IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v95y2001i01p169-190_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Recycling the Garbage Can: An Assessment of the Research Program

Author

Listed:
  • Bendor, Jonathan
  • Moe, Terry M.
  • Shotts, Kenneth W.

Abstract

The garbage can theory of organizational choice is one of the best-known innovations in modern organization theory. It also has significantly shaped a major branch of the new institutionalism. Yet, the theory has not received the systematic assessment that it both deserves and needs. We evaluate the early verbal theory and argue that it fails to create an adequate foundation for scientific progress. We then analyze and rerun Cohen, March, and Olsen’s computer model and discover that its agents move in lockstep patterns that are strikingly different from the spirit of the theory. Indeed, the simulation and the theory are incompatible. Next, we examine how the authors have built upon these incompatible formulations in developing the theory further. We assess this larger program, which includes the March-Olsen version of the new institutionalism, and find that many of the problems that attended the original article have intensified over time. We conclude that a fundamental overhaul is required if the theory is to realize its early promise.

Suggested Citation

  • Bendor, Jonathan & Moe, Terry M. & Shotts, Kenneth W., 2001. "Recycling the Garbage Can: An Assessment of the Research Program," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 95(1), pages 169-190, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:95:y:2001:i:01:p:169-190_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055401000041/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fritz Sager & Yvan Rielle, 2013. "Sorting through the garbage can: under what conditions do governments adopt policy programs?," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 46(1), pages 1-21, March.
    2. Emanuele Borgonovo & Marco Pangallo & Jan Rivkin & Leonardo Rizzo & Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2022. "Sensitivity analysis of agent-based models: a new protocol," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 52-94, March.
    3. Collantes, Gustavo, 2008. "The dimensions of the policy debate over transportation energy: The case of hydrogen in the United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 1059-1073, March.
    4. Bjerkan, Kristin Ystmark & Seter, Hanne, 2021. "Policy and politics in energy transitions. A case study on shore power in Oslo," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    5. Collantes, Gustavo Oscar, 2008. "The dimensions of the policy debate over transportation energy: The case of hydrogen in the United States," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt91f3d1ns, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    6. Edler, Jakob & James, Andrew D., 2015. "Understanding the emergence of new science and technology policies: Policy entrepreneurship, agenda setting and the development of the European Framework Programme," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 1252-1265.
    7. Collantes, Gustavo O, 2008. "The dimensions of the policy debate over transportation energy: The case of hydrogen in the United States," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt82j0z800, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    8. Fleischman, Forrest D., 2014. "Why do Foresters Plant Trees? Testing Theories of Bureaucratic Decision-Making in Central India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 62-74.
    9. Marcel Hanegraaff & Arlo Poletti, 2021. "The Rise of Corporate Lobbying in the European Union: An Agenda for Future Research," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(4), pages 839-855, July.
    10. Guido Fioretti & Alessandro Lomi, 2010. "Passing the buck in the garbage can model of organizational choice," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 113-143, June.
    11. Måns Nilsson & Andrew Jordan & John Turnpenny & Julia Hertin & Björn Nykvist & Duncan Russel, 2008. "The use and non-use of policy appraisal tools in public policy making: an analysis of three European countries and the European Union," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 41(4), pages 335-355, December.
    12. Guido Fioretti & Alessandro Lomi, 2007. "An Agent-Based Representation of the Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 11(1), pages 1-1.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:95:y:2001:i:01:p:169-190_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.