ABSTRACT
In this article, we propose a typology of policy design and non-design, with special attention to a category of policy making which we term, “anti-design”. We argue that contrary to the established literature, the opposite of design is not politics, but rather, a disconnect between problems, interventions, and outcomes. This disconnect can be caused by political forces but also by non-political factors such as incompetence, corruption, or global economic trends. We use an attempt by the government of Indonesia to regulate e-cigarettes to illustrate a scenario in which design activities are virtually absent. Making the distinction between design and the various forms of non-design is an important step in understanding the conditions that enable or impede rational mechanisms in the policy process.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Disclaimer
The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official stance of their employers.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Joshua Newman
Joshua Newman is an Associate Professor in the College of Business, Government and Law at Flinders University in Adelaide, South Australia. Joshua’s research interests include most aspects of the policy process, including transfer and learning, evidence-based policy, success and failure, and the interaction between the public and private sectors. He is the author of Governing Public-Private Partnerships (McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2017).
Martha Widdi Nurfaiza
Martha Nurfaiza currently works as a customs officer in the Indonesian Ministry of Finance, particularly at the Directorate General of Customs and Excise Headquarters, Jakarta. She obtained her master’s degree in public administration (policy) from Flinders University, South Australia, under the Australia Awards Scholarship. Her current research interests include tobacco control policy, excise taxes, and free trade agreements.