| Chapter 1: | Introduction |
|
|
scholars that the scale of policy change is related to the scale of knowledge acquisition. For instance, new research and experience may lead to relatively incremental policy changes without altering established policy goals. By contrast, broad-based policy changes involve a reconsideration of fundamental goals and are often accompanied by a more profound shift in knowledge—a shift that alters the underlying ideas and assumptions that guide decision making.39
More recently, scholars have also sought to understand when learning is most likely to occur. In issue areas that are politically salient but not technically complex, policymakers tend to follow majoritarian preferences rather than rely solely on expert knowledge or practical experience. Issue areas such as these are generally not conducive to learning.40 By contrast, learning is more likely in technically complex, rapidly changing issue areas—situations in which policymakers are required to step away from their political instincts and seek out new knowledge. Yet, even in these issue areas, learning is only possible when policymakers are open to new ideas, when they have the means to gather and analyze new knowledge, and when the institutional and political environment is conducive to learning.41
Cable Regulation as Organizational Learning?
This study explores the proposition that the FCC needed to learn in order to regulate cable television. For the purposes of this analysis, a theoretical approach rooted in the organizational learning literature is employed––this focus is appropriate for two broad reasons. First and foremost, the FCC was the primary decision-making agent in the case under examination. In fashioning regulations for cable television, the FCC drew on a broad delegation of authority granted under the Communications Act of 1934. During the period considered here, this grant of authority