What are the three approaches for understanding who sets the public agenda? Describe the elements of each approach. Which approach is best understood under which context?

What will be an ideal response?

Political power is used to alter the agenda. Three approaches to understand that exercise of political power is pluralist, elitist, and state-centric. The pluralist approach assumes policymaking is divided into a number of separate arenas and that the interests and individuals who have power in one arena do not necessarily have power in others. Interests that win at one time or in one arena will not necessarily win at another time or place. The pluralist approach assumes that there is a marketplace of policies with a number of interests competing for power and influence, even within a single area. Groups are assumed to relatively equal in power so that on any one issue any interest might win. Further, the actors agree on the rules of the game, especially that elections are the principal means of determining policy. Government’s principle role is to serve as an umpire among competing forces and enforce the victories through public law. Contrary to the pluralist approach is the elitist approach. Elitism assumes the existence of a power elite that dominates decision-making and the policymaking process. The same interests in society consistently win: business, the upper and middle classes and the Whites. Relatively few interests of the working and lower classes are effectively organized. There is a lack of resources among members of the lower economic classes. The ability of the elites to keep certain issues off the agenda is crucial to their power. Elites systematically use their power to exclude issues that would threaten their interests. These suppressed issues represent a major threat to democracy. A decision not to act is a policy decision. The state-centric approach conforms well with the iron triangle concept of government but places the bureaucracy or congressional committee at the center of the policy process, rather than the interest group. This approach allows for the concept that the political system itself is responsible for its own agenda. The major locus of competition over agenda setting is within government itself. Agencies compete for legislative time and for budgets. Government actors are not only relevant in pushing agendas but in framing agendas in a manner that will advantage one agency over another. Policies that are very much the concern of government itself are more heavily influenced by the state-centric approach. Problems directly affecting powerful economic interests would be more influenced by the elitist approach. Policy areas with a great deal of interest group activity and high group involvement are better understood by the pluralist approach.