on a crisis is

insightful because crisis response with deliberate policy design and mobiliza-

tion of policy capacity are critical to limit harm to society and facilitate robust

recovery (Albright & Crow, 2021; Boin et al., 2005, 2008; Capano et al.,

2020). In this sense, political economic drivers of policy (non-)design and

instrument choice can determine the length and impact of crises, as well as

their legacy for the post-crisis period.

Besides, this case is intriguing for two reasons. First, the country has

become a basket case of a major developing country that has been undergoing

a currency crisis-induced economic crisis since mid-2018 (Akçay & Güngen,

2022; Orhangazi & Yeldan, 2021; Şenses, 2022). This crisis exposed finan-

cial and macroeconomic fragilities, and the decision-makers have experi-

mented with haphazard instruments in response to the crisis. Second, the