Siraj- PPMA Chapter 1-5.pptxjghuhvgugcfbjj

P

1. Public Policy Making and Analysis Chapter One:- Theoretical Perspectives

2. The Evolution of the Policy Science Concept The policy sciences were consciously framed as being problem-oriented , quite explicitly addressing public policy issues and posing recommendations for their relief, while openly rejecting the study of a phenomenon for its own sake; the societal or political question has always been pivotal in the policy sciences’ approach . The policy sciences are distinctively multi-disciplinary in their intellectual and practical approaches. This is because almost every social or political problem has multiple components closely linked to the various academic disciplines without falling clearly into any one discipline’s exclusive domain . The policy sciences’ approach is deliberately normative or value oriented ; in many cases, the recurring theme of the policy sciences deals with the democratic ethos and human dignity. This value orientation was largely in reaction to behavioralism, i.e., “objectivism,” in the social sciences, and in recognition that no social problem or methodological approach is value free. As such, to understand a problem, one must acknowledge its value components

3. Concept of Public and Policy Policy of Government is Public Policy Public Policies are developed by officials within institutions of government to address public issues through the political process. Public Policy is an attempt by the government to address public issues in terms of laws, regulations, decisions and actions. According to David Easton “Public Policy is the authoritative allocation of values for the whole society ” [value is importance or worth of something to someone].

4. Concept ….. Public Policy-making is the process by which governments translate their political vision into programs and actions to deliver 'outcomes' desired change in the real world. What the government intends to do, What the government chooses not to do The sum of government activities, which influence on the life of citizens. Public policy is a purposive course of action followed by government in dealing with some topic or ma t ter of public concern . Public policy consists of political decisions for implementing programs to achieve societal goals .

5. Concept …… . Policies may deal with different subjects, such as: Foreign, environment, population, economy, education, etc. Policy which has a focus on development may be referred to as a development policy. Development policies are primarily directed towards higher income and living standards through industrialization and modernization, expansion of social services and cultural activities as well as broad basing and strengthening of political institutions . J.N. Khosla: Policy sciences as an important social science discipline emerged with the publication of Harold Lasswell’s essay ‘The Policy Orientation’ in the The Policy Sciences in 1951. In the 20 th century public policy provided a forum for social scientists to involve themselves for the betterment of society. This was multi-disciplinary in nature.

6. Concept …. Robert Merton, an eminent sociologist, contended that the problems facing society were multifarious and required the services of social scientists belonging to all the major disciplines. Investigations into the social problems have to be inter-disciplinary. Merton also said that social scientists have a responsibility to ‘sensitize policy makers to new types of achievable goals… and to more effective means of reaching established goals’ Yehezkol Dror (1928) identified the inadequacy and weakness in public policy-making in the contemporary society and emphasized on the need for the development of supra-discipline ‘based on systematic knowledge, structured rationality and organized creativity ’.

7. Concept …. His basic thesis is that there is a significant gap in the knowledge on how policies can best be made. The gap between available knowledge and practice of policy-making will get widened unless some radical changes are made in the policy-making methods, organizations and qualifications of policy makers . A large number of welfare programs of 1960s had to be terminated due to resource crunch/crisis/, hence the felt need for a specialized discipline of policy science, which can integrate the contribution of other social sciences. Policy science has an American and Western flavor as rigorous/accuracy/ methods of study were popularized since 1970s .

8. 3. Nature and Scope of Public Policies Nature or Characteristics of Public Policy: Some of the characteristics of Public Policy as given by Hogwood and Gunn (1984) are: It consists of a series of patterns of related decisions . The process of policy-making involves several sub-processes and may extend over a considerable period of time. It involves action as well as inaction Involves intra and inter-organizational relationships with a key, but not necessarily, the exclusive role of public agencies.

9. Types of Policies Substantive, Regulatory, Distributive, Redistributive and capitalization Substantive: More concerned with the concept of general welfare and general development of the society . Has to be in tune/adjust/ with basic features of constitution and socio-economic fabric of the society. Eg . Education, pollution control, etc.

10. Types of Policies …. ii) Regulatory: Policies normally implemented with the use of force. Eg . Regulation of trade, safety measures, Public utilities, etc. iii) Distributive: To a specific segment of the population. For example free health care for poor, adult education program, etc .

11. Types of Policies…. iv) Redistributive: They tend to benefit one group at the expense of the other through the reallocation of wealth . v) Capitalization: Financial assistance given by the central government to the regional/state and local governments

12. 4. Goals, Significance of Development Policy Goals of Development Policy: Elements of development policy should consist of: “ i ) the creation of general conditions of development ii) Awareness of developmental potentialities and advantages iii) Basic government instruments iv) Measure to facilitate and stimulate private activity v) Development of policy under varying circumstances” Prof. Timbergen

13. Significance of Development Policy: Policies state to welfare state, Acceptance of the idea of planned development Role of state from initiator to facilitator of socio-economic development Laws were also enacted so as to what types of goods and services are to be produced and provided by the government and the entrepreneurs. Formulation policy is not easy as there may be contradictions between local aspirations and global compulsions, hence to maintain a balance, we need to evolve development policy with the coordination of different stakeholders, experts from different disciplines, and areas of professional expertise .

14. 5. Development Policy Development: - “The general consensus among scholars is, to treat development as a total plan of action which encompasses all aspects of social activities, where growth rates of production and consumption form only one of the several factors which are geared to national progress” Ali and Jones

15. Policy: After second world war many Afro-Asian countries attained independence and faced and continue to face challenging tasks of development. Several researches examining governance in the context of policy lead us to the point that better policy-making is an essential precondition for development. Policy sciences (public policies) aim to reassert the role of intellectualism and rationalism to guide human destiny/future/. It is in this contextual background that we proceed to learn more about [public] policies with an implied focus on development .

16. Public Policy Making and Analysis Chapter II: - POLICY ANALYSIS

17. Chapter II ….. 2.1 Policy Analysis: Meaning and Issues of Policy Analysis Policy Analysis: Meaning Policy analysis is “any type of analysis that generates and presents information in such a way as to improve the basis for policy-makers to exercise their judgment. . . .’’ In policy analysis, the word analysis is used to imply the use of intuition and judgment and encompasses not only the examination of policy by decomposition into its components but also the design and synthesis of new alternatives. “Policy analysis is a problem-solving discipline that draws on theories, methods, and substantive findings of behavioral and social sciences, social professions, and social and political philosophy” (Dunn, 2004). “Policy analysis is a process of multidisciplinary inquiry designed to create, critically assess and communicate information that is useful in understanding and improving policies”

18. Meaning …. A careful examination of some of the definitions of policy analysis suggest the following features: Policy analysis is a problem solving endeavor; It involves an intellectual activity; It is an interdisciplinary effort to facilitate the reaching/making of sound policy; It is systematic and organized way of evaluating /comparing/ policy alternatives; It serves to analyze current and future consequences of policy alternatives; and Its overall attempt is to provide suggestions to decision (policy) makers.

19. B) Policy Analysis: Issues of Policy Analysis The purpose of public policy analysis is to assist policymakers in choosing a course of action from among complex alternatives under uncertain conditions. The word ‘assist’ emphasizes that policy analysis is used by policymakers as a decision aid. Some policy analyses are informal, involving nothing more than hard and careful thinking whereas others require extensive data gathering and elaborate calculation employing sophisticated mathematical processes.” E.S. Quade , 1975. In reality, policy analysis can produce policy-relevant information and reasonable arguments about possible solutions for public problems. The word ‘complex’ means that the policy being examined deals with a system that includes people, social structures, portions of nature, equipment and organizations; the system being studied contains so many variables, feedback loops and interactions that it is difficult to project the consequences of a policy change .

20. Issues …. The ‘alternatives’ are often numerous, involving combination of different technologies and management policies and producing multiple consequences that are difficult to anticipate, let alone predict. The word ‘uncertain’ emphasizes that the choices must be made on the basis of incomplete knowledge about alternatives that do not yet physically exist, for a future world that is unknown and even unpredictable. An important goal of public policy analysis is to help policy makers arrive at viable/possible/, informed policy choices with a credible expectation of what the expected outcome(s) of those policy choices will be.

21. ELEMENTS OF GOOD POLICY ANALYSIS The key elements of good policy analysis include the following (Nagel, 1984): (i) VALIDITY Validity, in general, refers to being accurate. In the context of policy analysis, validity refers to the internal consistency of logically drawing a conclusion that follows from the goals, policies, and relations, the external consistency with empirical reality in describing the relations between the alternative policies and the goals; the policies being considered encompass the total set of feasible alternatives (feasibility in this context refers to capable of being adopted and implemented by the relevant policy makers and policy appliers); and the listed goals include all the major goals and only the goals of the relevant policy makers in this context. (ii) IMPORTANCE

22. (iii) USEFULNESS (IV) ORIGINALITY (v) FEASIBILITY

23. 2.2 Putting Analysis to Work/ Implementation / 1. The Meaning and Aspects of Policy Implementation 2. Role of Institutional and Non-institutional Actors 3. Perspectives on Policy Implementation 4. Successes and Failures of Policy Implementation in Problem Solving 5. Requirements For successful Implementation

24. 1. Meaning and Aspects of Policy Implementation Policy Implementation is the stage of policy-making between the establishment of a policy and the consequences of the policy for the people whom it affects. Implementation involves translating the goals and objectives of a policy into an operating, ongoing program. The policy implementation stage starts after a policy becomes operational/policy enactment/ through the passing of legislation and after financial and other needed resources have been committed. Implementation is a series of logical steps – a progression from intention through decision to action. Implementation is putting policy or programmes into effect, coordinating and managing the various elements required to achieve the desired goal .

25. 2 . Role of Institutional and Non-Institutional Actors The institutional actors are:- Parliament, legislature, the prime minister, president, executive agencies, and the courts . The non-institutional actors are:- political parties, interest groups, political consultants, and the media (including electronic). The policy process is significantly more complicated than it appears. While the constitution provides for a legislature that makes laws, an executive that enforces laws, and a judiciary that interprets laws, the policy process has evolved into a confusing web of federal (central) and state (regional) departments, agencies, and committees that make up the institutional bureaucracy .

26. Role of …. In addition, the vast network of organized citizen groups / interest groups, parties, as well as the rise of the electronic media, political consultants, and other image making professionals, further complicate the process. The role each actor plays, and the relationship between actors, is what determines policy outcomes. The role of institution is being increasingly recognized in the policy implementation process. A body of theory about the impact of institutions upon the policy process was developed during the last decades of the twentieth century .

27. Role of …. The theories have manifestations within other social sciences like: political science, economics and sociology. It was within sociology that a concern developed about the impact of institutions which is particularly pertinent for the study of implementation. It suggests looking at organizations beyond structures, drawing attention both to the impact of the external environment and to the way people bring needs and affiliations into organizations that shape the informal social systems which develop within organization .

28. 3. Perspectives on Policy Implementation Implementation can be looked as: policy-centered and action-centered approaches . Policy-centered approach or the policy makers’ perspective represents what policy makers are trying to do to put a policy into effect. It includes top-down and bottom-up approaches also referred to as the hierarchical view. This view also implies that implementers are agents for policy-makers and in a complex relationship to policy makers. However, in many instances, those upon whom action depends are not in any hierarchical association with those making policy. Action-centered perspective seeks to examine the degree to which action relates to policy, rather than assuming it to follow from policy.

29. 4. Success and Failures of Policy Implementation in Problem Solving We need to appreciate different dimensions of policy in order to grasp the ways in which success and failure may be manifest within them. Further, tensions between these dimensions may help explain dynamics of policy. These differences can be found in process, programs and politics. They can overlap, but for analytical purposes can be treated separately. 4a) Defining Policy Success A policy is successful if it achieves the goals that proponents set out to achieve and attracts no significant criticism and support is virtually/nearly/ universal .

30. Success and Failures of …. 4b) From Policy Success to Policy Failures There may be intermediate categories between complete success or failure. The absence of opposition and/or the existence of universal support may be hard to come by for many higher issues but success is still possible. For example, we may include in the outright success category, policies with minor delays or errors that can be corrected. The remaining measures or benchmarks of success can be identified across the process, program and political dimension of policy. 4c) Factors affecting Contemporary Implementation Processes: Three factors, play an important role in today’s policy implementation process and its evaluation: i ) networked governance, ii) socio-political context and iii) new public management

31. Success and Failures of …. 4d) Reasons for Policy Failures: Underestimation of the complexity and difficulty involved in implementing policies. Lack of coordination /inadequate communication/. Lack of substantial effort and continuity of efforts to follow policy from intention to action. Administrative problems like, long delays , increased costs, inferior construction, low yield in investment, etc. The lack of trained experts. Lack of political support for civil servants and bureaucrats .

32. 5. Requirements for Successful Policy Implementation Considering implementation at every stage of policy development: It is essential that there is a clear and shared understanding of the policy objectives and intended outcomes. Strong leadership, An inclusive approach, Sound processes and The effective use of resources. Good governance is also an essential precondition . Summation: Policy implementation is a dynamic and evolving change process owing to a combination of factors, including networked-implementation structures, socio-political conflict management, and administrative reforms that shape how policy ideas are translated into social betterment programs .

33. 2.3 Stages in Policy Analysis There are six (6) stages in Policy Analysis . Stage 1: - Issue identification and problem definition: - During this stage attention is drawn to circumstances that are potential issues requiring attention of policy makers. Stage 2: Setting the agenda: - The issue has generated enough attention to warrant further action. Stage 3: - Policy formulation Steps: - are suggested as to how the problem could be addressed; which tools and instruments could be used and which institution could be the best place to address the problem . Stage 4: - Policy adoption:- Alternatives are considered and one is selected that could be used in addressing the issue. Stage 5: - Policy implementation: - Action to give effect to the chosen alternative is taken. Stage 6: - Policy evaluation: - The impact of the policy in delivering the desired result is examined.

34. Approaches to Policy Analysis Approaches to Policy Analysis imply the ways or procedures employed in public policy analysis. It is the case that every policy analyst implicitly /completely/ adopts a research strategy that suits him/her. On the other hand, it is argued that no one has perfect vision as to the “proper” approach to policy analysis (Lester & Stewart 2000). Diverse or alternative approaches are often based on individual’s own primary objectives and options when undertaking policy analysis. While employing different policy approaches one is free to adopt one or a combination of the approaches to help fit to set analysis objectives.

35. 1 . Rational Choice in Public Policy: Building Blocks and Assumption Maximum social gain; Costs should not exceed gains Building Block [Base on which concept is built] The policy maker should have information pertaining to: All the social value preferences All policy alternatives and their consequences Cost benefit ratio

36. 2. Deliberative Policy Analysis: Argumentation, Rhetoric, and Narratives Focused on the role of argumentation in policy analysis , The job of the analyst consists in large part of producing evidence and arguments to be used in the course of public debate. The goal of policy analysis is, to illuminate the contentious/debatable, controversial, arguable/ dimensions of policy questions, to identify the defects of supporting arguments, and to explain the political implications of contending/opposing/challenging/ prescriptions .

37. 3. Technocratic Policy Analysis Emphasis on rigorous/accurate/exact/careful/ quantitative analysis, would be able to generalize knowledge and tested solutions applicable to a range of policy problems. was influenced by economics and its scientific methodologies. Decision makers first empirically identify a problem, and then formulate the objectives and goals that would lead to an optimal solution. the relevant probabilities and consequences associated with the alternative means to the solution, costs and benefits related to the predicted outcomes. select the most efficient, effective alternative

38. 4 . Argumentative Policy Analysis: T he communications model A recognition that multiple perspectives are involved in the interpretation and understanding of social and political reality. This is done in part by emphasizing citizen participation, and the ways in which citizens’ interests are broadly constructed. Policy analysts help decision makers and citizens engage in arguments and develop alternatives. stress the need for participatory democracy and the development of techniques and approaches that emphasize deliberative interaction between citizens, analysts, and decision makers.

39. 5. Technical Analytical Discourse(Scientific) : Program Verification It advocates the use of a deductively derived theories, models, hypothesis testing, hard data, and rigorous statistical data for policy analysis. The concept, “scientific” in this context refers to: Clarifying key concepts used in the policy analysis; Working from an explicit theory of policy behavior and testing this theory with hypotheses; Using hard data; Developing measures of various phenomena, etc .

40. 6. Contextual Discourse: Situational Validation The focus of this approach is not on the content of the policy but more on the organizational structure. It also focuses on the individuals involved in the formulation and execution of the policy. According to this approach if a policy has been adjudged to be less effective, it could be attributed to the differences in the relationships of the individuals involved in the process of policy making.

41. 7 . Systems Approach: Societal Vindication /justification / Policies are analyzed on the basis of feedback from the social system. It deals with various steps involved in policy making. The approach stresses on the definition of the problem, selection of criteria, devising of alternative strategies for the accomplishment of the objectives, identification of costs and benefits .

42. 8 . Ideological Discourse: Social Choice While the ideological approach advances what is known as “visions” composed of what is commonly considered as liberal and conservative sets of belief towards policies and other related affairs. Rightist, leftist and centrists approaches may also be included in the ideological discourse.

43. 9. Narrative Policy Analysis It took until the late 1980s before a policy analyst demonstrated that good policy analysis revolves around crafting an argument, rather than applying logic and science. This insight was part of a wider development which has received many labels, but which many have come to know as the “argumentative turn” in policy analysis. stories commonly used in describing and analyzing policy issues, and considered explicitly in assessing policy options.

44. Narrative …. Policy narratives, are defined as: those stories—scenarios and arguments The narration of a sequence of events, where an event is defined as the transition from one state to another. Often, these studies employ an ethnographic set of methods. e.g., policy papers, news reports, bureaucratic forms, speeches or the oral histories offered by respondents, etc .

45. Public Policy Making and Analysis Chapter III: - Models For Public Policy Analysis

46. Chapter III – Models for Public Policy Analysis Institutional Model 2. The Process Model 3. The Group Theory Model 4. The Elite Model 5. The Rational Model 6. The Game Theory Model 7. The Public Choice Theory Model 8. System Theory Model

47. A. Meaning of Model A Model is constructed to portray (picture) a simplified representation of real-world situations. Likewise, planning is done by taking the help of models as they simplify complex situations. The models that are used in public policy are conceptual (idea) models.

48. According to Thomas Dye, models are useful in the following ways: Simplify and clarify our thinking about politics and public policy. Identify important aspects of policy problems Help to communicate on essential features of political life Direct our efforts to understand public policy better. Give explanation for public policy and predict its consequences.

49. 1. Institutional Model This model suggests a close relationship between public policy and government institutions. It also considers constitutional provisions, administrative and common law, and judicial decisions. a policy is not a public policy until it is adopted, implemented and enforced by some governmental institution. Institutions are structured in such a way that they facilitate in implementing certain policy measures and also to prevent some other types of policy outcomes.

50. 2. The Process Model It focuses on the process or procedure of policy formulation. The policy processes are as follow: Agenda setting (problem identification) Policy formulation Policy enactment Policy implementation and Policy evaluation  The approach is cyclical . The model focuses more on what happens, when and how than on who the participants are and why particular outcomes occur.

51. 3. The Group Theory Model People with common interests come together and form groups. Representatives of interest groups carry more political weight while dealing with government representatives. The relative strength of a group and its bargaining power is based on various factors such as numbers, wealth, organizational strength, leadership and access to decision-makers and internal cohesion. Public policy at any given point of time is the equilibrium (understanding) reached in the group struggle among different groups.

52. 4. The Elite Model In elite theory it is not the people or the masses who determine public policy through their demands and action, rather, public policy is decided by ruling elite and effected by public officials and agencies Policy is a reflection of the interests of those individuals within a society that have the most power, rather than the demands of the masses. Policy is the product of the elite, reflecting their values and serving their ends, one of which may be a desire to provide for the welfare of the masses

53. 6. The Game Theory Model Game theory involves the study of rational decisions in situations where two or more participants have a provision to make choices and the outcomes depends on the choices made by each other. The players or policy-makers have to adjust their conduct to reflect not only their own desires and abilities but also their expectations about what others will do. Game theory is generally applied to situations of war and peace, international diplomacy, the use of nuclear weapons, bargaining , etc.

54. 7. The Public Choice Theory Model In economics individuals try to maximize their profits and in politics, a public official or a politician makes efforts to maximize personal welfare in the name of social welfare. Political parties formulate a policy in such a way that they win elections. It is not that they win elections to formulate policies. The concentration of benefits in a few and the dispersal of the costs to the many results in the growth of interest groups. These groups pursue their self-interest in the political marketplace resulting in overproduction of government regulations, programs and services.

55. 8. System Theory Model In society there exists different types of pressure groups like farmers association, teachers association, students union and so on. Different associations give inputs to the government to formulate policies. While the inputs are the forces generated in the society on the political system, the political system comes out with policies that are called the outputs. According to David Easton, the outputs of the political system are the authoritative allocation of values and it is the output that is referred to as the public policy.

56. 3.2. Outputs and Effects of Public Policy The intended effects of a policy vary widely according to the context in which they are made. Broadly, policies are typically instituted to avoid some negative effect that has been noticed in the, or to seek some positive benefit. There may be two types of policy outputs. 1. Net Output as the Primary : - Net output is defined as output minus input. However, such a criterion cannot be used outside very narrow limits, because it is difficult to measure or even identify the output of a social process. 2. Partial output as the Secondary or Approximate: - A secondary criteria is applied to an aspect of a process that is chosen because it is considered to be positively correlated with, and more measureable than the net output.

57. Effects of Public Policy Results are increasingly being used by program managers to enhance accountability, inform budget allocations, and guide policy decisions. At the global level, impact evaluations help building knowledge about the effectiveness of development programs by highlighting what does and does not work to reduce poverty and improve welfare. Policies frequently have side effects or unintended consequences. Because the environments that policies seek to influence or manipulate are typically complex adaptive systems (e.g. governments, societies, large companies), making a policy change can have counterintuitive results. For example, a government may make a policy decision to raise taxes, in hopes of increasing overall tax revenue. Depending on the size of the tax increase, this may have the overall effect of reducing tax revenue by causing capital flight or by creating a rate so high that citizens are deterred from earning the money that is taxed .

58. Effects of …. Aims of Policy Impact Evaluation Measuring changes in short-term, intermediate and long-term outcomes. Determining whether changes in outcomes can be attributed to the policy . Identifying the relative cost-benefit or cost-effectiveness of a policy. Evaluations can address three types of questions : 1. Descriptive questions: The evaluation seeks to describe what is taking place and describes processes, conditions, organizational relationships, and stakeholder views. 2. Normative questions: The evaluation compares what is taking place to what should be taking place; 3. Cause-and-effect questions: The evaluation examines outcomes and tries to assess what difference the intervention makes in outcomes .

59. ( Wednesday 2:00 )3.2.1. Lindblom’s Incremental Model As an alternative to the traditional rational model of decision-making, Charles Lindblom presented the 'incremental model! of the policy-making process. His article on the "Science of Muddling Through", published in 1959, gained wide recognition in the development of policy analysis as concerned with the "process" of making policy. Since then Lindblom's thought has evolved beyond his original argument. In criticizing the rational model as advocated by Simon and others, Lindblorn rejects the idea that decision-making is essentially something which is about defining goals , selecting alternatives , and comparing alternatives .

60. Lindblom’s ….. The incremental approach (branch method) of decision-making involves a process of "continually building out from the current situation, step-by-step and by small degrees". In contrast, the 'root' approach, as favored by the policy analysts, was to start from "fundamentals a new each time, building on the past only as experience embodied in a theory, and always prepared to start from the ground up".‘ According to Lindblom , constraints of time, intelligence, and cost prevent policy-makers from . identifying the full range of policy alternatives and their consequences. He proposes that "successive limited comparison" is both more relevant and more realistic in such a condition of "bounded rationality ".

61. Features of Incremental Decision-Making A. Strategic Policy-Making, B. Partisan Mutual Adjustment A. Strategic Policy-Making: - In his subsequent article, "Still Muddling Through" (1979), LindbIom makes clear that the core idea in an instrumentalist approach is the belief in skill in solving complex problems, and his aim is to suggest 'new and improved' ways of 'muddling(mixing up) through'. To do this he draws a distinction between: i ) instrumentalism as apolitical pattern, with step-by-step changes,, and ii) instrumentalism as policy analysis. In this article he makes case for 'analytical instrumentalism' as a method of securing the balance of power in a pluralist polity in which business and large corporations tend to - exercise a powerful influence over the policy-making process.

62. The three main forms to incremental analysis 1 ) Simple incremental Analysis : It is a form of analysis in which only those alternative policies, which are marginally different to the existing policy are analyzed. 2) Strategic Analysis : Lindblom argues that since completeness of analysis is not possible because of many constraints, an analyst should take a middle position: 'informed, thoughtful' ' and uses methods to make better choices. These methods include: trial and error learning; systems analysis; operations research; management by objectives; and programme evaluation and review technique .

63. The three main forms …. 3) Disjointed Instrumentalism ': - Disjointed incrementalism is an analytical strategy, which involves simplifying and focusing on problems by following six methods: a) the limitation of. analysis for a few familiar alternatives; b) intertwining values and policy goals with empirical analysis of problems; c) focusing on ills to be remedied rather than on goals to be sought; d) bid-and-error learning; e) analyzing a limited number of options and their consequences; and f) fragmenting of analytical work to many partisan participants in policy-making.

64. A. Partisan Mutual Adjustment In his work "The Intelligence of Democracy" (1965), Lindblom argues that decision-making is a process of adjustment and compromise which facilitates agreement and coordination. Partisan mutual adjustment, he observes, is the democratic and practical alternative to centralized hierarchical controls. As Lindblom argues in his latest presentation, ": . .policy evolves through complex and reciprocal relations among all the bureaucrats, elected functionaries, representatives of interest groups, and other participants". In 1977 and 1979, Lindblom attacks the idea of pluralism, offers a radical critique of the business, and believes lhat there is a need for drastic radical change in a whole range of policy areas, and that the whole worldjs in need of more than simply incremental change.

65. Partisan …. The incrementalist approach to policy-making is in a dilemma, critics note that its deductive power is constrained by the difficulty in specifying what an increment is. Whilst its degree of confirmation is reduced by the typical occurrence of shift-points in policy-making which defy the interpretation of the incrementalist equations as stable linear growth models. For all its simplicity this model seems to be too crude in the context of the complexity of policy process, taken as a whole, the central concern of his work has been to explore the constraints that shape decision-making in the modem - policy process .

66. Partisan …. Incrementalism, it may be noted, has not been a major concern of his writings so much as the relationship between power, human knowledge and politics, Lindblom (1993) notes, "Hence, , anyone who wants to understand what goes wrong in the effort to use government to promote human well-being needs to comprehend how power relations shape and misshape public policy and to probe how power relations might be restructured to produce better policy".

67. 3.2.1. The Rational Policy- Making Model This approach emphasizes that policy-making is making a choice among policy alte natives on rational grounds. Rational policy- making is "to choose the one best option". Robert Haveman observes that rational policy is one, which is designed to maximize "net va1ue achievement". Thomas Dye equates rationality with efficiency, In his words, "A policy is rational when it is most efficient, that is, if the ratio between the values it achieves and the values it sacrifices is positive and higher than any other policy alternative". This model is called the linear, mainstream, common sense or rational actors model, and is the most widely held view of the way in which policy is made. In this rational decisions are taken by those with authority and responsibility for a particular policy area.

68. The Rational …. Various other authors expressed the notion that policy is some highly rational process in which technical persons or experts are firmly in control using highly tuned/adjusted/ instruments to achieve easily predicted outcomes’. It is also stated that there is much evidence to suggest that this model is far from being real and too simplistic . Simon identifies an outline of a step by step mode of analysis to achieve rational decisions as follows: Information gathering— data and potential problems and opportunities are identified, collected and analyzed. Identifying problems

69. Rational …. Assessing the consequences of all options Relating consequences to values— with all decisions and policies there will be a set of values which will be more relevant (for example, economic feasibility and environmental protection) and which can be expressed as a set of criteria, against which performance (or consequences) of each option can be judged. Choosing the preferred option— given the full understanding of all the problems and opportunities, all the consequences and the criteria for judging options.

70. Chapter Four: - Actors and Institutions in Public Policy Starting, managing or improving the policy process requires identifying the key participants from among the relevant stakeholders, as well as defining their respective roles. The first task, identifying the participants, consists of two steps: identifying the interests and then identifying the appropriate representatives of those interests . To identify the interests, there is need to concentrate on groups likely to be affected by the strategy and those with the power to implement or frustrate potential outcomes.

71. DIFFERENT ACTORS IN THE PROCESS : Politicians , interest groups , lobbyists and legislatures Political institutions , executives and bureaucrats The citizen, the Reporters and commentators Think tanks , lawyers and judges.

72. Actors and …. POLITICIANS AND LEADERS: - Politicians and leaders in the private sector and civil society will be expected to provide leadership and to endorse and promote the strategy as an initiative in the nation’s interest and of importance to society as a whole. PUBLIC AUTHORITIES Public authorities ( i . e central government, sub-national authorities at various levels, resource boards/agencies) play an important role in putting economic, social and environmental problems on the agenda. They must also provide resources for tackling problems ( eg money and information); create the framework for economic, political and social rights; shape the regulations to realize goals; establish mechanisms to set standards and to adhere to international obligations; and ensure that policies, plans and programmes are implemented and applied, and that legislation and regulations are complied with.

73. PUBLIC AUTHORITIES …. resist taking full ownership of and operation control of the process, but play an enabling role – acting as a facilitator of a wider process, creating the broad framework and supporting participation, seeking to engage and empower stakeholders (see Table 4.1) so as to foster a partnership approach between the different levels of government, the private sector and civil society, and promoting the development of a long-term vision for national development; use/build on existing forms of participatory structure available within government which have been used in strategic planning ( eg the planning systems, decentralized administrative systems, education systems), establish new structures ( eg special committees, round tables) and build capacity.

74. PUBLIC AUTHORITIES …. encourage/promote participation throughout the vertical hierarchy – provinces/states and different types of lower-level divisions; ensure the committed engagement of all sectoral departments and agencies and key individuals within them (notably those who have cross- sectoral expertise/vision and are open to change); ensure the strategy is not affiliated strongly with particular political parties (to help it to survive achange of government), is not in the hands of politicians or civil servants who could be moved by a new government, and promote strong support outside government.

75. THE PRIVATE SECTOR The private sector is responsible for creating goods and services, generating profit for investors and providing employment opportunities, innovation and economic growth. It can nominate representative, accountable members of the sector to engage in the strategy process. Leaders of large businesses responsible for making new patterns of investment and operation can play an effective role. But there should also be representatives of smaller-scale industries, which are important for employment, and smaller businesses with particularly high resource requirements ( eg small-scale mining, agricultural processing) or industries that have sensitive impacts ( eg tourism).

76. CIVIL SOCIETY Some of the more prominent civil society groups tend to be combative and territorial, but can/should: Elect/appoint organizations/people to participate in strategy meetings, workshops and so on, ensuring that they are accountable and aware of/reflect the views of the groups they represent, and have a mandate to voice particular views. Accountability can better be achieved when an interest group is represented by an association with democratic procedures ( eg chambers of commerce, professional association). Resist being compromised by any support provided to enable their participation ( eg to meet the costs of attending meetings or preparing informed positions).

77. CIVIL …. NGOs can play an important role in drawing attention to particular issues and problems, mobilizing public opinion and advancing knowledge. In developing countries, NGOs play a vital role undertaking development programmes in poor urban and rural communities, have much better knowledge of community problems and concerns than government and can play a key catalytic role in engaging communities in voicing their concerns. The NGO movement is very sophisticated and maintains a dialogue with industry and government . Environmental NGOs play a major role in nature and environmental education and take action, often through the courts, to defend conservation and environmental interests .

78. CSOs .... The operating environment for civil society is improving in an increasing number of countries. The number of CSOs is growing. The nature of civil society is changing, as is their engagement in policy processes. Many CSOs have become aware that policy engagement can lead to greater impacts. Many more CSOs are moving beyond service delivery Network with other organizations, Provide training, Comment on draft policy documents, Organize policy seminars, Publications on policy issues, Provide services, Submit articles in the media, Pilot alternative policy approaches, Insider lobbying, Website, Newsletter to policymakers, Work on projects, commissioned by policymakers.

79. DONOR AGENCIES In developing countries, development cooperation agencies have a role to play in providing support (when requested) to assist the development and implementation of strategies. Donors can support strategies in four main ways: in changing their internal procedures and practices to support the principles and elements, and at the international level in discussions and negotiations on issues of relevance to sustainable development strategies; at the national level, in the policy dialogue with partner country governments; at the operational level in the projects and programmes which development agencies support.

80. 1) The institutional foundations of policy-making - legitimacy, power and policymaking -constitutionalism - representative democracy ( majoritarian , proportional, presidential systems) - semi-authoritarian regimes 2) Actors in the policy process political parties - lobbying by corporate actors and interest groups - civil society, NGOs and social movements - courts 3) Interaction of actors and institutions in policy-making governance and government political opportunity structures and veto points electoral cycle and public opinion

81. Think Tank The term think tank is used here to mean policy research institutes involved in the research and analysis of a particular policy area or a broad range of policy issues, seeking to advise policy makers or inform public debate on policy issues. Generally, these organizations are constituted as non-governmental organizations (NGOs) but some are either semi-governmental agencies or units within government. Additionally, some political parties have created in-house think tanks in the form of party institutes or foundations. In parts of North Asia, think tanks are often affiliated with business corporations. Despite this increasing divergence in legal constitution, the roles and functions of think tanks put them at the intersection of academia and politics where they aim to make connection between policy analysis and policy making.

82. Think Tank …. However, there is considerable diversity among think tanks in terms of size, ideology, resources, and the quality or quantity of analytic output. The majority of think tanks around the world are relatively small organizations. think tank modes of policy analysis range, at one end of the spectrum, from being highly scholarly, academic, or technocratic in style, to overtly ideological, and advocacy driven, at the other end, with vastly different standards of quality . The interplay of applying knowledge to policy problems is complemented by strategic practices to develop advisory ties to government, industry or the public as brokers of policy analysis. Accordingly, think tank policy analysis is not simply an intellectual exercise that is manifest through expert commentary or policy documents. Instead, policy analysis is also action oriented, reliant on policy entrepreneurship, institution building, and the competitiveness of think tanks in the market-place of ideas.

83. Chapter Five: The Process of Public Policy Making 1 . The Agenda-Setting Process 2. Policy Formulation: Design and Tools 3.Policy Formulation: Context and Agency 4. Consequences of Public Policy 4A. Policy Legitimating 5.Implementing Public Policy: Top-Down, Bottom-Up, And Hybrid Theories of Implementation 6. The Interpretative Approach to Policy Implementation 6A. Policy Evaluation 6B. Policy Modification/Change/ OR Termination

84. Meaning of Policy Process P olicy studies focus on how policies are made rather than their content or their causes and consequences . Policy making process considers a series of activities, or processes, that occur within the political system. For purpose of understanding, to make the study more convenient, we think about policymaking as a series of processes. However, in real world these activities seldom occur in a neat step-by-step sequence. These processes occur simultaneously, each one collapsing into others.

85. 1. The Agenda-Setting Process Problem Identification Who decides what will be decided? In a democracy, it is argued that problem identification is not the prerogative/choice/ of the few. It can occur any time citizens or groups make demands upon the government. A problem can be discussed and placed on the agenda of national decision making. Individuals and groups can organize themselves to assume the tasks of defining problems and suggesting solutions. Policy Problem, according to James E Anderson, is a condition or situation that produces needs or dissatisfaction on the part of people for which relief or redress (from government ) is sought .

86. Agenda ….. It is argued that in a plural society , any problem can be discussed and placed on the agenda of national decision-making. Individuals and groups, it is said, can organize themselves to assume the tasks of defining problems and suggesting solutions . “Defining the problems of the society and suggesting alternative solutions is the most important stage of the policymaking process” (Thomas R. Dye (2005, 32). Problem definition is also considered strategic where groups, individuals, and government agencies deliberately design portrayals or symbols to mobilize the mass as well as promote their preferred course of action .

87. Agenda ….. Policy issues (problems) can only be perceived or succeed when meeting the following criteria: If an issue has reached crisis proportions and can no longer be ignored, it will be addressed; Having an emotive aspect, or receiving media attention because of human interest angle helps an issue to gain attention; and If the issue is seen as having wider impact, then it will make it onto the agenda.

88. What is policy agenda? An agenda is a collection of problems, understanding of causes, symbols, solutions, and related public problems or issues coming to the attention of members of the public and government officials (Thomas A. Birkland (2001). Agendas are quite vast to respond to them at a time, mainly due to the limited resources to be allocated or mobilized. Levels of Policy Agenda Agenda Universe Systematic Agenda Institutional Agenda Action/Decision Agenda

89. Policy agenda ….. Agenda Universe contains all ideas that could possibly be brought up and discussed in a society or in political system. Systemic agenda contains all issues/problems commonly perceived by members of the political community meriting public attention. Systemic agenda recurs most often and expansive especially when there is good national mood towards a specific subject (e.g. environmental protection, drug abuse, stopping crime in the street). To be accepted and acted upon, systemic agenda must be transformed into an institutional or governmental agenda to draw full attention of legislators and other parties.

90. Policy agenda ….. An action or decision agenda: - Since building or setting agenda is a competitive process, it is only few issues that will reach end decision. Once reached the level of decision agenda, it is implied that the matter is in the hands of the executive branch responsible for the implementation. The fierce struggle and goal of all contending parties in the policymaking process is to move their policy issues from systematic to institutional and over to decision agenda. Agenda Setting Styles A. Agenda setting from the bottom-up Is a peoples-driven type of decision making; also considered a “democratic-pluralist” model. This is done by individuals, groups, candidates seeking election, political leaders seeking to enhance their reputation and prospects for reelection.

91. F rom the bottom-up …. Is a peoples-driven type of decision making; also considered a “democratic-pluralist” model. This is done by individuals, groups, candidates seeking election, political leaders seeking to enhance their reputation and prospects for reelection. Bottom-up agenda style creates favorable popular images on the part of individual candidates. Compels public officials to respond to issues at stake (Dye 2005). Mechanisms for bottom-up Agenda setting 1.Public opinions 2. Media effects and media power 3. Opinion polls 4. Communication with policymakers 5. Think-tanks

92. Policy agenda ….. B. Agenda setting from the top-down Venues from which top-down policies flow include: Presidential/premier office and their staff; Legislative staffs/parliament staffs; and Executive staffs who initiate policy proposals with members of the parliament/congress (all of them considered proximate policymakers ). All of them attract the attention of most media outlets, commentators, and political scientists over policy matters.

93. Policy agenda ….. Agenda Non-decision: not putting policy in place Agendas or policy issues are sometimes made to be undecided for various reasons. As groups fight to keep their own issues to the attention of legislators, all issues/problems cannot get due share due to limited agenda spaces. Some are forced to wait until the issue/problem reaches its crisis stage where it can draw the attention, especially media attention. Policy non-decision is used as a means of suppression or blocking of an issue in the making which may come as challenge to the values and interests of the decision making body.

94. Policy non-decision ….. Non-policy decision-making style takes place when the dominant elites act both openly and covertly to suppress an issue for the fear of public attention if focused on it something will be done and what is done will not be in their interest. Policy agenda denial may take place through the use of force, and also resistance in support of prevailing values when problems disappear from agenda (when there is no more of an “issue attention cycle”) when changes take place in the conditions that gave rise to a problem. Due to appearance of new and more pressing probl ems , etc

95. Mechanisms of Influencing Policy Agendas/government policies / Direct lobbying . Campaigns via various committees Interpersonal contacts while on travel, recreation, shows, etc. Grassroots mobilization efforts to influence the parliament, top government offices, etc. Political power determines the viability of success of a given agenda since policy issues and competing groups are inseparable. One task of political power is to keep own agenda on and push others off agenda.

96. 2. Policy Making/Formulation/: Design and Tools The policy has reached a point to be designed and its drafting has become obvious. At this stage, important issues such as setting of goals , spelling out implementation strategies as a means of achieving the policy goals and policy statements are issued. It involves identifying and/or crafting a set of policy alternatives to address a problem, and narrowing the set of solutions in preparation for the final policy decision. According to Cochran and Malane , policy making takes up ‘ what’ questions: What is the plan for dealing with the problem? What are the goals and priorities? What options are available to achieve these goals What are the costs and benefits of each of the options? What externalities, positive or negative, are associated with each alternative? E.g. What should be the minimum wage level, & who should be covered by it?

97. Policy Design Seeks to understand the context in which the decision makers act and, to identify the selectivity in attention that occurs . Mostly the aim is to bring awareness of the “ boundaries ” of rationality to the design process in order to expand the search for solutions, in hopes of improving the policies that result. Typically designing policy involves some degree of creativity, or extra-rational element, in addition to rational processes of search and discovery. Developing truly innovative solutions involves crafting designs that fit specific and substantive, organizational and political contexts. Eventually leading to institution-building. A framework that can improve our understanding, analysis and evaluation of policy processes and consequences .

98. Tools of Policy Making Describing the tools involves drafting the legislative or regulatory language for each alternative. The recent trend is toward measures that embed government officials in complex collaborative relationships with other levels of government, private-sector actors, and non-government organizations. Research on policy tools highlights the political consequences of particular tools , as well as their underlying assumptions about problems, people, and behavior.

99. 3. Policy Making: Context and Agency Context (Design): - Policy making takes place at a particular moment in time, marked by particular dominant ideas related to the policy issue, to affected groups, to the proper role of government, etc. These ideas will change/modify or refine actors’ arguments, over passage of time, of particular solutions, and their perceptions and preferences when they take specific policy decisions (at a later point of time). Agency (Tool): - Designs have so many working parts such analysis cannot specify in advance the particular package of dimensions.

100. 4. Consequences of Public Policy Policy implementation distributes benefits to some groups, while imposing burdens on others . These suggest a number of ways through which policies shape the course of future politics. Groups receiving benefits from government programs are likely to organize to maintain and expand them. Those who are adversely affected may oppose. The selection of a particular policy design also imposes lock-in effects. 4A. Policy Legitimizing (Adoption) : - At this stage, action on a preferred policy alternative for which the proponents of action think they can win approval, even though it does not provide all they might like .

101. 4A. Policy Legitimizing (Adoption) …. As the formulation process moves toward the decision stage, some provisions will be rejected, others accepted, and still others modified; differences will be narrowed, bargains will be struck. In some cases the final policy decision will only be a formality and in some others, issue may be in doubt until the votes are counted and decision announced. When a policy meets the accepted procedural and substantive standards and when a policy is formally approved by the competent authority, having a legal authority to act, it becomes a policy. Policy legitimizing is phase of giving legal effect and attracts the attention of mass media and most political scientists.

102. 4A. Policy Legitimizing (Adoption) …. Law making process, as mandate of the parliament/congress in many countries, including Ethiopia, is one major task. As stipulated in Article 55 of the FDRE Constitution, the House of People’s Representatives (the parliament) shall have the power of legislation in all matters assigned by the Constitution… (Federal Jurisdiction). Laws deliberated upon and passed by the HPRs shall be submitted to the nation’s President for signature… (Article 57 FDRE Constitution) .

103. 5. Implementing Public Policy: Top-Down, Bottom-Up, and Hybrid Theories of Implementation Implementation studies are to be found at the intersection of public administration, organizational theory, public management research, and political science studies . Until the end of the 1960s, it had been taken for granted that political mandates were clear, and administrators were thought to implement policies according to the intentions of decision makers. The process of “translating policy into action” attracted more attention, as policies seemed to lag behind policy expectations. Theory building was not the aim. Theory building was not at the heart of the first generation of implementation studies.

104. Implementing Public …. The second generation began to put forward a whole range of theoretical frameworks and hypotheses. This period was marked by debates between what was later dubbed/called/ the top-down and bottom-up approaches to implementation research. The third generation of implementation research tried to bridge the gap between top-down and bottom-up approaches by incorporating the insights of both camps into their theoretical models and by being more scientific in approach. The three generations of implementation research can be subdivided into three distinct theoretical approaches to the study of implementation.

105. Implementing Public …. Top-down models put their main emphasis on the ability of decision makers’ to produce policy outcomes and on controlling the implementation stage. Bottom-up view local bureaucrats as the main actors in policy delivery and conceive of implementation as negotiation processes within networks of implementers. Hybrid theories try to overcome the divide between the other two approaches by incorporating elements of top-down, bottom-up and other theoretical models. Top-down theorists started from the assumption that policy implementation starts with a decision made by central government.

106. Implementing Public …. Top downers essentially followed a prescriptive approach that interpreted policy as input and implementation as output factors. Implementation implied the establishment of adequate bureaucratic procedures and sufficient resources to ensure that policies are executed as accurately as possible. Bottom-Up theorists suggested studying what was actually happening on the recipient level and analyzing the real causes that influence action on the ground. They rejected the idea that policies are defined at the central level and that implementers need to stick to these objectives as neatly as possible .

107. Implementing Public …. Instead, the availability of discretion at the stage of policy delivery appeared as a beneficial factor as local bureaucrats were seen to be much nearer to the real problems than central policy makers. The focus lies on the decentralized problem solving of local actors rather than on hierarchical guidance. Hybrid Theories: - The new models presented by these scholars combined elements of both sides in order to avoid the conceptual weaknesses of top-down and bottom-up approaches. Taking the top-downers’ concern with effective policy execution as their starting point, they blended several elements of the bottom-up perspective and of other theories into their models. The core argument was that implementation is an evolutionary process in which programs are constantly reshaped and redefined.

108. 6. The Interpretative Approach to Policy Implementation The interpretative approach does not take the factual essence of problems as its main point of reference, but shows that multiple and sometimes ambiguous and conflicting meanings, as well as a variety of interpretations, coexist in parallel. While traditional analysis concentrates on explaining the implementation gap between policy intention and outcome, interpretative analysis focuses on the analysis of how policy means. It also rejects the assumption that policy implementation can be studied without looking at the process of policy formation. In contrast, it assumes that prior debates and policy meanings have an impact on policy execution as they influence implementers’ understanding of the policy problem.

109. Implementing actors are also confronted with multiple policy meanings as policy formation frequently involves the accommodation of contradicting interests. 6A. Policy Evaluation 6B. Policy Modification/Change/ OR Policy Termination

110. Chapter Six: - Policy Change and Continuity Continuity and Change in Public Policy and Management offers a major reconsideration of patterns in long-term policymaking and organizational change. In face of linked dynamics of society and nature as well as social, technological and ecological transformation processes, a shift towards pathways of sustainable development is needed. This challenges societies to establish new forms of governance. Innovation of governance has to be based on an understanding of contemporary governance and specific policies in relation to the named broader processes of transformation in order to explore possible future pathways of governance change. To generate such an understanding a genealogy of particular policies is necessary .

111. Changes within and Change of Paths For a long time the path dependence concept in general was associated with a long-lasting stability and therefore blamed for its insufficient explanatory power regarding policy changes Path dependence overstates the degree of stability of political processes or institutions and for this reason endeavor to open or dynamize it Factors and mechanisms that lead to change within or of policy paths come to the fore. Consequently, not only exogenous impact factors (such as events, constellations or random influences, respectively) are considered but in addition to it endogenous explanation patterns and thus also actors’ options to press for and initiate gradual and incremental or abrupt change

112. Change of paths Historical institutionalists typically tried to explain fundamental institutional change by using the idea of “punctuated equilibrium”. According to the idea of “punctuated equilibrium” an institution or policy is in a stable state of equilibrium for a long time. In this period of stasis it functions in accordance with former decisions during its foundation or former phases of “punctuation”. The latter take place in times of severe historical crises, caused by exogenous shocks or a shift in the environment. In these situations fast and sudden changes of policies or institutions occur; thus they considered change as solely induced by exogenous developments.