It is well known and acknowledged that public policies are inherently complex. But the implications of complexity theory (or complex adaptive systems theory) for policy analysis have not been explored fully. The authors of this volume offer perspectives and methodological tools to fill this gap. Among the questions explored in the volume are, does complexity theory offer a 'new science', an alternative way of thinking to the pervasive rationalism of the mainstream policy analysis, or is it merely a novel analytical tool kit? Does the theory suggest a new way of knowing-and consequently solving-complex public policy problems, for example? How does the theory conceptualize complexity, and is this different from common understandings of the term? What should be the involvement of policy analysts in the process of change from the perspective of complexity theory? Does the theory support or suggest a complexity ethics? The authors of the book also illustrate how agent-based models, the most commonly applied tool of complexity theorists, can be used in policy analysis, as well as creatively applying other methods such as Q-methodology and qualitative case study in understanding complex social problems.

Over time, thought processes and decision making styles evolved and were shaped by theological, philosophical, political, social, and environmental factors and trends. Recently, advances in technology have borne an unprecedented influence on our social environment. Contemporary thinking inevitably reflects this influence and moves us from a linear, cause -effect rationale to broader perspectives that encompass new methodologies and an understanding of networked and complex social relations. Handbook of Decision Making is the first text of its kind to include the mainstream methods and theories of decision making, describe the influence of theological and philosophical traditions, and offer contemporary scientific theories. Decision making styles and processes vary with context and no single theory is comprehensive enough to capture the complexity involved. The editor identifies common patterns and the variations that different contexts may generate. The text covers the mainstream methods of decision making such as cost-benefit analysis, linear programming, and queuing. It also explains alternative and emerging methods such as geographic information systems, Q-methodology, narrative policy analysis, methods of creative thinking, and conflict management. Practical applications of the methods discussed are illustrated by examples of decision making practices in budgeting, public administration, drug trafficking, and information systems. Handbook of Decision Making offers an understanding of decision making processes in a broader social context, which will enable decision makers to find the best methods for a given circumstances.

Morcol argues that the objectivist and deterministic assumptions of mainstream policy analysis, which are based on the Newtonian/positivist worldview or mind-set, should be transcended. After demonstrating that the favored methods of mainstream policy analysis are based on Newtonian ontological and positivist epistemological assumptions and that the connections between these two are intimately and historically related, he critically assesses and highlights the contributions of quantum mechanics, complexity theory, and cognitive science to a new mind-set in scientific knowledge, a post-Newtonian and postpositivist mind-set.

Newtonian/positivist and post-Newtonian/postpositivist worldviews are conceptualized as fuzzy mind-sets, that is they are not mutually exclusive and that they share assumptions at varying degrees. Cognitive science shows that some of the fundamental concepts and assumptions of the Newtonain/positivist philosopy--such as the concept of causality and the tendency to categorize reality (reductionist thinking)--are the products of the evolutionary adaptation of the human mind and they have become its built-in defaults. As Morcol suggests, we cannot change the biological defaults of our minds, but we can change our way of thinking, to an extent, through a cultural evolution. He argues that conscious efforts can be made in policy analysis education to help move our thinking toward a post-Newtonian and postpositivist policy analysis. Of particular interest to scholars and advanced students dealing with policy analysis, public administration, and political science, especially those concerned with epistemology and methodology.