Best Selling Books by Aaron Wildavsky

Polsby and Wildavsky’s classic text, now updated by Stephen Schier and David Hopkins, argues that the institutional rules of the presidential nomination and election processes, in combination with the behavior of the mass electorate, structure the strategic choices faced by politicians in powerful and foreseeable ways. We can make sense of the decisions made by different political actors—incumbents, challengers, Democrats, Republicans, consultants, party officials, activists, delegates, journalists, and voters—by understanding the ways in which their world is organized by incentives, regulations, events, resources, customs, and opportunities. Thoroughly revised and updated, this Sixteenth Edition provides everything students need to know about presidential elections going into the 2024 cycle.

Aaron Wildavsky, a giant of American political science, brings his profound understanding of human affairs to bear on the founding of the world''s most enduring political community, the nation of Israel. At a time in which we are rediscovering the indispensability of resolute and perspicacious leadership, Wildavsky''s brilliant study of Moses as founding father illuminates not only the Jewish past but the enduring political questions of how to build and preserve a decent, righteous, and stable community, here and hereafter. A marvelous book! -- Leon Kass, University of Chicago

Brimming with data and examples from the heated 2004 election, and laced with previews of 2008, the twelfth edition of this classic text offers a complete overview of the presidential election process from the earliest straw polls and fundraisers to final voter turnout and exit interviews. The newest edition''s comprehensive coverage includes campaign strategy with overviews of the changes in campaign finance and the growing role of the Internet. Also, the twelfth edition explores the effect of the forward-creeping presidential nomination process and the sequence of electoral events. All of these aspects and the issues themselves are discussed by a wide array of actors in the electoral process: voters, interest groups, political parties, the media, and the candidates themselves. The twelfth edition is a timely update to this essential text on American elections.

Aaron Wildavsky''s greatest concern, as expressed in his writings, is how people manage to live together. This concern may at first appear to have little to do with the study of budgeting, but for Wildavsky budgeting made living together possible. Indeed, as he argues here, if you cannot budget, you cannot govern. Budgeting and Governing gathers in one place a mass of material that otherwise would be lost in a wilderness of journals and edited volumes. With few exceptions, Wildavsky chose the articles in this collection. They are organized largely chronologically so that the reader can trace the progression of his thought which moved from studies of the American federal government, through comparative work, and on to placing budgeting within a broader theory of political culture. Wildavsky wrote about budgeting because in his words, \"when a process involves power, authority, culture, consensus, and conflict, it captures a great deal of national political life.\" Wildavsky was interested in budgeting because of what it could tell us about the classic questions of politics: who gets what, how, and why? His earlier analyses focus narrowly on budgeting personnel and agency actors in answering these questions, while in his later work the contending actors become sub-cultural types. To Wildavsky politics was about finding terms for living together in spite of ideological differences. Budgetary incrementalism helped to manage this otherwise unmanageable task. He thought synoptic budgeting and all related reforms would increase disagreement and raise the stakes, and so were unwise. Analysis had to serve politics, not try to displace it. Aaron Wildavsky is considered one of the most innovative and prolific scholars in the field of political research in our time. He was the author most recently of Culture and Social Theory and Federalism and Political Culture, as well as Dilemmas of Presidential Leadership (with Richard Ellis), The Beleaguered Presidency, and Craftways: On the Organization of Scholarly Work, all available from Transaction. Brendon Swedlow is a visiting processor in the political science department at the University of California, Los Angeles. Joseph White is an associate professor in the Department of Health Systems Management at Tulane University Medical Center. \"...this collection of essays is to show the development of the late Wildavsky''s ideas on budgeting from the beginning of his career to the end....Recommended for research libraries and gradute students in public administration.\"-Choice \"Brendow Swedloe and Transaction Press have rendered policy scholars, budget specialists, and public managers a tremendous service by pulling together this posthumous collection of Aaron Wildavsky''s writings on the vital, it often politically tense, relationship between budgeting and governing.\"--Journal of Policy Analysis and Management

In Cultural Analysis, the fourth collection of his essays posthumously published by Transaction, Wildavsky argues that American politics, public law, and public administration are the contested terrain of rival, inescapable political cultures. Analysts of American politics distinguish liberals from conservatives and Democrats from Republicans, but do not explain how these categories of political allegiance develop, maintain themselves, or change. Wildavsky offers a cultural-functional explanation for ideological and partisan coherence and realignment. Wildavsky also felt that these dualisms did not adequately capture the ideological and partisan variation he observed on the political landscape. Like others, he detected another recurring strain of political allegiance: that of classical liberalism or libertarianism. People of this political stripe valued freedom more than equality (the primary political value of contemporary liberals), and also more than order, the primary political value of conservatives.

Nuclear power plants, new vaccines and drugs, pesticides designed to improve agricultural production, and a plethora of other technological advances hold great promise of improving the quality of human life, but also pose great risks to human well-being. Protecting ourselves against the risks associated with these modern technologies has emerged as a major public concern throughout the industrialized world. Searching for Safety is unique in its exposition of a theory that explains how and why risk taking makes life safer. It also exposes the high risk in backwardness, whether it is a result of policy or inadvertent. The book covers a wide range, including how the human body, as well as plants, animals, and insects, cope with danger. Wildavsky addresses the master dilemma head on, asking whether piling on safety measures actually improves safety. While he agrees that society should sometimes try to prevent large harms from occurring, he explains why such anticipatory measures are usually inferior to a strategy of resilience -learning from error how to bounce back in better shape. His purpose is to shift the risk debate from passive prevention of harm to active search for safety. Written for the intelligent layman, the book will be of special interest to individuals concerned with risk, technology, health, safety, environmental protection, regulation, and analysis of systems for making decisions.

Why do people want what they want? Why does one person see the world as a place to control, while another feels controlled by the world? A useful theory of culture, the authors contend, should start with these questions, and the answers, given different historical conditions, should apply equally well to people of all times, places, and walks of life.Taking their cue from the pioneering work of anthropologist Mary Douglas, the authors of Cultural Theory have created a typology of five ways of life?egalitarianism, fatalism, individualism, hierarchy, and autonomy?to serve as an analytic tool in examining people, culture, and politics. They then show how cultural theorists can develop large numbers of falsifiable propositions.Drawing on parables, poetry, case studies, fiction, and the Great Books, the authors illustrate how cultural biases and social relationships interact in particular ways to yield life patterns that are viable, sustainable, and ultimately, changeable under certain conditions. Figures throughout the book show the dynamic quality of these ways of life and specifically illustrate the role of surprise in effecting small- and large-scale change.The authors compare Cultural Theory with the thought of master social theorists from Montesquieu to Stinchcombe and then reanalyze the classic works in the political culture tradition from Almond and Verba to Pye. Demonstrating that there is more to social life than hierarchy and individualism, the authors offer evidence from earlier studies showing that the addition of egalitarianism and fatalism facilitates cross-national comparisons.

One of the foremost experts in public policy here attempts not only to describe what public policy is, but given societal changes in the last two decades, to account for its present status.To learn from the past in order to establish public policy as a discipline in its own right, Wildavsky traces its motifs from their beginnings in the 1960s to the 1980s. Starting from the premise that there has been growing polarization of political elites, he shows how public policy as a field has had to face increased politicization. For Wildavsky, the field of public policy needs to incorporate more awareness of the human aspects of policy making: he emphasizes the political choices to be made in a competitive environment and the social relations that sustain them.When the first specialist schools devoted solely to public policy came into existence in the 1960s, the programs of the Great Society were their main impetus. With the disillusionment and failure of the Great Society, the identity of public policy became transformed. New theoretical issues had to be addressed. In this volume, Wildavsky provides a foundation for the theory no less than the practice of policy-making.Aaron Wildavsky is professor of political science, University of California, Berkeley. He founded the School of Public Policy there, and is presently its Director. He was formerly Director of the Russell Sage Foundation. He was the President if the American Political Science Association for the years 1986-1987.

Aaron Wildavsky well understood that federalism is about freedom and diversity - not hierarchy and decentralization. His was an intensely normative concern with the promise of federalism and its abandonment in the United States. Over time, he became increasingly focused on political culture, federalism, and the Western domains of social life as fields of cultural competition. Although his interest in federalism was overshadowed by his work on political culture, it remained a visible theme in his writing. Federalism and Political Culture is a collection of Wildavsky''s essays on federalism over the latter part of his career. It is the second in a series, of his posthumous collected writings. Federalism is not a conventional collection on comparative federal systems, but deals with what federalism means, how it should work, and how it has been abused by those in power who protested their commitment to federal principles and practices but acted otherwise. Wildavsky''s analyses concentrate mainly on American federalism after the Great Society of the 1960s which brought major changes to the American federal system. The essays trace the progress of his thought as he first argues that true federalism is noncentralization, then to federalism as competition, and then combines both in reasserting that real federalism is possible only in a confederation.

How to behave in the diaspora has been a central problem for Jews over the ages. They have debated whether to assimilate by adopting local customs or whether to remain a God-centered people loyal to their temporal rulers but maintaining the peculiar customs that separated them from their host nations. The question not only of survival, but of the basis for survival, is also a central problem in the Joseph stories of the Book of Genesis. The work shows its readers the grand alternatives of Judaism, instilled in two larger-than-life figures, so its readers can reassess for themselves the road Judaism did not take, and understand why Joseph though admirable in many respects, is left out of the rest of the Bible. The question is answered through the stories about how Joseph, the son of Jacob, saved his people/family from famine by becoming a high-ranking administrator to Pharaoh. By analyzing his behavior to the people over whom he exercises power, Joseph lords it over his brothers, grieves his father, takes lands from Egyptian farmers, and engages in forced deportation. Wildavsky explains why Joseph-the-assimilator is replaced in the Book of Exodus by Moses-the-lawgiver. The book ends by demonstrating that Joseph and Moses are, and are undoubtedly meant to be exact opposites. As in his earlier book on The Nursing Father: Moses as a Political Leader, Wildavsky combines analysis of political and administrative leadership with both traditional and modern study of texts: thematic linkages via plot, grammar, dreams, poetry, and religious doctrine. Thus the chapter on \"Joseph the Administrator\" is preceded by a chapter on Joseph as The Dream Lord\" and followed by an analysis and explanation of why Jacob''s obscure blessings to his sons are more like curses. Always the emphasis is on the reciprocal influence of religion and politics, on rival answers to questions about how Hebrews should relate to each other and to outsiders. New, in paperback, the book will be of interest to biblical scholars and readers as well as those concerned with the interaction of religion and political life.

In this completely revised edition of his classic work, Aaron Wildavsky collects in one place the existing knowledge on budgeting. Realistic budgets are an expression of practical politics. Budgeting is so basic it reveals the norms by which men live in a particular political culture. In dealing directly with the universe of governmental activity, Wildavsky uses reliable accounts of how budgeting is carried on to capture a great deal of national political life. The focus is explicitly comparative. After developing a general theory of budgeting; he analyzes four rich countries - Britain, France, Japan, and the United States, followed by poor countries, American cities, and American states. Wildavsky uses this analysis to develop and apply a cultural theory of budgeting, explaining the degree of balance between revenue and expenditure; why government grows in all industrial democracies, and why there are still different rates of growth in spending. He offers a critical evaluation of the first edition, linking the ability of nations to make history and the various strategies of change they adopt to explain a wider range of budgetary processes.

\"Of all the questions that might be asked about political life, it would be difficult to find one of greater interest than the ancient query: who rules over whom? It appeals powerfully to our curiosity. We want to know who \"\"runs\"\" things--who makes policy decisions in New York, Washington, London, or the town in which we live. Is it a single powerful individual, an economic elite, a series of elites, the citizens, political bosses, or some variant of these possibilities?The major purpose of this volume is to find an answer to this question for a small American city, and to extend the answer through relevant theory to American cities in general. But much more precisely, answers are sought for these interrelated questions: What are the relationships between the rulers and the ruled? How are the rulers related to each other? Are the rulers the same for all policies or do they differ from one area of policy to another? How do leaders arise, and in what way are they different from other people?The issues discussed in this volume are familiar to many towns. They range from controversies about the building of a new water system to housing and zoning codes, from charity appeals to low-income housing, from nominations and elections to industrial development and off-street parking. Wildavsky draws parallels to other community studies and formulates general propositions in support of his thesis that American communities are pluralist. And ultimately, Wildavsky is optimistic that small towns foster citizen participation, giving the population more of a chance to direct its own future.Aaron Wildavsky was, until his death in 1993, professor of political science and public policy at the University of California, Berkeley, and, while working on the present study, taught at Oberlin College. Transaction has posthumously published Wildavsky''s complete essays and papers in five volumes.Nelson W. Polsby is Heller Professor of Political Science at the University of California, Berkeley, wh\"--Provided by publisher.

Wildavsky demonstrates how various recent presidents have attempted to escape or overcome their beleaguered status by such devices as focusing on only a few issues or shedding responsibility (or blame) to other actors, or treating policy problems as if they were essentially administrative in nature. The book analyzes the wide divergence on public policy among Democratic and Republican activists and assesses the efforts of presidents from Nixon through Bush to cope, at times successfully, often not, with these divisions.

Amid the chaos of questions and conflicting information, Aaron Wildavsky arrives with just what the beleaguered citizen needs: a clear, fair, and factual look at how the rival claims of environmentalists and industrialists work, what they mean, and where to start sorting them out.

The concern of many Americans with dangers to the natural environment is not justified rationally, according to the authors, but results from American cultural biases and the political goals of environmentalists.

Aaron Wildavsky''s greatest concern, as expressed in his writings, is how people manage to live together. This concern may at first appear to have little to do with the study of budgeting, but for Wildavsky budgeting made living together possible. Indeed, as he argues in Budgeting and Governing, now available in paperback, if you cannot budget, you cannot govern. Wildavsky wrote about budgeting because, in his words, \"when a process involves power, authority, culture, consensus, and conflict, it captures a great deal of national political life.\" Wildavsky was interested in budgeting because of what it could tell us about the classic questions of politics--who gets what, how, and why?--and ultimately, politics is about finding terms for living together in spite of ideological differences. \"Brendon Swedlow and Transaction have rendered policy scholars, budget specialists, and public managers a tremendous service by pulling together this posthumous collection of Aaron Wildavsky''s writings on the vital, if often politically tense, relationship between budgeting and governing. Those who have never read the 16 articles contained in the bookàare in for an intellectual treat. Those already well versed in the major arguments and themes of this work will be reminded of how much the public policy world lost when Wildavsky died in 1993.\"--Eric M. Patashnik, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management \"[Wildavsky] was one of the few people in the field who took the word æscience,'' as in political science, to mean precisely that: the scientific study of political behavior and its institutions. He was also one of the even rarer groups of people in the discipline who expressed his moral preferences and concerns in plain words.\"--Irving Louis Horowitz, Tributes Aaron Wildavsky was Class of 1940 Professor of Public Policy and Political Science at the University of California, Berkeley, a chair of the political science department, founding dean of the policy school, and a president of the American Political Science Association. Brendon Swedlow is an assistant professor of political science at Northern Illinois University, a research fellow at Duke University''s Center for Environmental Solutions, and a fellow of UCLA''s Center for Governance. Joseph White is Luxenberg Family Professor of Public Policy, Case Western Reserve University.

As a result of a lifetime of incomparably wide-ranging investigations, Aaron Wildavsky concluded that politics in the United States and elsewhere was a patterned activity, exhibiting recurring regularities. Political values, beliefs, and institutions were neither endlessly varied, nor haphazardly organized. They tended to exhibit a limited range of variation, and were organized in discoverable, predictable ways. In Cultural Analysis, the fourth collection of his essays posthumously published by Transaction, Wildavsky argues that American politics, public law, and public administration are the contested terrain of rival, inescapable political cultures.Analysts of American politics distinguish liberals from conservatives and Democrats from Republicans, but do not explain how these categories of political allegiance develop, maintain themselves, or change. Wildavsky offers a cultural-functional explanation for ideological and partisan coherence and realignment. Wildavsky also felt that these dualisms did not adequately capture the ideological and partisan variation he observed on the political landscape. Like others, he detected another recurring strain of political allegiance: that of classical liberalism or libertarianism. People of this political stripe valued freedom more than equality (the primary political value of contemporary liberals), and also more than order, the primary political value of conservatives.The value of Wildavsky''s reconceptualization of the ideological and social foundations of political conflict, compromise, and coalition is assessed here by Wildavsky''s former colleagues and students at the University of California, Berkeley: Dennis Coyle, Richard Ellis, Robert Kagan, Austin Ranney, and Brendon Swedlow.

Of all the questions that might be asked about political life, it would be difficult to find one of greater interest than the ancient query: who rules over whom? It appeals powerfully to our curiosity. We want to know who \"runs\" things--who makes policy decisions in New York, Washington, London, or the town in which we live. Is it a single powerful individual, an economic elite, a series of elites, the citizens, political bosses, or some variant of these possibilities? The major purpose of this volume is to find an answer to this question for a small American city, and to extend the answer through relevant theory to American cities in general. But much more precisely, answers are sought for these interrelated questions: What are the relationships between the rulers and the ruled? How are the rulers related to each other? Are the rulers the same for all policies or do they differ from one area of policy to another? How do leaders arise, and in what way are they different from other people? The issues discussed in this volume are familiar to many towns. They range from controversies about the building of a new water system to housing and zoning codes, from charity appeals to low-income housing, from nominations and elections to industrial development and off-street parking. Wildavsky draws parallels to other community studies and formulates general propositions in support of his thesis that American communities are pluralist. And ultimately, Wildavsky is optimistic that small towns foster citizen participation, giving the population more of a chance to direct its own future. Aaron Wildavsky was, until his death in 1993, professor of political science and public policy at the University of California, Berkeley, and, while working on the present study, taught at Oberlin College. Transaction has posthumously published Wildavsky''s complete essays and papers in five volumes. Nelson W. Polsby is Heller Professor of Political Science at the University of California, Berkeley, where he has taught American politics and government since 1967. He is editor of the\" Annual Review of Political Science\" and author of \"Congress and the Presidency.\"

The aim of An Operational Approach to Policy Analysis: The Craft is to cut through the ambiguity and contradictions inherent in policy analysis by means of an operational-prescriptive approach. Its main objective is to encapsulate the essential concepts, methods and tools of policy analysis and to provide an insight into factors acting within and around the policy analysis process. Based on the collaborative research of Iris Geva-May and Aaron Wildavsky, the first full draft of An Operational Approach to Policy Analysis: The Craft was completed just before Dr Wildavsky''s untimely death. Since that time, Dr Geva-May has worked to thoroughly revise and update the manuscript. An Operational Approach to Policy Analysis: The Craft can be used by researchers in political science, or as a textbook for any course in policy analysis, policy planning and evaluation. It will serve as a valuable source for students of political science, public policy, administration and management, as well as for policy analysts, researchers and executives in both the US and abroad.

The one subject that serious students want most to know about, other than their specialty, is how academic life is lived and how scholarly work is carried out. Their curiosity is equally shared by those interested in how to improve the quality and quantity of their work. With few exceptions, the time honored word-of-mouth approach is all there has been until now; how one works is rarely a subject seriously discussed in print. Craftways is intended to address these concerns and needs. Aaron Wildavsky has long been admired as one of the most productive political scientists of his generation. Repeated expressions of interest in his scholarly craft led him to gather together his essays on how he works. Included are chapters on how to read social science -\"not always everyone''s favorite pastime\" - how to work with others on collaborative projects, and how to improve one''s academic writing. The question of time, the most limited resource available to most scholars, is addressed in an amusing chapter, \"The Organization of Time in Scholarly Activities Carried Out Under American Conditions in Resource-Rich Universities.\" He includes a section on interviewing, focusing not only on the process, but on the spirit of scholarly enterprise that should animate it. The last part of the book is purely personal, emphasizing the familial and background variables that have made Wildavsky who he is and play a large part in how he goes about his work. This wise volume, by a master of his craft, should be of broad interest to students and faculty in the social sciences.

This book confronts the widespread impression that policy or program implementation should be easy, arguing instead that implementation, even under the best of circumstances, is exceedingly difficult. Using the Oakland Project as a case study, this book discusses each stage of the process of implementation, demonstrating that completion of what might seem to be a simple sequence of events will in fact depend on a complex chain of reciprocal interactions. Each part of the chain must be built with the others in view, so the separation of policy design from implementation is fatal. The first four chapters illustrate the movement from simplicity to complexity. Chapter 5 discusses the number of decision points throughout the process, giving an indication of the magnitude of the task. Chapter 6 examines why project targets may be set even if they are unlikely to be met, considering both the position of those who set targets -- top federal officials who wish large accomplishments from small resources in a short time -- and those who must implement them -- career bureaucrats and local participants characterized by high needs and low cohesion. The last chapter discusses the relationship between the evaluation of programs and the study of their implementation, arguing that tendencies to assimilate the two should be resisted.

Dilemmas of Presidential Leadership challenges the widely accepted distinction between \"traditional\" and \"modern\" presidencies, a dichotomy by which political science has justified excluding from its domain of inquiry all presidents preceding Franklin Roosevelt. Rather than divide history into two mutually exclusive eras, Richard Ellis and Aaron Wildavsky divide the world into three sorts of people-egalitarians, individualists and hierarchs. All presidents, the authors contend, must manage the competition between these rival political cultures. It is this commonality which lays the basis for comparing presidents across time. To summarize and simplify, the book addresses two general categories of presidencies. The first is the president with a blend of egalitarian and individualist cultural propensities. Spawned by the American revolution, this anti-authoritarian cultural alliance dominated American politics until it was torn asunder by what Charles Beard has called the second American revolution, the Civil War. The Jeffersonian and Jacksonian presidents labored, with varying degrees of success, to square the exercise of authority with their own and their followers'' ami-: authoritarian principles. They also were faced with intraparly conflicts that periodically flared up between egalitarian and individualist followers. The president with hierarchical cultural propensities faced different problems. While the precise contours of the dilemma varied, all straggled in one way or another to reconcile their own and their party''s preferences with the anti-hierarchical ethos that inhered in the society and the polity. Hierarchical presidents like Washington and Adams were hamstrung by this dilemma, as were Whig leaders like Henry Clay and Daniel Webster who aspired to the presidency but never achieved it. .Abraham Lincoln''s greatness resided in part in his ability to resolve the hierarch''s dilemma. He operated in wartime when he could invoke the commander-in-chief clause, and he created a new cultural combination in which hierarchy was subordinated to individualism. This, suggest the authors, was a key to his greatness. The unique dimension of this volume is its use of cultural theory to explain presidential behavior. It also differs from other books in that, it deals with pre-modern presidents who are too often treated as only of antiquarian interest in mainstream political science literature on the presidency. The analysis lays the groundwork for a new basis for comparison of early presidents with modern presidents.