ABSTRACT
In Chapter 1, the notion of the ‘common good’ in relation to public policy thinking was assessed and this was explored from the perspective of political philosophy, which suggests that people feel a sense of moral duty towards others. On that basis, public policy could be driven by the moral philosophical notion of the common good. Policy-makers could be operating on the basis of a sense of moral obligation to create policies which benefit all in society. We could therefore conclude that satisfying the common good is the predominant motive among public policy-makers, but is this the case? I will explore evidence that policy-makers are susceptible to the socio-cognitive group processes introduced earlier on in Part II. For instance, can self-categorization or group identity predict what is on the policy agenda and how important is subjective context? I and a research assistant, Abigail Spong, conducted a study using data from UK Parliamentary records and data in the public domain. We wanted to find out whether there is a systematic effect of any given MP’s group membership on what is on his/her policy agenda. In the first part of this chapter, I will discuss the results of this research and the implications for different policy contexts. I will then discuss reward motives as a key explanation for policymakers’ susceptibility to group processes when setting their own policy agenda.
