26
2 The Use of Paradigms and Theories in the PULSE 3 …
2.1 Introduction
In this chapter, I will elaborate on the role and function of research paradigms (hereafter called paradigms) and theories that inform the eThekwini green and ecological
policy landscape. My intention is to show how paradigms (worldviews) and theories
(perspectives) play a role in how we view the world and react to it in the policy
and political domains. When talking about paradigms and theories, it is inevitable
that normative elements, such as beliefs, culture, ideas, ideologies and social values,
enter the fray. Researchers and practitioners alike often ignore these elements, especially when dealing with seemingly technical problems, such as green and ecological infrastructures and water security. This means that practitioners and researchers
often develop policies that are based on incomplete, or one-sided, thinking (Meissner
2017). In a previous publication, I showed how such thinking and understanding
operate within the context of several policies, and I claimed that, with a fuller appreciation of paradigms and theories, science can play a more meaningful role in the
service of society (Meissner 2017).
To highlight the normative elements further and to bring the rest of the study into
the domain of cognitive elements, I will elaborate on how these aspects influence
policy paradigms. I need to add that there is a difference between policy paradigms
and research paradigms, with the former focusing on policy changes that are infused
by changing ideas within a fluid context, and the latter informing the research
practices in both the sciences.
In the policy domain, scholars often use the concept ‘policy paradigm’ to indicate
normativity, and more particularly, the ideas that influence the policy process. By
way of example, Menahem (1998) described the policy changes within Israel’s water
management realm, since its independence in 1948. Through her research on the
role of policy networks in the emergence, persistence and changes in policy, she
identified two paradigms. The earlier policy paradigm focused on the expansion of
water resources and agricultural production, whereas the second concentrated its
attention on the priority of agricultural expansion over water conservation. For her,
policy paradigms are systems of ideas and standards that specify policy goals, the
types of instruments used to attain such objectives and the nature of problems that
they are supposed to confront (Menahem 1998). She argues that the social context
is influential in defining Israel’s interests (Menahem 2001).
In another study from a completely different domain, namely, economic policymaking in Britain, Hall (1993) asserted that, ‘In order to understand how social
learning takes place, we also need a more complete account of the role that ideas
play in the policy process. After all, the concept of social learning implies that ideas
are central to policy making …’ Still on the topic of British economic policy-making,
Carstensen and Matthijs (2018) investigated how ruling policy paradigms persist and
why they often undergo internal ideational changes. Hall’s (1993) ideas around policy
paradigms are influential in their research and they show how policy-makers use their
institutional and ideational power to redefine and reinterpret a dominant neoliberal
2 The Use of Paradigms and Theories in the PULSE 3 …
2.1 Introduction
In this chapter, I will elaborate on the role and function of research paradigms (hereafter called paradigms) and theories that inform the eThekwini green and ecological
policy landscape. My intention is to show how paradigms (worldviews) and theories
(perspectives) play a role in how we view the world and react to it in the policy
and political domains. When talking about paradigms and theories, it is inevitable
that normative elements, such as beliefs, culture, ideas, ideologies and social values,
enter the fray. Researchers and practitioners alike often ignore these elements, especially when dealing with seemingly technical problems, such as green and ecological infrastructures and water security. This means that practitioners and researchers
often develop policies that are based on incomplete, or one-sided, thinking (Meissner
2017). In a previous publication, I showed how such thinking and understanding
operate within the context of several policies, and I claimed that, with a fuller appreciation of paradigms and theories, science can play a more meaningful role in the
service of society (Meissner 2017).
To highlight the normative elements further and to bring the rest of the study into
the domain of cognitive elements, I will elaborate on how these aspects influence
policy paradigms. I need to add that there is a difference between policy paradigms
and research paradigms, with the former focusing on policy changes that are infused
by changing ideas within a fluid context, and the latter informing the research
practices in both the sciences.
In the policy domain, scholars often use the concept ‘policy paradigm’ to indicate
normativity, and more particularly, the ideas that influence the policy process. By
way of example, Menahem (1998) described the policy changes within Israel’s water
management realm, since its independence in 1948. Through her research on the
role of policy networks in the emergence, persistence and changes in policy, she
identified two paradigms. The earlier policy paradigm focused on the expansion of
water resources and agricultural production, whereas the second concentrated its
attention on the priority of agricultural expansion over water conservation. For her,
policy paradigms are systems of ideas and standards that specify policy goals, the
types of instruments used to attain such objectives and the nature of problems that
they are supposed to confront (Menahem 1998). She argues that the social context
is influential in defining Israel’s interests (Menahem 2001).
In another study from a completely different domain, namely, economic policymaking in Britain, Hall (1993) asserted that, ‘In order to understand how social
learning takes place, we also need a more complete account of the role that ideas
play in the policy process. After all, the concept of social learning implies that ideas
are central to policy making …’ Still on the topic of British economic policy-making,
Carstensen and Matthijs (2018) investigated how ruling policy paradigms persist and
why they often undergo internal ideational changes. Hall’s (1993) ideas around policy
paradigms are influential in their research and they show how policy-makers use their
institutional and ideational power to redefine and reinterpret a dominant neoliberal