More than Semantics? Navigating the “Policy * Design” Concepts’ Landscape

Abstract Scholarship from the design discipline and policy sciences has produced rich empirical and theoretical knowledge on the intersection of policy and design. However, using concepts that pair “policy” and “design” in various ways, often with different meanings, can confuse practitioners and scholars alike. This confusion is further exacerbated by the sheer variety of online information, including peer-reviewed articles, books, reports, blogs, courses, and the websites of prominent scholars, practitioners, and policy actors. To address this, we analyze “Policy * Design” concepts from a Google Search Engine scraping tool and, in doing so, identify four distinct approaches: “policy design,” “design for policy,” “design in policy,” and “design policy.” The results are presented through issue mapping, and the content of these results is discussed. Finally, we suggest strategies for bridging the gap between “Policy * Design” definitions and then provide a preliminary description of these concepts.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Central European Journal of Public Policy
Published
2024-11-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2478/cejpp-2024-0008
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Innovative Approaches in Technology and Social Development
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.46

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

More than Semantics? Navigating the “Policy * Design” Concepts’ Landscape

Diana Pamela Villa Alvarez, ADAM M. WELLSTEAD
2 citations
Central European Journal of Public Policy
Innovative Approaches in Technology and Social Development
1.46
article

More than Semantics? Navigating the “Policy * Design” Concepts’ Landscape

Diana Pamela Villa Alvarez, ADAM M. WELLSTEAD
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Abstract Scholarship from the design discipline and policy sciences has produced rich empirical and theoretical knowledge on the intersection of policy and design. However, using concepts that pair “policy” and “design” in various ways, often with different meanings, can confuse practitioners and scholars alike. This confusion is further exacerbated by the sheer variety of online information, including peer-reviewed articles, books, reports, blogs, courses, and the websites of prominent scholars, practitioners, and policy actors. To address this, we analyze “Policy * Design” concepts from a Google Search Engine scraping tool and, in doing so, identify four distinct approaches: “policy design,” “design for policy,” “design in policy,” and “design policy.” The results are presented through issue mapping, and the content of these results is discussed. Finally, we suggest strategies for bridging the gap between “Policy * Design” definitions and then provide a preliminary description of these concepts.

Central European Journal of Public PolicyVol. 18(2)
Michigan Technological University (US), Universidad del Rosario (CO)
National Science Foundation
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
Innovative Approaches in Technology and Social Development
1.46
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

More than Semantics? Navigating the “Policy * Design” Concepts’ Landscape — Diana Pamela Villa Alvarez, ADAM M. WELLSTEAD · Central European Journal of Public Policy (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS