What do you think?
Rate this book
Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision Making
Since its debut, Policy Paradox has been widely acclaimed as the most accessible policy text available. Unlike most texts, which treat policy analysis and policy making as different enterprises, Policy Paradox demonstrates that "you can’t take politics out of analysis." Through a uniquely rich and comprehensive model, this revised edition continues to show how real-world policy grows out of differing ideals, even definitions, of basic societal goals like security, equality, and liberty. The book also demonstrates how these ideals often conflict in policy implementation.
In this revised edition, Stone has added a full-length case study as an appendix, taking up the issue of affirmative action. Clear, provocative, and engaging, Policy Paradox conveys the richness of public policy making and analysis.
In this revised edition, Stone has added a full-length case study as an appendix, taking up the issue of affirmative action. Clear, provocative, and engaging, Policy Paradox conveys the richness of public policy making and analysis.
428 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1988
128 people are currently reading
3918 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 99 reviews
February 12, 2012
A beautifully written text--full of humor and grappling with contradictions--that deftly reveals some of the major flaws in a traditional economics-based analysis of public policy. Stone doesn't so much propose an alternative model, however. Her critique is powerful, but it's hard to say where exactly to go from there.
Stone suggests that the economics-based model neglects several aspects of our "polis" that cannot be accounted for in traditional policy analysis. We are asked to think more broadly in how we define problems, and how solutions are posed based on particular gains to be realized by particular groups.
There is simply a streak of humanism in this book that is absent from much literature in public policy. A more rounded viewpoint that recognizes many of the political realities that drive our policy process. Probably the best text I read in my graduate public policy course.
Stone suggests that the economics-based model neglects several aspects of our "polis" that cannot be accounted for in traditional policy analysis. We are asked to think more broadly in how we define problems, and how solutions are posed based on particular gains to be realized by particular groups.
There is simply a streak of humanism in this book that is absent from much literature in public policy. A more rounded viewpoint that recognizes many of the political realities that drive our policy process. Probably the best text I read in my graduate public policy course.
November 18, 2009
Deborah Stone's "Policy Paradox" is an important work in the field of policy analysis. The subtitle is illuminating: "The Art of Political Decision Making." Her takeoff point is the following statement (pages x-xi): "This new field of policy analysis supposedly devoted to improving governance, was based on a profound disgust for the ambiguities and paradoxes of politics. . . . In rational analysis, everything has one and only one meaning." In her own words, she (page xi) ". . .wrote this book to critique the field and to capture, I hope, a more inspiring and humane kind of policy analysis."
Her basic point is that the rational models drawn from economics do not explain very well how policy analysis works. Nor, in her view, should it be the actual model for decision making. She contends that economic rationality often gives way to political reality, to accommodation to conflicting interests, to compromise, to values other than economic efficiency (such as liberty, fairness, and so on).
The introduction opens the book strongly, with Stone noting policy paradoxes, where the economic rational model does not prevail and explain how things work. She argues (page 13) that "each type of policy instrument [e.g., inducements, rules, rights, for example:] is a kind of sports arena, each with its peculiar ground rules, within which political conflicts are continued." The first chapter continues the theme, by speaking of the market (economics) and the polis (politics), with a nice table summarizing key points on page 33). She concludes that (page 34) "Problems in the polis are never `solved' in the way that economic needs are met in the market model." Two different realms, and what works in the market may or may not work in the polis.
The book proceeds in three major sections: Part II focuses on broad goals (e.g., equity, efficiency, security, liberty); Part III examines problems (with chapters labeled as follows: symbols, numbers, causes, interests, decisions); Part IV focuses on solutions (or tools or instruments, such as inducements, rules, facts).
In the end, the book examines nicely the tensions between economic rational analysis of policy ideas and the messier but inescapable political process as it addresses policy issues. The reader will be provoked to think about important issues upon encountering Stone's perspective. A very useful work on the bigger picture of policy analysis.
Her basic point is that the rational models drawn from economics do not explain very well how policy analysis works. Nor, in her view, should it be the actual model for decision making. She contends that economic rationality often gives way to political reality, to accommodation to conflicting interests, to compromise, to values other than economic efficiency (such as liberty, fairness, and so on).
The introduction opens the book strongly, with Stone noting policy paradoxes, where the economic rational model does not prevail and explain how things work. She argues (page 13) that "each type of policy instrument [e.g., inducements, rules, rights, for example:] is a kind of sports arena, each with its peculiar ground rules, within which political conflicts are continued." The first chapter continues the theme, by speaking of the market (economics) and the polis (politics), with a nice table summarizing key points on page 33). She concludes that (page 34) "Problems in the polis are never `solved' in the way that economic needs are met in the market model." Two different realms, and what works in the market may or may not work in the polis.
The book proceeds in three major sections: Part II focuses on broad goals (e.g., equity, efficiency, security, liberty); Part III examines problems (with chapters labeled as follows: symbols, numbers, causes, interests, decisions); Part IV focuses on solutions (or tools or instruments, such as inducements, rules, facts).
In the end, the book examines nicely the tensions between economic rational analysis of policy ideas and the messier but inescapable political process as it addresses policy issues. The reader will be provoked to think about important issues upon encountering Stone's perspective. A very useful work on the bigger picture of policy analysis.
April 3, 2021
Book is based on one grand theme, that the market model cannot be applied on defining a society(community, city, country) whilst designing a policy. Market model is discrete, has clear definition and boundaries, whereas society isn’t, it is a continuum, and collectively defined by traits known and unknown.
Additionally, author has listed various paradox faced by policy makers with ideological prejudice.
Book is a good read, but only for readers with at-least intermediate level knowledge on policy design.
Additionally, author has listed various paradox faced by policy makers with ideological prejudice.
Book is a good read, but only for readers with at-least intermediate level knowledge on policy design.
May 22, 2020
I had to read this book for a graduate class on public policy. Technically it offers useful information about public policy and goes into several different theories of public policy. It's pretty thorough and a good start to considering public policy.
I have two issues with the book: 1) it needlessly uses examples from the liberal camp to make its point; and 2) the author argues that she will describe a new and better way to describe public policy that incorporates the idea of the polis rather than economic or cost/benefit analysis frameworks. On the former point, the book could have been just as good had she not made her liberal politics oh so clear. There was no nuance or balance. I felt like I was being hit over the head at times. As to the latter point, from the get go she tells readers how she's going to introduce a new framework for public policy that leaves behind the old, bad economic frameworks that public policy is so heavily steeped in. I do not begrudge her the effort nor the critique that public policy is too heavily steeped in economic frameworks. It really is and it's terrible (my opinion--not expertise). So I was looking forward to her doing just that. Her efforts at the start of the book seem to move toward her goal and then she stops. The very concepts and frameworks she critiqued at the start of the book find their way throughout the text. It's either the case of someone so steeped in the discipline that they can't pull back enough to see their own contradictions, or perhaps, the desire to generate a new and better framework was a device used to get into the meat of the book: discussing and evaluating different theories of public policy.
It's ok. If you have an interest, check it out. But make space for the critique of the book so you don't gobble it up hook, line, and sinker. Also, diversify your reading. This was one book of three paired with several journal articles over the course of a semester. Those readings help bring the foibles of the book into relief. I'm not generally recommending this book.
I have two issues with the book: 1) it needlessly uses examples from the liberal camp to make its point; and 2) the author argues that she will describe a new and better way to describe public policy that incorporates the idea of the polis rather than economic or cost/benefit analysis frameworks. On the former point, the book could have been just as good had she not made her liberal politics oh so clear. There was no nuance or balance. I felt like I was being hit over the head at times. As to the latter point, from the get go she tells readers how she's going to introduce a new framework for public policy that leaves behind the old, bad economic frameworks that public policy is so heavily steeped in. I do not begrudge her the effort nor the critique that public policy is too heavily steeped in economic frameworks. It really is and it's terrible (my opinion--not expertise). So I was looking forward to her doing just that. Her efforts at the start of the book seem to move toward her goal and then she stops. The very concepts and frameworks she critiqued at the start of the book find their way throughout the text. It's either the case of someone so steeped in the discipline that they can't pull back enough to see their own contradictions, or perhaps, the desire to generate a new and better framework was a device used to get into the meat of the book: discussing and evaluating different theories of public policy.
It's ok. If you have an interest, check it out. But make space for the critique of the book so you don't gobble it up hook, line, and sinker. Also, diversify your reading. This was one book of three paired with several journal articles over the course of a semester. Those readings help bring the foibles of the book into relief. I'm not generally recommending this book.
November 28, 2008
I am not entirely sure how to rate a book like this. I personally found it illuminating since it was my first real taste for a public policy book. However, I suppose my judgment could differ if I had been exposed to many other books on the same subject. That being said, within the context with which I read this book I enjoyed it and learned a lot from it. I think one of the clearest points driven home for me is how contradictory it is to even attempt to call the study of human behavior a science. As organic beings obviously our lifestyles and our societies have a very organic nature to them. We are constantly changing, evolving and being influenced by countless factors. A clear example would be how science in its obsession with categorization almost wants to ignore anything that can't be categorized because it challenges the entire foundation of how science attempts to organize and make sense of the world. So when faced with a species like the duck-billed platypus many scientists would almost prefer it didn't exist because it doesn't fit neatly into a nice little package or label. But that is not even close to as frustrating as trying to measure and classify humans and their behavior and their collective behavior. This book attempts to demonstrate how this factor is not something to be ignored or disregarded as an anomaly but is the essential nature of public policy.
October 11, 2007
This book sets out to explain American politics through the model of the "polis" and contrast this analysis with the model of the "rational market" of politics. Broadly speaking, she feels that her polis theory better captures the "paradoxes" that occur in politics and political movements, and she feels that the market theory fails to explain these paradoxes or explains them incorrectly. To my reading, however, what she describes as paradoxes are really just effects of the fact that society is not a single "rational mind" but many "rational minds" and she often resorts to putting words into the mouth of rational market political analysis to make her point. She does do a wonderful job of describing the varieties of rhetoric politicians use and how they are useful for shaping political discourse and the thought of groups.
December 23, 2020
I was hoping for prescription but wound up instead with a whole lot of description. This would be good as a textbook, but only for an introductory policy course.
I did enjoy the various comparisons between the Rationality/Market model and then her Polis model, which I read mostly as Ms. Stone gently reminding free market economists that reality works somewhat differently than their Invisible Hand fantasy.
In that sense the book is solid: it mildly chides political and economic theorists for working with a model that is largely divorced from reality. It just doesn't go far enough in advising solutions to these discrepancies.
Not Bad Reviews
@pointblaek
I did enjoy the various comparisons between the Rationality/Market model and then her Polis model, which I read mostly as Ms. Stone gently reminding free market economists that reality works somewhat differently than their Invisible Hand fantasy.
In that sense the book is solid: it mildly chides political and economic theorists for working with a model that is largely divorced from reality. It just doesn't go far enough in advising solutions to these discrepancies.
Not Bad Reviews
@pointblaek
August 30, 2013
I found this book difficult to read purely due to the amount of heavy handed rhetoric. It's not as bad as a Michael Moore documentary but it's definitely preaching to the choir.
February 8, 2021
کتاب پارادوکس سیاست، یک کتاب مهم برای افرادی است که می خواهند با پیچیدگی دنیای سیاست آشنا شوند. عموما سیاست درمیان مردم عامه به عنوان چیزی کثیف، چیزی مرموز و چیزی در دست ارکان ظلم تلقی می شود. اما سیاست بیچ از هرچیزی امری است پارادوکسیکال. کتاب پارادوکس سیاست یک کتاب درسی محسوب می شود و شاید برای کسی که بخواهد به شکل روزمره ورقش بزند، کتاب مناسبی نباشد
April 7, 2021
Very interesting and learned more about each side of the political spectrum, albeit there were many ideas/statements I don’t quite agree with.
April 7, 2023
While the main thread of the book sometimes gets lost in incoherent subdomains and (mostly american) examples, it's an interesting and challenging enough view to really make you think about the suggested rationality behind policy.
April 22, 2025
Life changing on the low and quite disturbing to see the most "complex" of policy issues laid out in black and white. Stone is great at objectifying all races, genders, and religions equally. Also so alarming that most people in this policy class at Brown University (the ones who are supposed to care about these issues and then make lasting change later in the world) have maybe not read this book and do not show up to class! Alas, maybe I'm the problem
January 28, 2026
Fine, better at the start.
October 24, 2021
“People are naturally hardworking but will stop working hard at anything if they learn from experience that their effort makes no difference.”
― Deborah Stone
― Deborah Stone
September 24, 2009
Machiavelli for the 21rst century. (It applies mostly/best to American politics.)
Although I sort of dislike some of the cheap relativist conclusions she draws, such as 'because numbers are political instruments meant to convince, they are just one way among many to do so, and not at all holy, and may even go out of fashion again at some later date,' which just seems silly. Potential for abuse because people don't notice that they're being misused/misled/shown an incomplete picture does not equate to the tool being bad, it just means the tool has a manual, and we need more people to have read it.
Anyway, minor gripes like these aside, it really is a quite comprehensive policy analysis book, even though I got the feeling it could do with a bit more structure still (in later revisions than this one).
Although I sort of dislike some of the cheap relativist conclusions she draws, such as 'because numbers are political instruments meant to convince, they are just one way among many to do so, and not at all holy, and may even go out of fashion again at some later date,' which just seems silly. Potential for abuse because people don't notice that they're being misused/misled/shown an incomplete picture does not equate to the tool being bad, it just means the tool has a manual, and we need more people to have read it.
Anyway, minor gripes like these aside, it really is a quite comprehensive policy analysis book, even though I got the feeling it could do with a bit more structure still (in later revisions than this one).
May 7, 2022
I read this for a class, and all in all, it was one of the less horrible assigned readings I have had to do. Stone did a good job of illustrating her argument and developing a polis model to understand the policy making world. I really enjoyed her constant illustration of the paradoxes that we find ourselves in when discussing policies from a range of lenses. And her use of examples to illustrate points was well done and helped make points concrete. For someone learning about policy formation, I think it is a helpful book to illustrate all of the aspects that go into policy making and the different ways to think about issues.
I didn't hate reading it and I learned a lot, which speaks volumes.
I didn't hate reading it and I learned a lot, which speaks volumes.
December 17, 2016
A good book for all those interested to learn about how the values of liberty, efficiency, equity, security and welfare of a community conflict in a policy implementation. Below is the link for
Chapter 2- the famous example of the chocolate cake division among few recipients.
https://blogs.commons.georgetown.edu/....
I was very well impressed with Deborah's thoughtful analysis for each course of action.
Chapter 2- the famous example of the chocolate cake division among few recipients.
https://blogs.commons.georgetown.edu/....
I was very well impressed with Deborah's thoughtful analysis for each course of action.
January 29, 2009
If you like politics and you want a general tool box of the policy making process, this is the book for you. This book does get a little long winded but I think the writing is very well rounded and is willing to look at all sides regardless of how boarding it gets.
September 21, 2011
Read four chapters of this for my State and Local Policy Analysis class. They were vital chapters to understanding how to analyze policy; I'm thinking about turning each concept into a blog post, a sort of "MPP in a Blog" series.
October 28, 2008
You guessed it ... a class textbook!
June 22, 2009
Great introductory text to public policy. I love the examples that Stone uses that really illustrate how the public debate is framed.
July 10, 2011
Fascinating - loved it.
July 29, 2011
Makes the concepts and theories of policy analysis accessible.
April 9, 2012
A critical approach to the more traditional rational choice model for policy development, Stone sets up a readable argument that will make you reconsider how and why you think about policy.
November 23, 2012
An application of behavioral science and reasoning to policy cases. Convincing, entertaining, accessible, and reasonably well-supported.
April 11, 2021
Required reading... meaning I was required to read, not that you should...
May 8, 2020
I would like to give a brief overview on this seminal work on public policy.
PART 1 (THE MARKET AND POLIS MODELS)
Its about sorting out the Market and Polis world view or mental model as she would say. As the dominant intellectual landscape thinks the domain of public policy would resemble something as simple as two individuals trading goods in a market, the author here wants to paint the real picture. The polis model. where everything is political. people don't behave rationally most of the time. Feelings of altruism and opportunism, the forces of collective action, formulating political narratives are far more important things than gaining economic efficiencies.
PART 2 (GOALS)
These include the elusive goals in the polis. This include the mirage of EQUITY, EFFICIENCY, WELFARE, LIBERTY and SECURITY in the famous Polis setting. Here you can see the true nature of the game. The Polis is in firm grip of formulating or building a firm narrative towards these goals. But as it turns out these are all very vague, poorly defined and confusing. And the political actors play in the realm of narrative and trying to attract people's attention towards their own policy models citing to achieve these goals.
PART 3 (PROBLEMS)
In this part the author throws you off balance by throwing light on the modus operandi of the political actors, their main instrument through which they mainly try to confuse the masses and lures them into achieving their own vested interests. These problem areas are: Political SYMBOLS, Misrepresented or skewed or doctored NUMBERS, how to avoid CAUSES of your misleading actions in public domain and transferring blame on your opponents, how to safeguard your company or lobby INTERESTS by portraying a benevolent picture of your company or interest groups, and finally how the DECISIONS are made in polis. It is actually the meat of the book where the author throws light in the dirty world of lobbyists, interest groups, corrupt and powerful businesses etc.
PART 4 (SOLUTIONS)
In this part the author elaborates regarding the defence mechanism of the polis to achieving a resemblance of order and rule of law. These are: designing effective INCENTIVES to make the policies work, making RULES to ensure that everything is written down and the confusion is a little bit reduced, presenting FACTS and attempting to give a resemblance of rationality, most importantly giving of legal and constitutional RIGHTS to safeguard people from oppression and POWERS to various federal, state and local governments to achieve the policy goals.
I have given you a brief picture of what this book is. It is a lot to take in if it is your first book on public policy. Its a rebellion against rationalistic school of thought where everything is so simple and can be micromanaged. Here everything is chaos and the confused and full of dust. Even then you have to endeavour to understand the various elements of government policy making process, motives and instruments of implementation.
PART 1 (THE MARKET AND POLIS MODELS)
Its about sorting out the Market and Polis world view or mental model as she would say. As the dominant intellectual landscape thinks the domain of public policy would resemble something as simple as two individuals trading goods in a market, the author here wants to paint the real picture. The polis model. where everything is political. people don't behave rationally most of the time. Feelings of altruism and opportunism, the forces of collective action, formulating political narratives are far more important things than gaining economic efficiencies.
PART 2 (GOALS)
These include the elusive goals in the polis. This include the mirage of EQUITY, EFFICIENCY, WELFARE, LIBERTY and SECURITY in the famous Polis setting. Here you can see the true nature of the game. The Polis is in firm grip of formulating or building a firm narrative towards these goals. But as it turns out these are all very vague, poorly defined and confusing. And the political actors play in the realm of narrative and trying to attract people's attention towards their own policy models citing to achieve these goals.
PART 3 (PROBLEMS)
In this part the author throws you off balance by throwing light on the modus operandi of the political actors, their main instrument through which they mainly try to confuse the masses and lures them into achieving their own vested interests. These problem areas are: Political SYMBOLS, Misrepresented or skewed or doctored NUMBERS, how to avoid CAUSES of your misleading actions in public domain and transferring blame on your opponents, how to safeguard your company or lobby INTERESTS by portraying a benevolent picture of your company or interest groups, and finally how the DECISIONS are made in polis. It is actually the meat of the book where the author throws light in the dirty world of lobbyists, interest groups, corrupt and powerful businesses etc.
PART 4 (SOLUTIONS)
In this part the author elaborates regarding the defence mechanism of the polis to achieving a resemblance of order and rule of law. These are: designing effective INCENTIVES to make the policies work, making RULES to ensure that everything is written down and the confusion is a little bit reduced, presenting FACTS and attempting to give a resemblance of rationality, most importantly giving of legal and constitutional RIGHTS to safeguard people from oppression and POWERS to various federal, state and local governments to achieve the policy goals.
I have given you a brief picture of what this book is. It is a lot to take in if it is your first book on public policy. Its a rebellion against rationalistic school of thought where everything is so simple and can be micromanaged. Here everything is chaos and the confused and full of dust. Even then you have to endeavour to understand the various elements of government policy making process, motives and instruments of implementation.
May 6, 2025
Loved, loved, loved this one. Stone did to policy what Kahneman and Tversky did for individual decision-making. She basically says: "All the experts, researchers, and pundits act like policy is rational, but it is absolutely not rational." In each chapter she explains a different way in which policy is, in fact, highly irrational. It's not really designed to give practical tips or advice. It's just a really fascinating theoretical framework. Policy wonks might enjoy this one especially.
This book is very thought-provoking and plainly told.
There's a quote I love: “True genius isn’t about inventing something so complex, nobody understands it. It’s about inventing something so simple everyone wonders why they didn’t think of it first.” If that's true, then this book is true genius.
This book is very thought-provoking and plainly told.
There's a quote I love: “True genius isn’t about inventing something so complex, nobody understands it. It’s about inventing something so simple everyone wonders why they didn’t think of it first.” If that's true, then this book is true genius.
March 29, 2025
What touched me most about this book is how it honors the complexity of the world we live in. Stone reminds us that making policy is about people: their stories, their struggles, their hopes. Her writing is clear, generous, and often quietly poetic. Reading it felt like being gently guided by someone who truly understands the beauty and messiness of public life. It’s the kind of book that not only informs, but softens the heart—perfect for anyone who wants to do this work with intelligence and compassion.
October 18, 2020
I had to read this book for my doctoral policy class, and it was a pretty enjoyable read. Stone makes challenging issues approachable and highlights the complexity and paradoxes of policy development. This text was beneficial and helped me to understand policy on a new level. Basically, there is no black and white. When one group wins, another loses. There will never be a perfect solution, but we cannot stop moving forward.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 99 reviews