SOCIAL WELFARE POLICIES PORGRAMS AND SERVICES

Lecture Notes
Compiled by: Richard A. Dizon

INTRODUCTION TO SOCIAL WELFARE PRINCIPLES AND CONCEPTS

DEFINITION OF SOCIAL WORK:

Social Work is a profession that is practiced independently or as part of a team in many different fields, health,
education, corrections and community development.

William Schwartz (1961) States that “Every profession has a particular function to perform in society; it
receives a certain job assignment for which it is held accountable”.

The General assignment for the social work profession is to mediate the process
through which individual and society reach out to each other through a mutual need
for self-fulfillment. This presupposes a relationship between people and their
nurturing group which we would describe as “symbiotic”- each needing the other
with all the strength it can command at a given moment.
Wernes Boehm (1958) Social Work seeks to enhance the social functioning of individuals, singularly and in
groups by activities focused upon their social relationship which constitutes
interaction between individuals and their environments. These activities can be
group into three functions;
 restoration of impaired capacity
 provision of individual and social resources
 prevention of social dysfunctional
William Gordon (1969) The central focus of social work traditionally seems to have been on the person-in-
his-life-situation complex- simultaneous dual focus on man and his environment.
Harriet Barlett (1970) Social functioning is the relation between the coping activity of people and the
demand from the environment. This dual focus ties them together. Thus, person
and situation, people and environment are encompassed in a single concept which
requires that they be constantly reviewed together.
Louise C. Johnson (1989) Social workers become involved when individuals are having difficulty in
relationship with other people in growing so as to maximize their potential; and in
meeting the demands of the environment. The core of the social work endeavor is
to find the worker and client interacting in relation to problems in social functioning
which problems are the reason for the worker-client interaction. Thus the ultimate
goal of all social work practice is the enhancement of the social functioning of
individuals.

Global Definition of the Social Work Profession. The following definition was approved by the IFSW General
Meeting and the IASSW General Assembly in July 2014:
“Social work is a practice-based profession and an academic discipline that promotes social change and
development, social cohesion, and the empowerment and liberation of people. Principles of social justice,
human rights, collective responsibility and respect for diversities are central to social work. Underpinned by
theories of social work, social sciences, humanities and indigenous knowledges, social work engages people
and structures to address life challenges and enhance wellbeing.

BASIC CONCEPTS OF SOCIAL WELFARE:

1. The organized system of social services and institutions, designed to aid individuals and groups to
attain satisfying standards of life and health (Friedlander).
2. Include laws, programs, benefits and services which assure or strengthen provisions for meeting, social
needs recognized as basic to the well-being of the population and the better functioning of the social
order (Wickened).

WAYS ON HOW THE SOCIETY RESPONDS TO UNMEET NEEDS OR PROBLEMS:

1. Individual and group efforts.
2. Major societal institution which their designated roles and responsibilities for meeting human needs.
3. Social agency.

VIEWS OR CONCEPTIONS OF SOCIAL WELFARE:

1. Residual- views social welfare structure as temporary, offered during emergency and withdrawn when
the regular social system-the family and the economic system- is again working properly.
2. Institutional- sees social welfare as a proper, legitimate function or modern society. That “normal”
condition and helping agencies are accepted as “regular” social institutions.
SOCIAL WELFARE CATEGORIES:
1. Social Security
2. Personal Social Services
3. Public Assistance

SOCIAL WELFARE GOAL:

1. Humanitarian and Social Justice Goal
2. Social Control Goal
3. Economic Development Goal

HISTORY OF SOCIAL WELFARE GOAL:

A. Beginning Ancient Times:
1. Helping the needy and distressed is as old as civilization itself although not necessary on a formal
organized basis.
2. In Ancient China refuge was provided for the sick and the poor; also provisions for distributing clothing
and feeding unfortunate.
3. In Greece and Rome, there were “XENODOCHIA” or guesthouse for the custody and care of the
various classes for the unfortunate.
4. Almsgiving was recognized by the religious as duty of means of obtaining grace for the giver.

SOURCES OF SOCIAL WELFARE:

Problems of destitution, maladjustment, physical and mental illness were dealt with by:
1. The family and the tribe
2. The church
3. Private philanthropy
4. Community
5. The government

B. Old World Background

1. Religious motivation became the most powerful incentive for benevolence and charity, particularly in the
Jewish and the Christian and religious teachings.
2. Charity was motivated primarily by the desire of the giver to receive the grace of God or to secure the
merits of good deeds for eternal life.
a. The early Christians helped one another when facing poverty.
b. Medieval church entrusted the administration of charity to bishops, local priests and the
deacons.
c. With the acceptance of Christianity as state religion, institution for the poor were
established in monasteries, serving as orphanages, as homes for the old, the sick and the
handicapped and as refuge for the homeless.

Missionaries devoted their time to missionary teaching, collecting alms and distributing relief to the
destitute. They established charitable institutions.
Later on, institutions replaced by “hospitals” for old and sick persons, orphans, abandoned
children and pregnant women.

BEGINNING CONCEPTS OF SOCIAL WELFARE:

1. Common Chest (1520) – the prototype of the modern day community chest. Martin Luther conceive that
there should be “common chest” for the receipt of food, money and clothing to assist the needy.

The responsibility for the collection of funds and the distribution of relief to destitute, the sick and the
orphans was assumed by local authorities, but the church wardens played the leading role in relief
distribution.
2. Individualization- during the 16th Century, the Spanish Philosopher, Juan Luis de Vives advanced the
idea that the fate of the individual poor deserved attention. There should be investigation of the social
conditions of every pauper family. He recommended that the aid be provided through vocational
training, employment and rehabilitation instead of the customary distribution of alms.
3. Hamburg Experiment (1788)- Professor Busch, commissioner for Public Relief introduced a district
system of investigation and distribution or relief to individual paupers through volunteer committees.
The poor were interviewed and the individual needs of each family were determined. Children and
youth were trained in elementary courses and an industrial school was attached to the central orphan.

4. Military Workhouse (1790-Germany)- it was established in Munich by Benjamin Thompson; later count
of Rumford to prevent begging by able bodied paupers. The workhouse manufactured clothing for the
army by utilizing the employable poor.
5. Elberfeld System (1853-France)- the City of Elberfeld introduced the idea of financing relief exclusively
by public taxations.
 6. Daughters of Charity (1633-France)- “Friendly visitors”, they were the forerunners of social work. The
organization was founded by St. Vincent de Paul who recruited young women of the peasant class for
charitable work. They were trained in nursing the poor.

Father Vincent de Paul was the most important reformer of the charities of the Catholic Church during
the 17th century.
C. English Social Welfare
Philosophical Base

1. Religious foundation- care for the poor, almsgiving and church activities
2. Early charities-relief distribution.

POLITICAL FOUNDATION:
The English (Elizabethan) Poor Law of 1601 remained for a long time the basis of English Social Welfare. It was
codification of preceding poor relief legislations starting with the Statue of Laborer in 1249.
Salient Points
1. Primary responsibility for the care of the poor belonged to the individual‟s family and relatives.
2. Those who could not be supported by the relatives had to be cared for by the parish or the local
community.
3. Only the poor who were bonafide residents of the parish were eligible for assistance.
4. The parish must maintain the impotent poor from voluntary contributions of the parishioners through
collections.
5. The general tax was levied to provide the “poor tax” and was the main source for the financing of poor
relief.

In English up to the early part of the 20th century personal failure was considered the main cause of poverty.
The Poor Law distinguished three (3) classes of poor:
1. The able bodied poor
2. The impotent poor
3. Dependent children

CHANGING CONCEPTS OF SOCIAL WELFARE

CHARITY TO CITIZEN RIGHT

- Benevolent indiscriminate giving social rights to citizens of a society.

INDIVIDUAL WELFARE CONCERN TO SOCIETAL WELFARE

- Special services for special needs to common social contingencies such as unemployment, housing
and etc.

PRIVATE RESPONSIBILITY TO GOVERNMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY

- Voluntary social welfare efforts through programs and services to meet emergency needs of “needy”
individuals, groups and communities when they are incapable of providing for themselves through basic
institutions to recognition that all citizens may require social services to develop their capacities to
perform productive roles and achieve and maintain a desirable standard of well-being.

SOCIAL WELFARE IN HUMAN SERVICE TO SOCIAL WELFARE IN NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

- Contributing to man’s maximum development for nation-building.
- Development of man, his liberation from forces inside and outside him which impede his development
and his participation in the development of his community and of society as a whole.
- Man should be liberated from prejudice.
- Policies should conform to the Government goals.

POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND SOCIAL WELFARE

DEFINITION OF POLICY
1. It is seen as course of action or intended action conceived deliberately, after a review of possible
alternatives and pursued or intended to be pursued. It refers to a series or set of programs aimed to
achieve some objectives and goals. (Tropman).
2. “Standing Plans”, a product of series of rational exercise involving the determination of goals, the
examination of alternatives and the action strategy. (Alfred Kahn).
3. These are standing plans. (Montes)

REASONS WHY POLICY EXISTS

1. Diversity for magnitude of social problems
2. Gap between needs and resources
3. Increase in social services
GOALS OF POLICIES
1. Elimination of poverty
2. Maximization of welfare
3. Pursuit of equality
4. Higher Productivity
CLASSIFICATION OF POLICIES
1. Developmental
2. Social Welfare Policies
3. Social Reform

DEFINITION OF SOCIAL POLICY

1. Social Policy focuses on those decisions and actions affecting the social quality of individual lives, of
groups, organizations and communities within society, (Cura).
2. Sometimes called domestic policy is really a blue print of society‟s social goals and priorities, based on
the society‟s dominant values and beliefs and is, a key to understanding what makes society tick.
(Erickson)
3. It is used sometimes as synonym for other terms as “Social Welfare”, “Social Planning” or Policy
analysis, (Encyclopedia of Social Work)
4. It is a set of measures, which aim to achieve a certain level of social welfare or society either for the
whole population or for certain population groups. It is usually affects income distribution and the
system of social distribution and the system of social security. There are five pillars of social security:
a. Old age, disability and death benefits
b. Health care, sickness and maternity benefits
c. Work-injury compensation
d. Unemployment support
e. Family allowances
5. Social Policy is a guide for settled course of action composed or consisting of collective decisions
directly concerned with promoting the well-being of all parts of the population. It may be verbal, written
or implied expression of purpose that provides the guidelines for executive action. (Montes)

SOCIAL WELFARE DEFINITION

1. Means “well-being”. (Montes)
2. An organized function regarded as body of activities designed to enable individuals, groups and
communities, to cope with the social problems of changing conditions. (Council of Welfare Agencies)
3. A nation‟s system of programs, benefits and services that help people to meet those social, economic,
educational and health needs fundamental to the maintenance of the society. (Whitaker)
4. Social Welfare is both a residual (remedial) role and an institutional (preventive) role in the society.
(Tratter)
5. In the Philippines, Social Welfare refers to an aggregation of specialized programs, institutions and
services intended to meet certain residual needs (food, clothing, shelter) or not5 services by other type
of sectoral action, and receiving some degree of financial support.

SOCIAL WELFARE POLICY

1. Essential component of the social work knowledge base. To study social welfare policy is to study the
history, politics and economics of social welfare, social services and other decisions that directly affect
people. (Macht)
2. Mainly concerned with the transfer of goods and services to individuals, families, either through
government agencies, voluntary NGOs or profit making companies.
3. “It is hereby declared that it is the responsibility of the Government to provide a comprehensive
program of social welfare services designed to ameliorate the living conditions of distressed Filipinos
particularly those who are handicapped by reason of poverty, youth physical and mental disability,
illness and old age or who are victims of natural calamities including assistance to members of the
cultural minorities to facilitate the integration into the body politic.” (R.A. 5416, the Social Welfare Act of
1968)

OBJECTIVES OF SOCIAL WELFARE POLICY

1. To increase access to basic needs and improve the quality of life of distressed and disadvantage
individuals, groups, families and communities, the disabled, the elderlies, displaced workers and low-
salaried employees, and the victims of natural calamities and man-made disasters.
2. To develop the capacity of distressed and disadvantage individuals, families and communities to fulfil
their potentials as self-reliant partners in national development.
3. To organize communities and harness resources to identify and solve local problems and provide
community needs.
4. To strengthen existing local institution and peoples organization, as well as coordinate mechanism
among government organizations and non-government organizations to enable them to contribute
productivity toward national development.

CLASSIFICATION OF POLICIES
(According to Dubey)
 1. Developmental- directly affect the quality of life of the people in a given society. It includes industrial
and agricultural policies, import and export policies, policies to define and maintain market morality (fair
trade practices, product liabilities and policies to prevent and control economic offenses, employment
policies).
2. Social Welfare Policies- those dealing with areas of individuals, community and societal living which are
actual or potential casualities of psychological, social economic and political forces and with those
areas which contribute to the physical, social, emotional and intellectual well-being of the community
and society.
3. Social Reform-those that aim at the improvement of socially, economically and politically,
disadvantaged minorities who are generally in a lower status by eradicating social, economical and
political handicaps or discriminating practices.

BASIS FOR SOCIAL WELFARE POLICIES, PROGRAMS AND SERVICES

 Needs
 Interests
 Human rights
 Values and norms

WHY ARE NEEDS NOT MET BY SOCIETY?

Some Social Stratifiers:
 Class
 Gender
 Ability/Disability
 Educational Attainment
 Geographic location

FROM NEEDS TO HUMAN RIGHTS

Emergence of rights-based perspective and approach in society
 Founded on the conviction that all human beings are holder of rights.
 A right requires a government to respect, promote, protect and fulfil it. “The legal and normative
character of rights and the associated governmental obligations are based on international human
rights treaties and other standards, as well as on national constitutional human rights provisions”.

RIGHT’S APPROACH TO SOCIAL WELFARE MEANING

 Clearly understanding the difference between a right and a need.
 A rights is something to which I am entitled solely by virtue of being a person that which enables me to
live with dignity.
 A right can be enforced before the government and entails an obligation on the part of the government
to honor it.
 “A human needs‟ approach appeals to charity while a “human rights‟ approach translates need into a
matter of entitlement with dignity. Universal access to modern energy services falls within the purview
of human rights‟ conversations‟.( Manuel Solis, PhD student at the Adelaide Law School)

HUMAN RIGHTS-BASED APPROACH (HRBA)

Principles of HRBA Conceptual shifts in adopting the HRBA

 Reference of human From “answering needs” to “enabling the realization of rights” (civic,
rights political, social, cultural, economical right)
 Empowerment From “beneficiary” (charity) to “citizen”/right-holder” (power)
 Participation From “consultation” to “active, free and meaningful participation” and
ownership.
 Accountability From “provider” to “duty-bearer”.

WHAT DOES SOCIAL WELFARE ENCOMPASS?

1. Public Policy
2. Laws
3. Programmes
4. Entitlements
5. Benefits
6. Organized System
7. Institutions
8. Various Disciplines

OBJECTIVES OF SOCIAL WELFARE

 Better quality life
 Social inclusion
 Equality
  Develop their full capacities and to promote their well-being in harmony with the needs and inspirations
of their families and the community.

FIVE SECTORS OF SOCIAL WELFARE

1. Public (state-initiated and administered)
2. Private (for profit)
3. Voluntary (non-profit)
4. Mutual aid (provision by solidarity)
5. Informal (family, friends, etc.)

WHICH SECTOR OF SOCIAL WELAFRE ARE THEY PART OF

1. Paluwagan
2. Cooperative
3. Plan International
4. Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program

PERSPECTIVES ON SOCIAL WELFARE

1. Residual Social Welfare
2. Neoliberal Social Welfare
3. Institutional Social Welfare
4. Developmental Social Welfare

RESIDUAL SOCIAL WELFARE

 Premise: The market economy and family should respond to people‟s needs.
 Social welfare is seen as charity. Stigma is often attached to social welfare.
 Government assistance viewed as temporary and minimal. It requires proof of need and is made
available only after other sources of help have been exhausted.
 The residual conception of social welfare excludes any interest or effort to address proactively and
systematically the causes of people‟s needs.
 Service Coverage: selective, not universal.

NEOLIBERAL SOCIAL WELFARE

 Bring the market into social welfare”
o Reduced government spending on social welfare.
o Social welfare is a good “market” for business (health, care, day care, long-term care).
 Devolution of social service delivery
 3Maximization of self-interest is a high social good. Provide consumers with as many choices.

INSTITUTIONAL CONCEPT OF SOCIAL WELFARE

 Social welfare is a normal and “legitimate function of modern society”.
 It protects individuals in society from the social costs of operating an industrialized capitalist market,
rather than letting those costs fall on those who experience the risks of industrial society. Need is
stablished based on the fact on need, without consideration of the cause of need. The shift to this view
occurred in the post-war era.
 Social welfare needs cannot be fully responded to by the family, market, economy and the private
sector.
 No stigma should be attached to social welfare.
 Government responsibility to provide safety nets to citizens.
 Welfare is seen as a right of citizens. Hence, service coverage should be universal, not selective.
 Equality: the expected outcome of social welfare programs.

DEVELOPMENTAL SOCIAL WELFARE

 Assumption: “possible for society to set up a social welfare institution simply to make living better, to
improve the quality of life and to fulfill human development not necessarily to solve problem”.(Dolgoff &
Feldstein, 2003, p.140)
 Focus: multi-casual nature of social issues.
 Emphasis: “multilevel interventions”, prevention of social problems.
 Direction: Becoming a “welfare society” rather than a “welfare state”.
 Anticipates problems and creates environments
 Coverage: universal.
 Committed to the pursuit of equality in all areas of life.

SOCIAL WELFARE POLICIES, POLICY MAKING AND IMPLEMENTATION

OVERVIEW OF GENERIC POLICY FORMULATION PROCESS

MODELS OF PUBLIC POLICY MAKING

1. INSTITUTIONAL MODEL
Focuses on the traditional organization of government. Describes the duties and arrangements of bureaus and
departments. Considers constitutional provisions, administrative and common law, and judicial decisions. It
focuses on formal arrangements such as federalism executive reorganizations and presidential commission.
Traditionally political science has studied government institutions-congress, presidency, courts, political parties
that authoritatively determine, implement, and enforce public policy. Strictly speaking, a policy is not a public
policy until it is adopted, implemented and enforced by some governmental institution.

Government lends legitimacy to policies, they are then legal; Government extends policies universally to cover
all people in society; Government monopolizes the power to coerce obedience to policy, or to sanction violators.

2. ELITE-MASS MODEL
A policy-making elite acts in an environment characterized by apathy and information distortion, and governs a
largely passive mass. Policy flows downward from the elite to the mass. Society is divided into those who have
power and those who do not. Elites share values that differentiate them from the mass. The prevailing public
policies reflect elite values, which generally preserve the status quo. Elites have hither income, more education,
and higher status than the mass. Public policy may be viewed as the values and preferences of a governing
elite. The elites shape mass opinion more than vice versa. Public officials and administrators merely carry out
policies decided on by the elite, which flows 'down' to the mass.

Assumptions:
1) Society is divided into the powerful few and the powerless many; only the few allocate values (the mass do
not decide public policy).
2) The few are not typical of the mass; elites are drawn disproportionately from the upper strata.
3) There must be slow and continuous movement of non-elites into elite positions, but only after they accept
elite values, in order to maintain stability and avoid revolution.
4) All elites agree on basic social system and preservation values, i.e., private property, limited government,
and individual liberty.
5) Changes in public policy will be incremental rather than revolutionary, reflecting changes in elite values (not
mass demands).
6) Active elites are subject to little influence from apathetic masses.

Implications are that the responsibility for the state of things rests with the elites, including the welfare of the
mass. The mass is apathetic and ill-informed; mass sentiments are manipulated by the elite; the mass has only
an indirect influence on decisions and policy. As communication flows only downward, democratic popular
elections are symbolic in that they tie the mass to the system through a political party and occasional voting.
Policies may change incrementally but the elites are conservative and won't change the basic system. Only
policy alternatives that fall within the range of elite value consensus will be given serious consideration.
Competition centers around a narrow range of issues, and elites agree more than they disagree; there is always
agreement on constitutional government, democratic procedures, majority rule, freedom of speech and of the
press, freedom to form political parties and run for office, equality of opportunity, private property, individual
initiative and reward, and the legitimacy of free enterprise and capitalism. The masses cannot be relied on to
support these values consistently, thus the elite must support them.

3. GROUP MODEL
Public policy results from a system of forces and pressures acting on and reacting to one another. Usually
focuses on the legislature, but the executive is also pressured by interest groups. Agencies may be captured by
the groups they are meant to regulate, and administrators become increasingly unable to distinguish between
policies that will benefit the general public and policies that will benefit the groups being regulated. Interaction
among groups is the central fact of politics. Individuals with common interests band together to press their
demands (formal or informally) on government. Individuals are important in politics only when they act as part of
or on behalf of group interests. The group is the bridge between the individual and the government.

The task of the political system is to:

1) establish the rules of the game
2) arrange compromises and balance interests
3) enact compromises in public policy
4) enforce these compromises

It is also called equilibrium theory, as in physics. Influence is determined by numbers, wealth, and
organizational strength, leadership, access to decision makers and internal cohesion. Policy makers respond to
group pressure by bargaining, negotiating, and compromising among competing demands. Executives,
legislators, and agency heads all put together coalitions from their consistencies to push programs through.
Political parties are coalitions of groups. The Democrats have traditionally been central city, labor,
ethnics/immigrants, the poor, Catholics, liberals, intellectuals, blacks, and Southern blue collar workers.
Republicans have been wealthy, rural, small town, whites, suburbanites, white collar workers, conservatives,
and middle class.
The entire system assumes:
1) a 'latent' group supports the rules of the game
2) there is overlapping group membership which keeps groups from moving too far out of the political
mainstream
3) there are checks and balances on groups competition

4. SYSTEMS MODEL
Relies on information theory concepts such as input, output, and feedback. Sees the policy process as cyclical.
What are the inputs and outputs? Public policy is viewed as the response of the political system to forces
brought to bear on it from the outside environment. The environment surrounds the political system. In this
model, "environment" means physical: natural resources, climate, topography; demographic: population size,
age, and distribution, and location; political: ideology, culture, social structure, economy, and technology.
Forces enter the political system from the environment either as demands or as support. Demands are brought
to it by persons or groups in response to real or perceived environmental conditions, for government action.
Support is given wherever citizens obey laws, vote, pay taxes, etc., and conform to public policies.

The political system is a group of interrelated structures and processes that can authoritative allocate resources
for a society. The actors are the legislature, the executive, the administrative agencies, the courts, interest
groups, political parties, and citizens. Outputs are decisions and actions and public policy. The political system
is an identifiable system of institutions and processes that transform inputs into outputs for the whole society.
The elements with the system are interrelated and it can respond to forces in the environment, and it seeks to
preserve itself in balance with the environment. The system preserves itself by producing reasonably
satisfactory outputs. It relies on deep rooted support for the system itself and its use, or threat of use, of force.

Macro level policies are those that concern the whole system, and are influenced by official and unofficial
groups (media, etc.). It may center on the proper role of Congress or the President, or the relationships of
government and business or citizens and businesses. Subsystem policies involve legislators, administrators,
and lobbyists and researchers who focus on particular problem areas; also called sub-governments, policy
clusters, coalitions, or iron triangles. E.G. civil aviation, harbors, agricultural subsidies, grazing lands, etc. Micro-
level policies are efforts by individuals, companies, or communities to secure some favorable legislation for
themselves. Typically presented to a legislator as a request from the "home" district. The incentive to engage in
micro-politics increases as the extent of government benefits, programs and regulations increases.

5. STREAMS AND WINDOWS MODEL

This model posits three streams which are always simultaneously ongoing. When the three streams converge,
a policy window opens, and a new policy may emerge.

The problem stream focuses the public's and policy-makers' attention on a particular problem, defines the
problem, and calls for a new policy approach (or else the problem fades). Attention comes through monitoring
data, the occurrence of focusing events, and feedback on existing polices, though oversight studies of program
evaluation. Categorization of the problem is important in determining how the problem is approached and/or
resolved: values, comparisons, and categories.

The political stream is where the government agenda is formed: the list of issues or problems to be resolved by
government. This occurs as the result of the interaction of major forces such as the national mood, organized
interests, and dynamics of public administration, jurisdictional disputes among agencies and the makeup of
government personnel.

The policy stream is where alternatives are considered and decisions are made. Here the major focus in
intellectual and personal; a list of alternatives is generated from which policy makers can select one. Policy
entrepreneurs and other play a role, such as academics, researchers, consultants, career public administrators,
Congressional staffers and interest groups. Trial balloons are sent up to gauge the political feasibility of various
alternatives, either publicly or privately. They must be acceptable in terms of value constraints, technical
constraints, and budgetary constraints. Consensus is developed though rational argument and persuasion (not
bargaining). Tilt occurs when a plausible solution begins to emerge.

When these three streams converge, a policy window may open, because of a shift in public opinion, a change
in Congress, or a change in administration, or when a pressing problem emerges. Any one stream may change
on its own, but all three must converge for a policy decision to emerge.

WHAT TYPES OF POLICIES MAY EMERGE?

1. Incremental Policy Output. This model relies on the concepts of incremental decision-making such as
satisficing, organizational drift, bounded rationality, and limited cognition, among others. Basically can be called
"muddling through." It represents a conservative tendency: new policies are only slightly different from old
policies. Policy-makers are too short on time, resources and brains to make totally new policies; past policies
are accepted as having some legitimacy. Existing policies have sunk costs which discourage innovation,
incrementalism is an easier approach than rationalism, and the policies are more politically expedient because
they don't necessitate any radical redistribution of values. This model tries to improve the acceptability of public
policy.
Deficiencies of Incrementalism–Bargaining is not successful with limited resources. Can downplay useful
quantitative information. Obscures real relationship being political shills. Anti-intellectual approach to problems;
no imagination. Conservative; biased-against far-reaching solutions.

2. Rational Model. This model tries to understand all the alternatives, take into account all their consequences,
and select the best. It is concerned with the best way to organize government in order to assure and undistorted
flow of information, the accuracy of feedback, and the weighing of values. This model tries to improve the
content of public policy.

Deficiencies of Rationalism--gap between planning and implementation. Ignores role of people, entrepreneurs,
leadership, etc. Technical competence along is not enough (ignores the human factor). Too mechanical an
approach, organizations are more organic. Models must be multidimensional and complex. Predictions are
often wrong; simple solutions may be overlooked. The costs of rational-comprehensive planning may outweigh
the cost savings of the policy.

3. Public Sector Strategic Planning. An attempt to combine the incremental and rational approaches to public
policy-making. It is an attempt to reconcile the day-to-day demands with long range strategies for the future. It
doesn't see the organization as wholly determined by the
political environment, neither does it ignore risks. It takes an active stance (versus passive) toward the future
with an outward looking, aggressive focus sensitive to the political environment. It tries to place the organization
in a distinctive position vis-a-vis the political environment. It concentrates on making decisions (unlike the
rational model) but blends rational analysis with economic and political analyses (unlike the incremental model).
It is highly participatory and tolerant of controversy, it concentrates on the fate of the whole organization; the
fate of subunits is secondary.

4. Neo-institutionalist Model. Attempts to categorize public policies into 4 areas by the probability of government
coercion--immediate or remote--and the object of government coercion--individual or systemic. The concern in
this type of analysis is to relate these types of policy to the different branches of government and the behaviors
associated with each policy area.

POLICY MAKING STAGES

A policy established and carried out by the government goes through several stages from inception to
conclusion. These are agenda building, formulation, adoption, implementation, evaluation, and termination.
AGENDA BUILDING
Before a policy can be created, a problem must exist that is called to the attention of the government.

Example: drug addiction and crime

Insight: People considered drug addiction and crime such a serious problem that it required increased
government action. On the other hand, the society tolerates a certain level of crime; however, when crime rises
dramatically or is perceived to be rising dramatically, it becomes an issue for policymakers to address.

FORMULATION AND ADOPTION

Policy formulation means coming up with an approach to solving a problem. Congress, the executive branch,
the courts, and interest groups may be involved. Contradictory proposals are often made. Policy formulation has
a tangible outcome: A bill goes before Congress or a regulatory agency drafts proposed rules. The process
continues with adoption. A policy is adopted when Congress passes legislation, the regulations become final, or
the Supreme Court renders a decision in a case.

IMPLEMENTATION
The implementation or carrying out of policy is most often accomplished by institutions other than those that
formulated and adopted it. A statute usually provides just a broad outline of a policy.
Example: Congress may mandate improved water quality standards, but the environmental agencies provides
the details on those standards and the procedures for measuring compliance through regulations.

The Supreme Court has no mechanism to enforce its decisions; other branches of government must implement
its determinations. Successful implementation depends on the complexity of the policy, coordination between
those putting the policy into effect, and compliance.

EVALUATION AND TERMINATION

Evaluation means determining how well a policy is working, and it is not an easy task. People inside and
outside of government typically use cost-benefit analysis to try to find the answer. Cost-benefit analysis is
based on hard-to-come-by data that are subject to different, and sometimes contradictory, interpretations.

History has shown that once implemented, policies are difficult to terminate. When they are terminated, it is
usually because the policy became obsolete, clearly did not work, or lost its support among the interest groups
and elected officials that placed it on the agenda in the first place.
Example: In US, 1974, Congress enacted a national speed limit of 55 miles per hour. It was effective in
reducing highway fatalities and gasoline consumption. On the other hand, the law increased costs for the
trucking industry and was widely viewed as an unwarranted federal intrusion into an area that belonged to the
states to regulate. The law was repealed in 1987.

POLICY ADVOCACY

Policy advocacy is a specific type or form

of advocacy, of which there are many. It is
the process of taking action using a series
of strategies to influence the creation and
development of public policy. It makes
use of multiple targeted actions directed
at changing policies, positions or
programmes. Specifically, policy
advocacy seeks to:

• Establish new policies;

• Improve on existing policies and/or;
• Challenge pieces of legislation that impact negatively on particular individuals or groups:

Policy advocacy looks specifically at public policy, which is a set of laws (or other types of legislation) taken by
government, or other governing bodies that have a local, national, regional or international reach. Its
development involves a system of courses of action, regulatory measures, legislative acts, judicial decisions
and funding priorities concerning a particular issue. In summary, policy advocacy is directed at shaping public
policy.

WHY USE POLICY ADVOCACY?

There are numerous reasons why policy advocacy is an effective way to bring about change in society. For a
start, laws and policies are implemented across large jurisdictions and therefore affect large numbers of people,
sometimes the populations of entire countries or regions. Policy advocacy targets policy and decision makers;
the people who are mandated to develop, implement and evaluate policy. By alerting them to policy gaps and
shortfalls, organizations are able to influence the content of policies, which in turn allows for shifts to take place
around social norms and practices. In addition to this, policy advocacy:

• Takes the work we do to scale - meaning that it has the ability to reach large numbers of people; • Gives
people leverage to demand their rights because they are protected by law;
• Commits government to implementing the strategies contained in policy or legislation, to fund and support
civil society, and adopt best practices as developed by civil society.

WHO IS INVOLVED IN POLICY ADVOCACY?

Policy advocacy is multi-levelled in its approach to shifting policy for social justice. To be effective, organizations
will need to engage with people and institutions that are key to the development of legislation. These may
include, but are not limited to:
• Government;
• Civil Society;
• Media; and
• Affected Communities.
The development of public policy is informed by each of these spheres. For example, government should not
pass legislation which civil society has identified as antidemocratic or which infringes on human rights.
Therefore, although these spheres are often seen as separate entities, in reality, they are interrelated and
mutually reinforcing. Any policy advocacy initiative must be prepared to engage with each of these spheres in
order to make an impact and yield a positive policy outcome.

Government

It is not a homogeneous (uniform) or static entity but is instead multifaceted and fluid. Certain government
departments, at certain times, may be hostile towards civil society and reluctant to engage. However, different
departments, or different government representatives, may welcome and appreciate such engagement.
Government departments may also be more, or less, amenable to civil society engagement at different points in
time. When doing policy advocacy, it is very important to understand how government operates and particularly,
who to engage concerning a particular public policy. This allows one to target the relevant ministries and
departments, identify parliamentary processes and/or use the court system (such as municipal or high courts)
as and when is necessary. Some government officials welcome external pressure and appreciate the space it
opens up for them while others resist it determinedly. The task is to build relationships that allow for an
understanding of how to operate in this fluid environment.
The Community
As the aim of policy advocacy is to extend human rights and/or bring about social justice for an affected group,
it is important that organizations identify exactly who will be affected (or left out) of a particular policy proposal.
In some cases the affected community can comprise of a group residing in a particular geographical area, or of
marginalized persons belonging to, for example, LGBTI, women, people of colour, disabled people, refugees or
migrants, children and youth or impoverished communities. Throughout the policy advocacy process, the
community must be consulted so as to capture their views and experiences, as well as the outcomes they
desire from a policy advocacy initiative.

Media
The media comprises of traditional media sources, such as print, film, radio and nontraditional media sources,
such as the World Wide Web (internet), and social media. These media sources are communication „mediums‟
used to communicate messages to society at large. Print media comprises of national and local newspapers,
magazines, newsletters and other publications. Film messages are mostly delivered through television,
although the radio tends to be a more popular communication tool given that radios are cheaper and more
accessible than televisions or the internet. However, with the proliferation of smart phones, the use of the
internet, and specifically social networks like Facebook and Twitter, has become a highly impactful
communication tool, especially in situations of conflict where the state has control over mainstream media such
as radio and television. Effective policy advocacy campaigns must engage with these various media in order to
reach a wider audience and alert society to a particular problem or cause.

Civil Society
Civil society is distinct from government and the private sector. However, as one of its advocacy strategies, civil
society does work with institutions and government to bring about social change. Civil society organizations
include non-governmental organizations (NGOs); non-profit organization (NPOs); community-based
organizations (CBOs) and a host of other civil society groups that are founded outside of government. Civil
society organizations are often seen as „the voice of the people‟ thereby acting in the interests of marginalized
individuals or groups. Through their eff orts, civil society can:
• Lobby (attempt to influence) government to adopt or amend laws and policies;
• Provide input on laws and policies through research and data collected through service provision, consultation
with communities and other means;
• Hold governments accountable for failing to comply with their legal duties;
• Assist government to implement laws and policies;
• Present the needs and concerns of marginalized groups of people to government and broader society.