Masters Level Forum: Examine The Tension Between Theory And

Masters Level Forumexamine The Tension Between Theory And Practice F

examine the tension between theory and practice. For example, books may explain how decisions should be made; however, reality and human nature dictates how they are made. Find examples on how a governmental body has made a decision or taken an action that you would consider contrary to theory or teaching that you have experienced during this program. Give us the example, a link where we might read further and the theory or teaching you feel it contradicts.

Paper For Above instruction

The relationship between theory and practice is a fundamental subject in public administration and governance, embodying the often-clear principles of decision-making contrasted with the complex realities of implementing policies or actions in real-world contexts. While theories serve as ideal models for decision-making, ethical standards, and organizational behavior, practice often reveals discrepancies driven by political, social, and human factors. A notable example illustrating this tension involves the decision by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to relax certain air quality standards during the Trump administration, an action seemingly contrary to established environmental policy theories and scientific consensus.

The theoretical framework underlying environmental regulation emphasizes precaution, scientific evidence-based policymaking, and the protection of public health and the environment (Lester & Parks, 2016). Numerous scholarly sources advocate for stringent standards that minimize pollution and mitigate health risks, aligning with theories of sustainable development and the precautionary principle (Levin et al., 2015). However, the EPA's decision in 2019 to weaken regulations on coal-fired power plants exemplifies a divergence from these principles, partly justified by economic considerations and regulatory rollback rhetoric (EPA, 2019).

This decision was justified on the grounds that reducing regulatory burdens would promote economic growth, job creation, and energy affordability—common practice arguments rooted in economic or neoliberal theories emphasizing deregulation's efficiency. Nonetheless, such actions contradicted environmental health theories advocating for precautionary measures to prevent pollution-related health issues, particularly respiratory illnesses linked to air pollution (World Health Organization, 2018). The practice of easing standards appears to prioritize short-term economic benefits over long-term environmental sustainability and public health, indicative of a gap between normative theories and policy implementation.

The contrast between theory and practice in this case reveals systemic influences on governmental decision-making, such as political ideology, lobbying interests, and economic pressures. While environmental regulations rest on scientific theories and ethical commitments to public health, practical politics often lead to compromises or deviations that serve particular interests. This discrepancy underscores the importance of understanding the political context when evaluating policies and highlights the tension between ideal principles and pragmatic considerations.

Furthermore, this case exemplifies the broader theoretical debate about regulatory "capture," where regulatory agencies may become influenced by industry stakeholders, thus deviating from their original mandates rooted in scientific and ethical standards (Dal Bó & Cason, 2019). Such deviations raise critical questions about accountability, transparency, and the capacity of government institutions to adhere to normative theories amid practical pressures.

In conclusion, the EPA's decision to relax air quality standards illustrates how practical considerations can sometimes override normative theories grounded in science and ethics. The tension underscores the necessity for public administrators to navigate competing interests carefully, ensuring that practice aligns as closely as possible with ethical standards and scientific evidence. It also demonstrates the ongoing challenge of implementing ideal policies within complex political and economic landscapes, emphasizing the importance of vigilance, advocacy, and institutional integrity to uphold theoretical principles in practice.

References

• Dal Bó, E., & Cason, T. N. (2019). Regulatory Capture. The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 1-7.
• EPA. (2019). The Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient Vehicles Rule. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/safer-affordable-fuel-efficient-vehicles-rule
• Levin, K., Cashore, B., Bernstein, S., & Auld, G. (2015). Overcoming the Tragedy of the Commons. Harvard International Review, 36(3), 28-33.
• Lester, J., & Parks, P. (2016). Environmental Policy and Decision-Making. New York: Routledge.
• World Health Organization. (2018). Air Pollution and Child Health: Prescribing Clean Air. WHO Publications.