Laserfiche WebLink
that appears to conflict with the general public interest. Cross-sector collaboration theory departs <br /> from traditional Public Choice theory by recognizing a more multi-layered interest base, which <br /> benefits by working together to make complex decisions. <br /> For example, consider an art project envisioned by the artist,judged and selected by the <br /> artist community of"experts"that results in a project that results in widespread community <br /> criticism. In this example, the politician may think they are benefitting the community by <br /> providing an art project approved by the artist community. Likewise, other special interest <br /> groups involved with the project are considered to behave rationally if they maximize their <br /> individual benefit. Their interests may have different motivations such as cultural representation <br /> or historic interpretation. However, in the end, the community as a whole may or may not see <br /> this project as a responsible use of tax dollars. <br /> This study will apply research on cross sector collaborations as it relates to making <br /> complex public decisions in a local community. Public art choices, unlike many public decisions, <br /> need to be made in plain sight. Consequently, whether intentionally or not, public art projects <br /> engage broad sectors of society. The scrutiny that public art receives, lends itself to incremental <br /> decision making that seeks the input from many sectors of the community. Lindblom (1959) <br /> proposed theories on incrementalism in The Science of Muddling Through, in which he contends <br /> that the most likely choice of decision-makers, favors keeping most policies and programs as <br /> they are, and not taking the political risk of advocating for massive overhauls, but settling for <br /> incremental changes around the edges. Consequently, changes will occur, but incrementally over <br /> time, unless the window of opportunity is available for significant change. Under that scenario, <br /> presumably, the political risk has been minimized, and the problem/solution is so well defined <br /> that action may be the only safe political option. <br /> 20 <br />