MPA 810 May 25

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 155

NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA

FACULTY OF MANAGEMENTSCIECES

MPA810
Public Policy Analysis

Course Team:
Dr. (Mrs.) Maryam O. Quadri (Course Writers)
University of Lagos
Prof E.E. Chukwuemeka (Course Editor)
University of Nigeria
Dr. Amina Bala Saleh/Musa Zakari (Reviewers)
National Open University of Nigeria

1
NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA
91Cadastral Zone, NnamdiAzikiwe Express Way, Jabi-Abuja
URL: www.nou.edu.ng
Published By: National Open University of Nigeria
First Printed 2012
Second Printed 2022
ISBN: 978-058-548-6
All Rights Reserved
CONTENTS
PAGE
Introduction……………………………………………………………………….. 1
Course Guide…………………………………………….................................... 1
Measurable Learning Outcomes………………………………………………… 1
Course Materials………………………………………………………………….. 2
Self-Assessment-Exercise …………………………........................................... 3
Summary………………………………………………………………………...... 3

Introduction
Introduction
This course, MPA 810: Public Policy Analysis is a 3 -credit unit course consisting of 20
units. It is one-semester course for students offering Master in Public Administration.
Each unit is to he covered in 2 hours and it is a core course.
This course, PAD810: Public Policy Analysis is a three (3) credit unit compulsory for
students studying public administration and related programmes in the Faculty of
Management Sciences.
The course has been arranged for you in twenty distinct but related units of study
activities. In this course guide, you will find out what you need to know about the aims
and objectives of the course, components of the course material, arrangement of the study
units, assignments, and examinations.
Course Contents
The course has 5 module and 25 units. Characteristics, (3units) Methods and Approaches
in Policy Analysis (3 units) Theories of Policy Making, (4 units), Modules of Policy
Making (3 units), and Tools and Techniques in Policy Analysis with 3 units including a
case study of National Industrial Policy. The citing of the case study is to enhance your
understating of the gap between policy making and policy implementation in Nigeria.
Course Guide
The aim of this curse is to enrich your knowledge on the concept of policy, its features
and implementation process. Therefore, you are introduced to:
1. Concepts of Public Policy and Policy Analysis
2. Different methods and approaches in Policy Analysis. System elite
3. Institutional and Group Theories
4. Models in policy-making techniques and tools of in policy analysis.

2
Measurable Learning Outcomes
Upon successful completion of these modules, you will be able to:
Explain the Policy Conception and Characteristics
Explain the Concept and Field of Public Policy Analysis
Outline the Uses and Types of Public Policies
Discuss the Prescriptive, Descriptive, Micro and Macro
Approaches
Discuss the Methods and Approaches in Policy Analysis
Explain the Perspective, Descriptive, Micro and Macro
Approaches in Policy Analysis
Discuss the Approaches to Public Policy Analysis
Discuss the System and Elite Theories
Explain the Theories of Policy Making
Discuss the Institutional and Group Theories
Explain the Rational-Comprehensive, Satisfying and Mixed
Scanning Models
Discuss the public policy process and implementation
Discuss the actors in Policy Analysis.

Self-Assessment-Exercise (SAEs)
Two Self-assessment Exercises each are incorporated in the study material for each unit.
Self-assessment Exercise helps students to be a realistic judge of their own performance
and to improve their work. Promotes the skills of reflective practice and self-monitoring;
Promotes academic integrity through student self-reporting of learning progress;
Develops self-directed learning; Increases student motivation and Helps students develop
a range of personal, transferrable skills.

Summary
Each Unit contained a summary of the entire unit. A summary is a brief statement or
restatement of main points, especially as a conclusion to a work: a summary of a chapter.
A brief is a detailed outline, by heads and subheads, of a discourse (usually legal) to be
completed: a brief for an argument.

Possible Answers to Self-Assessment Exercise(s) within the content


The materials contained Possible Answers to Self-Assessment Exercise(s) within the
content. The possible Self-assessments answers enable you to understand how well you're
performing in the contents. It is a way of analysing your work performance and any areas
for growth. Reflecting on your strengths, weaknesses, values and accomplishments can
help you determine what goals to work toward next.
Course Material
The course material package is comprises of following Modules and unit structure:

3
MODULE 1
Unit 1: Concept of Policy and Public Policy
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Learning Outcomes
1.3 Title of the main
1.3.1 Meaning of Policy
1.3.2 Concept of Public Policy
1.4 Public Policy Hierarchy
1.5 Characteristics of Public Policy
1.6 Forms of Public Policy
1.7 The Role of Public Policy in the Decision-Making Process
1.8 Summary
1.7 References/Further Readings/Web Resources
1.8 Possible Answers to Self-Assessment Exercise(s) within the content

1.1 Introduction
Government policies in today‘s worldare growing more complicated, ambiguous, and
unpredictable to due to numerous demands. Citizens are more knowledgeable, have
higher expectations, and are making an increasing number of demands for services that
are tailored to their specific requirements. Because of the interconnected nature of key
policy concerns, such as social need, low educational achievement, and poor health, these
problems cannot be effectively addressed by separate departments or agencies operating
in isolation. Efficiency in service delivery was a primary emphasis of government reform
efforts in Nigeria, as it was in other countries; the overhaul of government and
management structures is to improve service delivery to the citizenry. The process of
formulating policies, as described in this materials, entails first determining what should
be done, which involves analyzing the underlying rationale behind policies as well as
their efficacy, followed by figuring out how to carry out the tasks, and finally evaluating,
on an ongoing basis, the degree to which the desired results are being achieved. The
process of formulating policies is not an exact science, yet it is nonetheless quite
challenging to execute successfully. As is the case with any procedure, there are several
instruments and methods that can make the work that needs to be done more efficient.
Given this concept, in order to accomplish what this book set out to do, it was broken up
into six sections, beginning with the introduction. This material discusses and reviews
issues associated with public policy, model of public policies, the hierarchy of public
policies, their evaluations, and the criteria for those evaluations, along with the processes
involved, were examined.

1.2 Learning Outcomes


At the end of this unit you should be able to:

4
i. Explain the Meaning of Policy
ii. Discuss the concept of Public Policy
iii. Examine the Public Policy Hierarchy
iv. Explain the Forms of Public Policy

1.3 Policy and Public Policy


1.3.1 Meaning of Policy
What exactly does the term "policy" mean? Policy is as a course or principle of action
adopted or suggested by a government, party, business, or individual."
The process by which governments translate their political vision into programs and
activities to create "outcomes" intended change in the real world is referred to as
policymaking. This process has been characterized as the process by which governments
make policies.
Policy can take a variety of different forms, including non-intervention; promotional,
distributive, re-distributive, and regulatory, for example by licensing; or the
encouragement of voluntary change, including by grant aid; as well as direct public
service provision. Non-intervention is one of the more common forms of policy (Musa,
Ibrahim and Yakubu, 2020).
1.3.2 Concept of Public Policy
Public Policy
Public Policy has been defined by various scholars in different ways. Ikelegbe (2006)
defined Public Policy as the proposed course of action of the government or one of its
divisions. Egonmwan (2000) defined Public Policy as important action of government.
Olamiyi (1998) defined Public Policy as the management of human and material
resources by policy actors to address a policy problem identified at any point in time.
Ikelegbe (2006) also defined Public Policy as governmental actions or course of actions,
or proposed actions or course of proposed actions that are directed at achieving certain
goals. From the foregoing it is evident that Public Policy is governmental action to
remedy perceived societal problems. Public Policy could also be seen as an attempt by a
government to address a public issue by instituting laws, regulations, decisions, or actions
pertinent to the problem at hand. Numerous issues can be addressed by Public Policy
including crime, education, foreign policy, health, and social. While public policies are
most common in the United States, several other countries, such as those in the United
Kingdom, implement them as well. The process to create a new public policy typically
follows three steps: agenda-setting, option-formulation, and implementation; the time-
line for a new policy to be put in place can range from weeks to several years, depending
on the situation (Ezeigwe, 2013).
According to the definition provided by George and Klauss (2000), public policy is "an
publicly proclaimed objective that is backed by a sanction," where the sanction can either
be a reward or a punishment. "a law, a rule, a statute, an edict, a regulation, or an order"
is the shape that "a public policy" can take while it's being implemented as a course of

5
action (or inaction). It is possible for public policy to take a variety of various forms, such
as non-intervention; regulation, such as via licensing; the encouragement of voluntary
change, including by grant aid; and direct provision of public services; among other
possible manifestations.
Geurts (2010) defines public policy as a decision that the government makes in response
to a political issue or a public crisis. This decision was made in accordance with our
standards and ideals. In order to close the gap that exists between these ideals and
standards and a given circumstance, policies are developed. When applied in this setting,
the term "public policy" always refers to the decisions and acts taken by the government,
as well as the goals that serve as the basis for those decisions and activities. The decisions
and activities of the government that have the best chance of achieving a desired goal are
those that are guided by policy.
Edward (1987) suggests that the process of formulating public policy should be seen of as
one that is decision-centered and goal-driven.
According to Egonmwan (2000), other characteristics of public policy include the
following:
(a) The formation of public policy is an exercise in power; it involves the manipulation of
dependence relationships; and to the extent that it involves the solution of societal
problems for constrained circumstances, it invariably involves political conflict.
b). It is not simply a continuous process of decisions and activities; it takes place
primarily but not entirely inside the formal and legal organizational structure and
agencies of the state. c). It is not only a process that is ongoing (public bureaucracy). It
requires a range of decisions to be made, but the primary course of action or specific
instructions to be followed might not be one of them. For example, you might not be
allowed to utilize your own personal discretion.
c). Because it is focused on the future, this entails that it is perpetually concerned with
probability and economic conditions that are open to transformation. As a result, it
necessitates the use of logic rather than the simple use of power.
On the other hand, while it is believed that public policies will express and consolidate
the goals that will serve public interests as justified by the government, sectional or self-
seeking motivations may be uncovered after conducting a thorough investigation.
Interaction with a broad spectrum of a critical mass of external interest group is typically
required for the development of public policy. Examples of such groups include civil
society organizations, advocacy groups, traders, farmers, professionals, industrialists, and
other development associations.
According to Egonmwan (2000), the steps involved in the policy formulation process are
as follows: I Goal formulation, in which multiple groups operate with different and
frequently conflicting objectives; (ii) Problem identification and definition as a result of
the partial ignorance problem; and (iii) Agenda setting, which involves attempts by
individuals and groups to influence policy decisions. (iv) Identifying alternative policies
and assessing those alternative policies (analysis of policy option) (v) Policy choice.
According to Egonmwan (2000), the results of the process described above are typically

6
articulated in the official papers of the government. These documents might take the form
of legislative acts, decrees, policy statements, directives, laws, and guidelines.
Formulation of policy draws from a variety of models and theories, the most prominent
of which are the rational comprehensive model, the satisfying model, the instrumentalist
model, the mixed scanning model, the facet design model, and the choice theory of
planning. In the context of the Nigerian environment, the choice theory of planning,
which was developed by Thomas Reiner and Paul Davidoff, and the facet design theory
of planning, which was developed by Dror, are not particularly popular.
James (1960) provides a definition of policy as a deliberate plan of action that is carried
out by an actor or group of actors in order to address a problem or other subject of
concern. This idea of policy places the emphasis on what was really done, as opposed to
what is proposed or planned, and it distinguishes a policy from a decision, which is a
selection made from a number of options that are in competition with one another. The
policies that constitute public policy are those that are formulated by governmental
agencies and authorities. The fact that a political system's "authorities" are the ones who
establish public policies gives these policies their distinctive qualities, as a result of
which they are called "public." The Provisional Ruling Council, the Armed Forces, the
Ruling Council, the Presidency, the Legislature, Councillors, and so on is all examples of
such authorities. According to Mbiele (2006), the definition of public policy is the
general articulation of the intentions, goals, and objectives of the people, along with the
adoption of actions that are practical for the achievement of targeted interests and the
fulfilment of needs.
To put it another way, public policy is comprised of the objectives and presumptions that
guide the actions of the government and do not in any way contradict what has been said
above. It serves as guidance for the actions and inactions of the government (Starling,
1974).
In order to formulate policies, the government must make decisions, such as whether or
not to do something, how much of something to do, how little of something else to do, or
whether or not to do anything at all (Starling, 1974).
It follows that an attempt by a government to not act is considered a policy as a result of
this. According to Smith (1974), the formulation of public policy is "a logical activity of
government that encompasses planning." Policy formulation is a blend of politics and
planning.
A more precise definition of public policy would describe it as an action or inaction taken
by the government in response to the existence of a problem, with the intention of
addressing the problem in order to fulfill some kind of purpose or achieve some kind of
objective. (Hugo, 1972) A policy can be thought of as a course of action or inactivity that
is intended to accomplish particular aims. This meaning derives directly from the term.
This concept encompasses those deliberate choices to ignore an issue and do nothing
about it (Hugo, 1972).
To put it another way, one definition of policy describes it as "a path of action chosen
from among a variety of choices on the basis of some defined criteria." Further deduction
from the preceding definition reveals that planning and public policy are conceptually

7
distinct terms, despite the fact that planning is similar to public policy in that it involves
purposive action. According to Anderson (1975), policy is "what is really done as
opposed to what is proposed or intended." This distinction allows policy to be
distinguished from other notions, such as "decision," among others. In addition, when
defining public policy, it is important to differentiate between policies held by the
government and those held by private organizations. This is due to the fact that not only
governmental authorities but also commercial groups are responsible for formulating
policy. Therefore, public policy can be defined as "those policies produced by
governmental bodies and officials" (Anderson, 1975), which refers to a course of action
that is chosen from a variety of options based on the application of certain criteria.
Further deduction from the preceding definition reveals that planning and public policy
are conceptually distinct terms, despite the fact that planning is similar to public policy in
that it involves purposive action.
Therefore, "those policies created by governmental bodies and officials" is one definition
of what we mean when we talk about "public policy" (Anderson, 1975). According to
Anderson, the following are the five most important aspects of public policy:
1. It is an action that is carried out in order to accomplish a particular goal.
2. Rather than consisting of a series of independent choices, it is a plan of action.
3. It refers to the actions that the government takes, rather than the goals that it has set for
itself.
4. It can either be constructive (in its acts) or destructive (inactions).
5. It is founded on legal precedent and a decision made by an administrative body.
This final argument above bolsters the contribution of David Easton's system as another
analysis on public policies, through which he defines it as the authoritative allocation of
limited societal values. Easton describes public policies in this way since scarce societal
values are scarce (Easton, 1965).
If the desired outcome must correspond to the consequences that were intended, as
determined by a particular environment, the scenario that follows demonstrates how
closely policy formulation and implementation are related (Geurts, 2010:23).
A significant number of the changes that have been made to our governmental system
over the course of the last few decades have focused on modernization strategies that are
also being utilized in the private sector to improve efficiency, effectiveness, and value for
money. The policymaking process and the way in which it affects the ability of
policymakers to satisfy the requirements of constituents in a world that is becoming
increasingly complex, ambiguous, and unpredictable received much less attention than it
should have (Smith, 2002). This suggests that there is a significant amount of room for
innovation and optimization within this sphere. After all, the primary functions of
government are policy formulation and policy implementation. If the actors in the chain
are going to cooperate on the basis of common goals and outcomes, then it is abundantly
clear that some kind of powerful support is going to be required. Therefore, putting
purpose into practice ought to be a key component of any future action plans for the e-
government (David, 2000).

8
According to Nyong (2005), the goal of every government should be to provide for the
needs of its citizens in order to improve the welfare of those citizens. This includes
providing for fundamental requirements such as food, education, health, education,
housing, good drinking water, power supply, good roads, provision banking facilities,
environmental protection, and so on.
Since the needs of humans are diverse and continue to expand over time, it is the
responsibility of the government to meet these needs, which also include the promotion
of rapid economic growth, the reduction of unemployment to a manageable level, the
preservation of price stability, and the establishment of a stable and equitable payment
balance (Musa, Ibrahim Yakubu, 2020).
Self-Assessment Exercises 1
1. explain the Meaning of Policy
2. Discuss the concept of Public Policy
1.4 Public Policy Hierarchy
The hierarchy of public policy is seen as a "unbroken claim" through which policy must
travel before a solution to a particular problem may be found (Akindele and Olaopa,
2004). According to Akindele and Olaopa (2004), the Public Policy Handbook can be
broken down into four primary categories: political policy, executive policy,
administrative policy, and technical policy.
It is generally accepted that the Political Policy serves as a basic policy process through
which conversations are held with various broad aims. It is political in the sense that the
government has made a choice with the intention of resolving some issues, the nature of
which may include more than one. To be more detailed, public policy is the process of
determining the overarching goals of significant policy initiatives in general terms. A
result of such a wide policy is to give a basic framework within which successful policy
may be worked out. This is one of the effects of good policy (Musa, Ibrahim Yakubu,
2020).
The term "Executive Policy" refers to the effective reduction of "general" or "political"
policy into "cabinet policy," in which concrete, practical aims express themselves. This
concept is widely recognized. After this has been completed, the policy will now shift its
focus to administrative sectors or policy. This part of the market is referred to as the
"actuation" sector. To put it another way, it is a location where ministerial duty is
exercised. This is the structure that the ministerial administration takes when it is put into
action. In conclusion, the technical policy is an everyday practice that is adopted by
officials in the process of formulating administrative policies for the government. At this
point in the process, experienced technocrats and higher-level civil employees are tasked
with interpreting the substance of the policy in terms of its implementation. Technocrats
are responsible for decoding the contents of policies in order to ascertain whether or not
they are positive in relation to the policies' stated purpose (Musa, Ibrahim Yakubu, 2020).
Self-Assessment Exercises 2

9
1. Examine the Public Policy Hierarchy
2. Explain the Different Categories of Public Policy

1.5 Characteristics of Public Policy


Ikelegbe, (2006) cited in Musa, Ibrahim Yakubu (2020) identified the following
characteristics of public policy:
a. It is dynamic in nature, which means that it is susceptible to ongoing changes.
b. It makes the most of available possibilities and outlines strategies for overcoming
challenges in the pursuit of a goal.
c. It refers to a pattern of behavior carried out by an individual, a group, or the
government.
d. It is an activity that involves actors and components from both the government and
non-government organizations, among other things.
Importance of Governmental Regulations
The following are some of the reasons why public policy is important:
a. It is a vehicle through which the will of the people can be expressed. b. It is a primary
instrument in the hands of the government.
c. It fosters the growth of the people on a social, political, economic, and administrative
level.
d. It is a spoken, written, or implied basic guide that all administrative management
operations must adhere to.
1.6Forms of Public Policy
Different parts of society are subject to distinctly different policies. There are many
distinct sorts of policies, each of which can be classified according to a unique set of
characteristics; for example, public policy can pertain to issues of housing, education,
health, transportation, agriculture, industry, etc. Intent, operational process, issues, and
clientele are some of the other categories that can be used to classify policies (Ikelegbe,
cited in Musa, Ibrahim Yakubu, 2020). On the other hand, Lowi (1970) distinguished
between three types of policies: distributive, regulatory, and redistributive.
a. Policies Regarding Distribution
These are policies that pertain to tariffs or taxes, as well as the distribution of public
amenities and other such things. According to Ikelegbe (1996), distributive policies are
ones that involve gradual dispersal, unit to various parts of the population and to persons
and organizations. In reality, these policies are favors, rewards, or patronage handed out
to a small number of people.
The process of dispersal is ongoing, and as a result, individuals who were not favored at
one period may be accommodated through additional dispersal at some later time. One of
the characteristics that sets distributive policies apart from other types of policies is that
they do not incite conflict among people who are wanting to profit from the policy.

10
The primary reason for this is due to the fact that distribution occurs continuously, and
those who are unsuccessful in the beginning almost always succeed in the long run
(Ikelegbe, 1996)
In this sort of policy, the person making the decision is not aware of either all of the
possible alternatives or the effects of each one. This state is more prevalent in real world
situations due to the fact that the majority of decision making occurs under settings of
uncertainty. In this scenario, judgments are made based on the restricted number of
options that are known to the decision maker as well as his limited understanding of the
implications of those options.
b. Regulatory Policy
The actions of various social groupings in a society can be regulated through the
implementation of various regulatory regulations.
Because regulatory rules are aimed at specific industries, they inevitably cause friction
and sometimes even outright conflict between those industries that are in direct
competition with one another. In order for the government to fulfill its responsibilities of
protecting its citizens, it is required to create guidelines, rules, and regulations that serve
as a standard for how diverse groups and sectors of society should behave themselves.
Regulatory policies are developed with winners and losers in mind; however, given that
most people despise being defeated, these policies frequently result in a great deal of
conflict. Those who come out on the losing end of a policy may refuse to accept it in
good faith and may work to alter it so that it works more to their advantage. Legislation
such as labor laws, import policies, financial regulation, and other forms of government
policy all fall under this category. These rules and regulations are enacted with the
intention of controlling the activity of various groups and businesses in society.
c. Policies of Income Redistribution
These are the kinds of policies that have a propensity to move resources away from one
industry or group and towards another. for example, earnings from the oil industry going
to the healthcare or transportation industries. Policies that the government enacts with the
intention of achieving equity or inequity by favoring one group over another and doing so
at the expense of others are known as redistributive policies. These are the kinds of
policies that almost inevitably lead to conflict and tension. Because the topic in question
may entail socioeconomic, ideological, tribal, religious, or geographical lines, it is
relatively straightforward to identify the people who will benefit from these policies.
Progressive tax policies, social welfare programs, and sectorial allocation preference
policies are all examples of the types of policies that fall under this category.

1.7 Summary
This unit explained that, Policy is a course or principle of action adopted or suggested by
a government, party, business, or individual. The process by which governments translate
their political vision into programs and activities to create "outcomes" - intended change
in the real world - is referred to as policymaking. This process has been characterized as
the process by which governments make policies.
11
public policy is "an publicly proclaimed objective that is backed by a sanction, where the
sanction can either be a reward or a punishment. "a law, a rule, a statute, an edict, a
regulation, or an order" is the shape that "a public policy" can take while it's being
implemented as a course of action (or inaction). It is possible for public policy to take a
variety of various forms, such as non-intervention; regulation, such as via licensing; the
encouragement of voluntary change, including by grant aid; and direct provision of
public services; among other possible manifestations.
Since the needs of humans are diverse and continue to expand over time, it is the
responsibility of the government to meet these needs, which also include the promotion
of rapid economic growth, the reduction of unemployment to a manageable level, the
preservation of price stability, and the establishment of a stable and equitable payment
balance.
The hierarchy of public policy is seen as a "unbroken claim" through which policy must
travel before a solution to a particular problem may be found (Akindele and Olaopa,
2004). According to Akindele and Olaopa (2004), the Public Policy Handbook can be
broken down into four primary categories: political policy, executive policy,
administrative policy, and technical policy.
It is generally accepted that the Political Policy serves as a basic policy process through
which conversations are held with various broad aims. It is political in the sense that the
government has made a choice with the intention of resolving some issues, the nature of
which may include more than one.
The following are characteristics of public policy:
a. It is dynamic in nature, which means that it is susceptible to ongoing changes.
b. It makes the most of available possibilities and outlines strategies for overcoming
challenges in the pursuit of a goal.
c. It refers to a pattern of behavior carried out by an individual, a group, or the
government.
d. It is an activity that involves actors and components from both the government and
non-government organizations, among other things.
Importance of Governmental Regulations
The following are some of the reasons why public policy is important:
a. It is a vehicle through which the will of the people can be expressed. b. It is a primary
instrument in the hands of the government.
c. It fosters the growth of the people on a social, political, economic, and administrative
level.
d. It is a spoken, written, or implied basic guide that all administrative management
operations must adhere to.
Forms of Public Policy
Different parts of society are subject to distinctly different policies. There are many
distinct sorts of policies, each of which can be classified according to a unique set of
characteristics; for example, public policy can pertain to issues of housing, education,
health, transportation, agriculture, industry, etc. Intent, operational process, issues, and
clientele are some of the other categories that can be used to classify policies. On the

12
other hand, Lowi (1964) distinguished between three types of policies: distributive,
regulatory, and redistributive.

1.7 References/Further Readings/Web Resources


Akindele, S.T. and Olaopa, O.R. (2004). A Theoretical Review of Core Issues on Public
Policy and its Environment. J. Hum. Ecol., 16(3): 173-180.
Anderson, J.E. (1975). Public Policy Making.Praeger Publishers, New York, p. 18.
David U.I. (2000). Public Policy Analysis, Concept and Applications. Benin, Resyin
(Nig) Company.
David, E. (1965). A system analysis of political life; New York, Wiley
Dror, Y. (1968). Public Policy- Making.Pennsylvania: Shandler Chapter 1 & 2.
Easton, D. A. (1965).System Analysis of Political Life. Willey, New York.
Edward, T. (1987).The process of formulating public policy. Chicago. Edward Elgar
Publishing.
Edwards, Michael (2004), Civil Society. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Egonmwam, 2000). Public Policy Analysis, Concept and Applications; Benin, Resyin
(Nig) Company
Egonmwan, J.A. (1991), Public Policy Analysis, concepts and Applications. Benin:
Resyin. European Union Election Observation Mission to Nigeria (2011), ―Final
Report on the 2011 General Election. Dhanagare, D.N. (2001), ―Civil Society, State
and democracy : Contextualizing a Discourse‖, In the Sociological Bulletin 5(2),
pp.167–91.
Ezeigwe, F. O. (2013). Governance, Civil Society And Public Policy-Making In Nigeria:
A Study Of The 2010 Electoral Act. Advance Research in Public Policy,
Administration and Development Strategies Vol.1 No.2.
George H. & Rudi K. (2000) in Egonmwam.Public Policy Analysis, Concept and
Applications; Benin, Resyin (Nig) Company.
Geurts T. (2010) Public Policy Making the 21st Century Perspective: Apeldoorn the
Netherlands
Geurts T. (2010) Public Policy Making the 21st Century Perspective: Apeldoorn the
Netherlands.
Hugo, H. (1972). Review Article: Policy Analysis, British Journal of Political Science, 2:
85.
Ikelegbe, A.O. (2006), Public Policy Analysis: Concepts, Issues and Cases. Lagos:
Imprint Services.
Lowi, T. (1970). Decision making vs. policy making: Toward an antidote for
technocracy. Willey, New York.
Mbieli, P. (2006) Public administration, a broad view.Megavons (West Africa) limited.

13
Musa, Z. Ibrahim I. S. Yakubu S. I. (2020).An Introduction to Public Policy Analysis
and Administration; Germany.LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing.
Nyong, M.O. (2001) Public Policy, Public Sector Economics and Management in
Nigeria.Calabar. A & A. Communication.
Ogbu, S. (2003). Public Policy Making and implementation: The Petroleum Trust Fund
(PTF) of Nigeria in perspective. Abuja Management Review (AMR). Vol. 1
issues No. 1 March 2003.
Olaniyi, J.O. (1998), Foundations of Public Policy Analysis. Ibadan: Sunad Publishers.
Smith, D. G. (2000) in Egonmwam.Public Policy Analysis, Concept And Applications.
Benin, Resyin (Nig) Company.
Smith, K. B. (2002). Typologies, taxonomies, and the benefits of policy
classification. Policy studies journal, 30(3), 379-395.
Smith, S. C. (1964). Economics and public policy in water resource development.Willey,
New York.
Starling, G. (1988).Strategies for Policy Making. The Dorsey Press, Chicago.

1.8 Possible Answers to SAEs


Answers to SAEs 1
1. Policy is a course or principle of action adopted or suggested by a government, party,
business, or individual. The process by which governments translate their political
vision into programs and activities to create "outcomes" - intended change in the real
world - is referred to as policymaking. This process has been characterized as the
process by which governments make policies.
2. public policy is "an publicly proclaimed objective that is backed by a sanction, where
the sanction can either be a reward or a punishment. "a law, a rule, a statute, an edict,
a regulation, or an order" is the shape that "a public policy" can take while it's being
implemented as a course of action (or inaction). It is possible for public policy to take
a variety of various forms, such as non-intervention; regulation, such as via licensing;
the encouragement of voluntary change, including by grant aid; and direct provision
of public services; among other possible manifestations.
Since the needs of humans are diverse and continue to expand over time, it is the
responsibility of the government to meet these needs, which also include the
promotion of rapid economic growth, the reduction of unemployment to a
manageable level, the preservation of price stability, and the establishment of a stable
and equitable payment balance.
Answers to SAEs 2
1. The hierarchy of public policy is seen as a "unbroken claim" through which policy
must travel before a solution to a particular problem may be found (Akindele and

14
Olaopa, 2004). According to Akindele and Olaopa (2004), the Public Policy
Handbook can be broken down into four primary categories: political policy,
executive policy, administrative policy, and technical policy. It is generally accepted
that the Political Policy serves as a basic policy process through which conversations
are held with various broad aims. It is political in the sense that the government has
made a choice with the intention of resolving some issues, the nature of which may
include more than one.
2. The following are characteristics of public policy:
a. It is dynamic in nature, which means that it is susceptible to ongoing changes.
b. It makes the most of available possibilities and outlines strategies for overcoming
challenges in the pursuit of a goal.
c. It refers to a pattern of behavior carried out by an individual, a group, or the
government.
d. It is an activity that involves actors and components from both the government and
non-government organizations, among other things.
Importance of Governmental Regulations
The following are some of the reasons why public policy is important:
a. It is a vehicle through which the will of the people can be expressed. b. It is a
primary instrument in the hands of the government.
c. It fosters the growth of the people on a social, political, economic, and
administrative level.
d. It is a spoken, written, or implied basic guide that all administrative management
operations must adhere to.
Forms of Public Policy
Different parts of society are subject to distinctly different policies. There are many
distinct sorts of policies, each of which can be classified according to a unique set of
characteristics; for example, public policy can pertain to issues of housing, education,
health, transportation, agriculture, industry, etc. Intent, operational process, issues,
and clientele are some of the other categories that can be used to classify policies. On
the other hand, Lowi (1964) distinguished between three types of policies:
distributive, regulatory, and redistributive.

Unit 2:Public Policy in the Decision-Making Process


1.1 Introduction
1.2 Learning Outcomes
1.3 Public Policy in the Decision-Making Process
1.3.1 The Role of Public Policy in the Decision-Making Process
1.3.2 Approaches to Public Policy in the Decision-Making Process
1.4 Stages of the Policy Making Process
1.5 Types of Public Policy
1.6 Summary
1.7 References/Further Readings/Web Resources
1.8 Possible Answers to Self-Assessment Exercise(s) within the content

15
1.1 Introduction
The Administrator "makes his selections based on a straightforward picture of the
circumstance that takes into account a handful of the aspects that he considers to be the
most significant and important." The Administrator, as opposed to being an economic
guy who just maximizes and satisfies-interest in solutions that meet his problems, seeks
to maximize and fulfill all of his interests. This is also referred to as "bounded
rationality," because the extent of the administrator's knowledge, the information he can
gather at any given time, his values, skills, perception, and the amount of time he has
available for decision making all act as bounds, or limitations, on the administrator's
ability to make sound judgments.

1.2 Learning Outcomes


At the end of this unit you should be able to:
Itemize and discuss the Approaches to Public Policy in the Decision-Making Process
Explain the rational Comprehensive Approach
Discuss incremental Approach
Explain the decision making model
Discuss Mixed scanning Approaches
Itemize the stages of the Policy Making Process
Mention and briefly explain the Types of Public Policy

1.3 Approaches to Public Policy in the Decision-Making Process


1.3.1Rational Comprehensive Approach
The rational comprehensive approach can be seen in phases ranging from the
identification of the problem to the setting of goals and the gathering of information, a
search for alternative courses of action and a thorough investigation into each alternative
course of action, and finally the selection of the "rational" course of action as the best
course of action to take. On the basis of the limitations and constraints involved in
rational decision making, Simon (1976), as cited in Obikeze and Obi (2004: 123),
proposed a modified version of decision making known as the satisfying model. In this
model, the administrative man makes decisions that are satisfactory in order to solve the
problem that is currently being considered.
1.3.2 Incremental Approach
The aviator Charles Lindblomsaid that, there is a step-by-step approach to administrative
decision making, which he referred to as "Successive-Limited-Comparison." The
16
incrementalist approach holds the belief that choices are not made in the manner outlined
above. This strategy merely broadens or expands upon earlier selections that were made.
According to Obikeze and Obi (2004), a synopsis of the incremental theory is as follows:
"A policy is directed at a problem: it is tried, altered, tried in its altered form, altered
again, and so on." In a nutshell, the answer to any given problem is a series of
incremental measures that are implemented one after the other. The conclusion that can
be drawn from this is that incrementalist thinking entails making adjustments and
alterations to pre-existing programs. The approach does not lend support for fundamental
shifts in the way that the government runs its policies and programs. This helps to explain
why Dror (1968), as cited in Obikeze and Obi (2004), hypothesized that the model "fits
the needs of a stable society, because evolution leads to institutions that embody the
wisdom of generations and that should not be carelessly harmed." Incrementalism
emphasizes care in rejecting government policies (especially by new regimes), it
entrenches continuity in government policies, and it makes it simple for the governed to
be brought along because of the incremental character of government policies. On the
other hand, this method of formulating public policy has been attacked on the grounds
that it is insufficiently moderate and helps to preserve the status quo. It is also feasible to
argue that the paradigm is not fit for the developmental objectives of developing
economies, which require some fundamental reform. This line of reasoning requires some
dramatic transformation. As a method of explanation, incrementalism has failed to
adduce reasons behind unexpected shifts in government policy, and as a result, its
applications have been severely restricted. It's possible that an incremental approach to
decision making isn't necessary in today's dynamic environment, which is being driven
by the quick pace of technology progress and advancement.
The incrementalist strategy will just focus on those places in which comparable patterns
arose in the recent past and possibly on a few trouble locations, but the rational approach
may be excessively comprehensive. Etzioni proposed that mixed scanning could be
broken down into two levels, each with a different level of detail and coverage; the
decision regarding how the scanning process should be carried out in each level is based
on the amount of time and money that is available. He also canvassed that in utilizing
mixed scanning, it is essential to differentiate between fundamental decisions (requiring
the rational approach) and incremental decisions. The onus of evaluating the nature of
decision to be taken rests on the decision maker who should be able to identify/choose
the model that suits the situation.

1.3.3 A decision making model


As a decision making model, it attempts to rise to the inability of Incrementalism in
explaining radical changes in government policies. It also strives to accommodate the
divergent capacities of decision makers as rationalists and Incrementalists. However, as a
model, it is too conciliatory and compromising to the directed at a problem: it is tried,
altered, tried in its altered form, and altered again and so forth. In a nutshell, the answer
to any given problem is a series of incremental measures that are implemented one after

17
the other. The implication of this is that Incrementalism amounts to improvements and
modifications of existing policies. The approach does not lend support for fundamental
shifts in the way that the government runs its policies and programs. This helps to explain
why Dror (1968), as cited in Obikeze and Obi (2004: 124), hypothesized that the model
"fits the needs of a stable society, because evolution leads to institutions that embody the
wisdom of generations and that should not be carelessly harmed." Incrementalism
emphasizes care in rejecting government policies (especially by new regimes), it
entrenches continuity in government policies, and it makes it simple for the governed to
be brought along because of the incremental character of government policies. On the
other hand, this method of formulating public policy has been attacked on the grounds
that it is insufficiently moderate and helps to preserve the status quo. It is also feasible to
argue that the paradigm is not fit for the developmental objectives of developing
economies, which require some fundamental reform. This line of reasoning requires some
dramatic transformation. As a method of explanation, incrementalism has failed to
adduce reasons behind unexpected shifts in government policy, and as a result, its
applications have been severely restricted. It's possible that an incremental approach to
decision making isn't necessary in today's dynamic environment, which is being driven
by the quick pace of technology progress and advancement.
As a decision making model, it attempts to rise to the inability of Incrementalism in
explaining radical changes in government policies. It also strives to accommodate the
divergent capacities of decision makers as rationalists and Incrementalist. However, as a
model, it is too conciliatory and compromising to the Lack of well-defined programme
for attainment of goals; Choice of inappropriate organizational structure for
implementation of policies; lack of continuity in commitment to policy; lack of clear
definition or responsibility; political opposition during implementation; compromises
during implementation capable of defeating policy purposes; political insensitivity to
policy demands; (wrong) timing implementation; corruption; lack of adequate data for
decision making.
1.3.4 Mixed scanning Approaches
According to Etzioni (1974), mixed scanning is a combination of the rational
comprehensive model and the incremental model, it is not considered to be an innovative
theory of decision making. This is because the rational comprehensive model and the
incremental model are both based on rationality. Etzioni used an illustration of worldwide
weather observation using two cameras to explain this model. The first camera was a
wide-angle camera that would cover all parts of the sky but not in detail. The second
camera would zero in on those areas that were revealed by the first camera to require a
more in-depth examination.
Because Etzioni's mixed scanning is a combination of the rational comprehensive model
and the incremental model, it is not considered to be an innovative theory of decision
making. This is because the rational comprehensive model and the incremental model are
both based on rationality. Etzioni used an illustration of worldwide weather observation
using two cameras to explain this model. The first camera was a wide-angle camera that
would cover all parts of the sky but not in detail. The second camera would zero in on

18
those areas that were revealed by the first camera to require a more in-depth examination.
The rational approach could be too detailed, while the Incrementalist will merely focus
on those areas in which similar patterns developed in recent past and perhaps on a few
trouble spots.
Etzioni proposed that mixed scanning could be broken down into two levels, each with a
different level of detail and coverage; the decision regarding how the scanning process
should be carried out in each level is based on the amount of time and money that is
available. He also canvassed that in utilizing mixed scanning, it is essential to
differentiate between fundamental decisions (requiring the rational approach) and
incremental decisions. The onus of evaluating the nature of decision to be taken rests on
the decision maker who should be able to identify/choose the model that suits the
situation.
The role of public bureaucracy as civil and public servants in the public policy making
process (with respect to policy (input) formulation and as implementers) is not in dispute.
The two main ‗phases‘ of policy execution are Execution and Enforcement, which are
preceded by the two ‗phases‘ of policy making: Formulation and Implementation
(Fischer, 2003).
Self-Assessment Exercises 1
1. Explain the Role of Public Policy in the Decision-Making Process
2. Discuss the Step-By-Step Approach to Administrative Decision Making
Incremental Approach

1.4 Stages of the Policy Making Process


According to Lindblom (1990), there are three stages in the policy making process, they
are (a) Policy Formulation (b) Policy Implementation and (c) Policy Evaluation.
A. Policy Formulation
The process of policy formulation varies from society to society. In most democratic
societies today, the Judiciary and Legislature play a major role in the policy making
process.
Individuals and groups are getting more and more involved in decision making process. It
is this realization that has given rise to the concept of the pluralist theory of policy
formulation‖. Others have argued that instead of talking of pluralism, the dominant factor
is the elite. In other to balance the view of both the pluralist theory and the elite theory
Lindblom (1990), came out with what is called Partisan Mutual Adjustment, which
facilitates agreement among partisans on values and decisions. However in policy
formulation, public involvement is very important because it helps in the implementation
stage. People easily obey or accept polices they take part in formulating than those forced
on them.
Steps in Policy formulation process
Lindblom (1990) cited in: Musa, Ibrahim and Yakubu (2020), started that, following are
steps in Policy formulation process:

19
i. Identification of the problem: What is a policy problem, what makes it a policy
problem, how does it get on the agenda of the government?
ii. Development of alternative courses of action: How are alternatives for dealing with the
problem developed, who participates in policy formulation, what is the cost implication
of the proposed policy?
iii. Analysis of alternative: Where the alternatives are critical analyze for the best option.
iv. Selection of one alternative/policy choice for adoption: How are alternatives analyzed,
adopted and enacted, what requirements must be met?
B. Policy Implementation
This is the critical stage in policy making process as it determines the overview of the
quality of the decision made. This stage is very sensitive and subject to criticism. The
quality of a policy is determined by its implementation, and not how good it looks on
paper. The 6 – 3 – 3 – 4 policy on education looks so good on paper but how effective is
it since inception? In Nigeria, it is well known fact that, the ability to implement a policy
is a big problem. However, policy implementation centres on, who is involved, what is to
be done to carry policy into effect, what resources are available for policy
implementation, what impact does this have on policy content.
The following factors are considered when policies are to be implemented.
I. Clarity and Specificity of Policy: Before policies are adopted for implementation, the
intention of such policies would have been known clear and specific on a particular
sector, item or purpose. Any policy that is not clear, direct and specific in nature may be
rejected by the masses. The interest and opinion of the people have to be considered
before implementing such policy. The government should enlighten the people on public
policies in order to enlist their support and cooperation.
ii. Implementation Organization: Before embarking on Programme implementation
there is supposed to be an appraisal of the institutional capacity of the implementing
organization to know whether the policy can be implemented or not. Most government
policies are not properly implemented due to inadequate institutional capabilities which
need to be created or to upgrade the existing ones.
iii. Identification/Assessment of the Target Group: Every policy formulation has a
purpose and target group once this has been achieved, implementation of such policy
takes centre stage. For instance, if a group has an organized leadership, the government
may decide to penetrate the group through its leaders.
iv. The Environment: The environment where the policy is to be implemented must be
taken into consideration. Some salient features within the environment have to be
considered for the success and failure of the policies. In Nigeria, the enactment and
implementation of Sharia law was restricted to few states of the country because the
people‘s religion or way of life permits such policies. The peculiarities of each location
must be of much concern to the policy implementation team.
C. Policy Evaluation
Evaluation of policies can be done by the policy makers, the implementing organ,
members of the public and public policy analysts or experts. There are some good
techniques used in policy evaluation, these include the Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA), the

20
Cost Effectiveness Analysis (CEA), Management by Objectives (MBO), Programme
planning and Budgeting System (PPBS), Programme Evaluation and Review Technique
(PERT), and Zero Based Budgeting (ZBB).
Public Policy Implementation
According to Ogbu (2003), record has shown that, policy implementation is not as easy
as policy formulation. Sometimes, policies are made and dumped by the same
government, other times; policies that are made by one government are ignored and even
scrapped by a new government. This has far-reaching consequences for the social and
economic progress of a country, lack of continuity in policy implementation from one
government to another result in waste of valuable resources, and hampered services
delivery to the people (Ogbu, 2003). In Nigeria, lack of continuity in policy
implementation, unsuccessful implementation, or even non-implementation of policies
constitutes a great problem in the country‘s development programmes. From the First
National Development Plan to vision 20:2020 has faced serious challenges in their
implementation.
Ayo (2007) points out the reasons for implementation were to increase per capita income,
more even distribution of income, increase in the supply of high level manpower,
diversification of the economy, balanced development, and indigenization of economic
activities.
Implementation refers to the process of converting inputs - financial, information,
materials, technical, human, demands, support, etc., into outputs. This stage involves
translation of goals and objectives of a policy into concrete achievement through various
programmes (Egomnwan, 2000). George and Klauss in:Egonmwam (2000) see
implementation as the nemesis of designers; it conjures up images of plans gone awry
and of social carpenters and masons who fail to build to specification and thereby distort
the beautiful blueprints for progress which were handed to them. It provokes memories of
a good idea that did not work, but places the blame on others.
Self-Assessment Exercises 2
1. List the three stages in the policy making process
2. Explain the policy Implementation
1.5 Types of Public Policy
According to Dror (1968) identified types of Public Policy are:
Patronage/Promotional Policies: as those government actions that provide incentive for
individuals or corporations to undertake activities they would only reluctantly undertake
without the promise of a reward. These can be classified into three types: subsidies;
contracts; and licences.
Regulatory Policies:as those which allow the government to exert control over the
conduct of certain activities (‗negative forms of control‘). They include: environmental
pollution; civil & criminal penalties; consumption of tobacco, alcohol; consumer
protection; employee health and safety.
Redistributive Policies: as those which control people by managing the economy as a
whole. The techniques of control involve fiscal (tax) and monetary (supply of money)

21
policies. They tend to benefit one group at the expense of other groups through the
reallocation of wealth.
Liberal or Conservative Policies: Liberal policies are those in which the government is
used extensively to bring about social change, usually in the direction of ensuring greater
level of social equality. Conservative policies generally oppose the use of government to
bring about social change but may approve government action to preserve the status quo
or to promote favoured interests. Such as: Liberals tend to favour a concentration of
power in higher levels of government; whereas Conservatives tend to favour
decentralization of power and authority.
Substantive Policies:Substantive policies are concerned with governmental actions to
deal with substantive problems, such as highway construction; environmental protection;
payment of welfare benefits.
Procedural policies: are those that relate to how something is going to be done or who is
going to take action, such as the Administrative Procedures.
Material or Symbolic Policies: Material policies provide concrete re-sources or
substantive power to their beneficiaries, or, impose real disadvantages on those adversely
affected. For example, welfare payments; housing subsidies etc. Symbolic policies appeal
more to cherished values than to tangibles benefits; such as national holidays that honour
patriots, concerning the flag etc.
Collective or Private Goods Policies:Collective goods policies are those benefits that
cannot be given to some but denied to others, such as national defence and public safety.
Private goods policies are those goods that may be divided into units, and for which
consumers can be charged, such as food, trash collection, home security etc (Musa,
Ibrahim and Shehu, 2020)

1.6 Summary
This unit sees the role of Public Policy in the Decision-Making Process to includes; The
rational comprehensive approach can be seen in phases ranging from the identification of
the problem to the setting of goals and the gathering of information, a search for
alternative courses of action and a thorough investigation into each alternative course of
action, and finally the selection of the "rational" course of action as the best course of
action to take
The incrementalist approach holds the belief that choices are not made in the manner
outlined above because Etzioni's mixed scanning is a combination of the rational
comprehensive model and the incremental model, it is not considered to be an innovative
theory of decision making. This is because the rational comprehensive model and the
incremental model are both based on rationality
Stages of the Policy Making Process
There are three stages in the policy making process, they are (a) Policy Formulation (b)
Policy Implementation and (c) Policy Evaluation
Steps in Policy formulation process
The following are steps in Policy formulation process:
22
i. Identification of the problem: What is a policy problem, what makes it a policy
problem, how does it get on the agenda of the government?
ii. Development of alternative courses of action: How are alternatives for dealing with the
problem developed, who participates in policy formulation, what is the cost implication
of the proposed policy?
iii. Analysis of alternative: Where the alternatives are critical analyze for the best option.
iv. Selection of one alternative/policy choice for adoption: How are alternatives analyzed,
adopted and enacted, what requirements must be met?
Public Policy Implementation
Ayo (2007) points out the reasons for implementation were to increase per capita income,
more even distribution of income, increase in the supply of high level manpower,
diversification of the economy, balanced development, and indigenization of economic
activities.
Implementation refers to the process of converting inputs - financial, information,
materials, technical, human, demands, support, etc., into outputs. This stage involves
translation of goals and objectives of a policy into concrete achievement through various
programmes (Egomnwan, 2000)
Types of Public Policy
Patronage/Promotional Policies
Regulatory Policies:
Redistributive Policies:
Liberal or Conservative Policies:

1.7 References/Further Readings/Web Resources


Ayo, F. S. (2007). Extreme Poverty and Hunger.Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/. Accessed on 21/08/2022
Dror, Y. (1968). Public Policy- Making.Pennsylvania: Shandler Chapter 1 & 2.
Etzioni, A. (1974). Public Policy Processes. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Fischer, F. (2003).Reframing Public Policy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
George H. & Rudi, K. (2000). Public Policy Analysis, Concept and Applications; Benin,
Resyin (Nig) Company
Ikelegbe, A. O. (1996). Public policy making and analysis, Benin; Uri publishing Ltd.
Lindblom, C. E. (1990). The science of muddling through; public administration review.
London. McMillian publishers.
Musa, Z. Ibrahim I. S. Yakubu S. I. (2020).An Introduction to Public Policy Analysis and
Administration; Germany.LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing.
Obikeze, O. S. and Obi, E. A., (2004).Public administration in Nigeria: a developmental
approach. Onisha. Book points Ltd.

23
Ogbu, S. (2003). Public Policy Making and implementation: The Petroleum Trust Fund
(PTF) of Nigeria in perspective. Abuja Management Review (AMR). Vol. 1
issues No. 1 March 2003.
Simon A. H. (1946), Approaches to public administration, book of the half century 4th
edition.

1.8 Possible Answers to SAEs


Answers to SAEs 1
1. the role of Public Policy in the Decision-Making Process to includes; The rational
comprehensive approach can be seen in phases ranging from the identification of the
problem to the setting of goals and the gathering of information, a search for
alternative courses of action and a thorough investigation into each alternative course
of action, and finally the selection of the "rational" course of action as the best course
of action to take. The incrementalist approach holds the belief that choices are not
made in the manner outlined above. Because Etzioni's mixed scanning is a
combination of the rational comprehensive model and the incremental model, it is not
considered to be an innovative theory of decision making. This is because the rational
comprehensive model and the incremental model are both based on rationality
2. Stages of the Policy Making Process. There are three stages in the policy making
process, they are (a) Policy Formulation (b) Policy Implementation and (c) Policy
Evaluation
Answers to SAEs 2
1. Steps in Policy formulation process
The following are steps in Policy formulation process:
i. Identification of the problem: What is a policy problem, what makes it a policy
problem, how does it get on the agenda of the government?
ii. Development of alternative courses of action: How are alternatives for dealing with
the problem developed, who participates in policy formulation, what is the cost
implication of the proposed policy?
iii. Analysis of alternative: Where the alternatives are critical analyze for the best option.
iv. Selection of one alternative/policy choice for adoption: How are alternatives
analyzed, adopted and enacted, what requirements must be met?
2. Ayo (2007) points out the reasons for implementation were to increase per capita
income, more even distribution of income, increase in the supply of high level
manpower, diversification of the economy, balanced development, and indigenization
of economic activities. Implementation refers to the process of converting inputs -
financial, information, materials, technical, human, demands, support, etc., into
outputs. This stage involves translation of goals and objectives of a policy into
concrete achievement through various programmes (Egomnwan, 2000).

24
Unit 3: Models of Public Policy Analysis I
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Learning Outcomes
1.3 Eastonian‘s Model of policy-making Process
1.3.1 Limitations of Eastonian‘s Model of policy-making Process
1.3.2 Application of Eastonian‘s Model of policy-making Process
1.3.3 Application of Eastonian‘s Model of policy-making Process
1.4 Institutional model of public policy
1.4.1 What is institutional model/approach
1.4.2 Application of Institutional model of public policy
1.5 Model of Rational Policy Making
1.6 Rationality Constraints
1.7 The Lindmom Incremental Model
1.7.1 Characteristics of Incremental Decision-Making
1.8 Summary
1.9 References/Further Readings/Web Resources
1.10 Possible Answers to Self-Assessment Exercise(s) within the content

1.1 Introduction
Models and frames that form and provide context for analysis discourse originally
appeared in the 1970s and 1980s. They were viewed as problem-solving strategies that
provided structure and coherence. A model is the concept of drawing a line around reality
that is shared by a group of academics or theorists. When studying public policy, we must
be aware of how many different models of analysis exist to define and explain situations,
as well as how these models clash and shift: We will explore at some of the models that
analysts employ in this Unit. The paradigm for policy analysis will be examined in this
unit.

1.2 Learning Outcomes


At the end of this unit, you should be able to:
i. Explain the Eastonian‘s Model of policy-making Process
ii. State the limitations of Eastonian‘s Model of policy-making Process
iii. Explain the application of Eastonian‘s Model of policy-making Process
iv. State the application of Eastonian‘s Model of policy-making Process
v. Discuss the institutional model of public policy
vi. Define and explain the institutional model/approach
vii. Explain the application of Institutional model of public policy
viii. Discuss the model of Rational Policy Making
ix. Explain the Rationality Constraints
25
x. State the Lindmom Incremental Model
xi. State characteristics of Incremental Decision-Making

1.3 Models of Public Policy Analysis


1.3.1 Eastonian’s Model of policy-making Process
David Easton has described the policy-making process as a "black box" that translates
societal demands into policies. In his analysis of political systems, David Easton contends
that the political system is that component of society that is engaged in the authoritative
distribution of 'values.
Political analysis takes a systems perspective.
The intra-societal setting: The environment outside of society:
1. International political systems ecological systems
2. International ecological systems biological systems
3. International social systems
4. Personality system social structure
An example of what Easton refers to as an apolitical system. The physical, social,
economic, and political products of the environment are referred to as inputs. They are
accepted into the political system as both demands and supports.
Individuals and groups make demands on the political system in order to change some
aspect of the environment. Demands occur when individuals or groups act to affect public
policy in reaction to environmental conditions.
The environment is any circumstance or incident that is defined as occurring outside of
the political system's borders. The rules, laws, and practices that create the foundation for
the existence of the apolitical community and the authorities are the supports of the
apolitical system. Individuals or groups provide support when they accept decisions or
laws. Supports are a system's symbolic or material inputs (such as observing laws, paying
taxes, or even respecting the national flag) that represent the system's psychological and
material resources.
The structures and persons for policymaking are at the heart of the political system.
These individuals include the president, legislators, judges, and bureaucrats. They
translate inputs into outputs in the system's version. The authoritative value allocations of
the political system are thus outputs, and these allocations constitute public policy or
policies. According to systems theory, public policy is an output of the political system.
The concept of feedback implies that public policies can have an impact on the
environment and the demands generated by it, as well as the character of the political
system. Policy outcomes may result in new demands and new supports for the system, as
well as the withdrawal of old supports. Feedback is critical in creating an appropriate
climate for future policy.
1.3.2 Limitations of Eastonian’s Model of policy-making Process

26
The systems theory can help you comprehend the policy-making process. According to
Thomas Dye (Understanding Public Policy), the importance of the systems model to
policy study rests in the issues it raises. They are as follows:
i. What are the key environmental characteristics that place demands on the political
system?
ii. What are the key qualities of the political system that allow it to translate demands
into public policy and sustain itself over time?
iii. How do environmental inputs influence the character of the political system? iv.
How do political system features influence the content of public policy?
v. How do environmental inputs influence public policy content?
vi. How does public policy alter the environment and the character of the political
system through feedback?
However, the systems model's applicability to the study of public policy is limited due to
a number of variables. This input-output model appears to be too basic to be effective in
comprehending the policy-making process, according to critics. This model is accused of
adopting welfare economics' value-laden techniques, which help is based on the
maximization of a clearly defined social welfare function.' Another flaw of the classic
input-output paradigm is that it fails to account for the fragmentary nature of the 'black
box.' The "power, personnel, and institutions" of policy-making are the missing
ingredients in the systems approach. Line Berry observes that in evaluating them, "we
will not forget that political decision-makers in the political system are significantly
restricted by economic considerations in the environment."
The Estonian model also misses a key aspect of the policy process, namely, that
policymakers (including institutions) have significant influence over the environment in
which they operate. According to the standard input-output model, the decision-making
system is "facilitative" and value-free rather than "causative," i.e., a wholly neutral
structure.
In other words, structural differences in the systems are discovered to have no direct
causal effect on public policy.
Furthermore, it is suggested that the political and bureaucratic elites shape public opinion
more than the public does. To demonstrate this argument, the concept of "inside puts" as
opposed to "inputs" was developed. Thus, policy changes may be linked to the political
and administrative elite's redefining of their own beliefs rather than to environmental
needs and support. Quite often, policy is initiated by the bureaucracy.
1.3.3 Application of Eastonian’s Model of policy-making Process
In some cases, the bureaucracy can become a dominant institution in designing and
legitimizing policies. The function of bureaucracy in dictating policy direction in Western
democracies is mostly technical and rather minor. The traditional sphere of the political
elite continues to dominate policy decisions. In contrast, in a developing country such as
India, where state objectives are not completely specified and obvious, the bureaucracy
easily capitalizes on the process of policy selection from alternative policy alternatives.
In addition to executing strictly technical responsibilities, it participates in the creation of
public policy. Finally, the extent to which the environment is claimed to have an

27
influence on the policy-making process is determined by the beliefs and ideologies held
by the system's decision-makers. It implies that policymaking entails not only policy
content but also the policymaker's perceptions and attitudes.
Policymakers' values are basically thought to be critical in understanding the policy
alternatives that are proposed.
1.4 institutional model of public policy
In a democratic society, a state is a web of government institutions and organizations.
The stale is capable of doing anything. It aims to reconcile clashing social and
commercial interests.
The good attitude is regarded as the community's guardian. It does not defend the
superiority of any single class or division. It should, ideally, protect everyone's economic
interests by accommodating and reconciling them. No organization has ever been able to
fulfill its objectives across the entire spectrum of public policies, and policy issues are
typically addressed in ways that are largely consistent with the preferences of the
majority of the public.

The institutional approach looks into the relationship between public policy and
governmental institutions. With its emphasis on the legal and structural elements of
institutions, institutionalism can be utilized to study policy. Structures and institutions'
arrangements and interactions can have a significant impact on public policy. According
to Thomas Dye, government institutions are established patterns of conduct of individuals
and groups that persist across time.
Historically, the description of governmental structures and institutions has been the
focus of research.
The method, however, did not pay sufficient attention to the links between government
institutions and the content of public policy. To support the institutional perspective,
there was no systematic examination of the impact of these institutional qualities on
public policy decisions.
As a result, the relationship between government architecture and policy outcomes has
largely gone unstudied and unnoticed.
Despite its narrow focus, the structural method is not out of date. In reality, government
institutions are a collection of individual and group behavioral patterns. These have an
impact on both decision-making and public policy content. Government institutions,
according to the institutional approach, can be designed in such a way that specific policy
outcomes are supported. These patterns may give certain societal interests an advantage
while depriving others of an advantage. Rules and institutional institutions rarely have a
neutral impact. In truth, they choose certain society interests over others. As a result,
under one set of organized patterns, certain individual groups may have greater authority
or access to government power than others. In other words, "institutional characteristics
influence policy outcomes."
1.4.1 What is institutional model/approach

28
The institutional approach can be used to study the connections between institutional
structures and public policy content. Policy issues must be investigated methodically,
with a focus on institutional arrangements.
The institutional approach to policy analysis provides value by investigating and
analyzing the links that exist between institutional structures and the content of public
policy. However, assuming that a certain change in institutional structure will result in
changes in public policy is erroneous. Without first examining the relationship between
structure and policy, it is hard to assess the impact of institutional arrangements on public
policies. In this context, "both structure and policy are largely determined by
environmental forces," according to Thomas Dye, and "tinkering with institutional
arrangements will have little independent impact on public policy if underlying
environmental forces - social, economic, and political - remain constant."
1.4.2 Application of Institutional model of public policy
Individuals and groups' activities in a pluralistic society are largely directed towards
governmental institutions such as the legislature, executive, judiciary, and bureaucracy.
Governmental agencies create, execute, and enforce public policy. To put it another way,
a policy does not become public until it is adopted and implemented by government
institutions. Government institutions attribute three main characteristics to public policy.
For starters, government policies are legally sanctioned. Public policy is the product of
individual decisions and is distinguished by the use of legal penalties. It is seen as a legal
obligation that must be followed. Second, public policy is widely applied. Only public
policies benefit all residents of the state. Finally, government policies imply coercion. It
is used to support the actions of the government. A policy provides the appearance that
the government is capable of imposing sanctions through coercion of the type usually
reserved for the government itself. Only the government has the legal authority to impose
penalties on policy violators.
Individuals and groups generally attempt to get their preferences turned into laws because
the government has the ability to impose the allegiance of its whole population, to design
policies that dominate the entire country, and to monopolize coercion.
As a result, public policy and government institutions are inextricably linked. So it's not
surprising that social scientists focus their research on governmental structures and
institutions. Institutional analysis has become a key focus of public policy. As a result,
one model of the policy-making system is known as the institutional approach since it is
based on the interactions of institutions established by the constitution, government, or
legislature.
In policymaking, several individuals and groups exercise authority, such as the Executive
or Cabinet, Members of Parliament, bureaucrats, or leaders of interested groups. Each
exercise of power is one of the influences that impact policymaking. To put it another
way, public policy is enacted through a process. In general, the process comprises of a
sequence of related decisions made under the influence of powerful persons and groups
that collectively build what are known as state institutions. The institutional approach
also aims to explain how social groups and governmental institutions exert power over
individuals who have the authority to make and implement legally binding decisions.

29
Such decision makers include those who hold office under the official and constitutional
set of rules and regulations that confer formal authority and power to various positions
within governmental structures and organizations
Self-Assessment Exercise 1
i. Explain the Eastonian‘s Model of policy-making Process
ii. State the limitations of Eastonian‘s Model of policy-making Process
iii. Explain the application of Eastonian‘s Model of policy-making Process
iv. State the application of Eastonian‘s Model of policy-making Process

1.5 Model of Rational Policy Making


Rationality and rationalism are terms that appear and are used far too frequently in social
science literature. Both are more widely advocated than applied in policy-making.
However, in policymaking, rationality is seen as the "yardstick of wisdom": This
approach emphasizes that policymaking is a logical decision among policy alternatives.
The goal of rational policymaking is to "choose the best choice." According to Robert
Haveman, a rational policy is one that is meant to maximize " (value achievement)." Dye
connects reason and efficiency.
"A policy is rational when it is most efficient, that is, when the ratio between the values it
obtains and the values it sacrifices is positive and greater than any other policy
alternative," he writes. He goes on to add that efficiency entails calculating all social,
political, and economic values sacrificed or attained by a public policy, not only those
that can be assessed in monetary terms.
As a result, political policymakers must be sensible. But that is not simple. To be rational,
the following steps should be taken: I goal identification and determination; ii) goal
ranking in order of significance; iii) identification of feasible policy choices for
accomplishing those goals; and iv) cost-benefit analysis of policy alternatives.
A rational policymaker must: I understand all of society's value preferences and their
relative weights; ii) clarify and rank the goals and objectives; iii) understand all of the
policy alternatives available; iv) compare the consequences of each policy alternative; V)
calculate the ratio of achieved to sacrificed societal values for each policy alternative; and
vi) select the most efficient policy alternative that matches the goals.
Instead of making a 'perfect' decision, as Simon remarks, policymakers would divide the
complexity of situations into tiny and understandable bits; choose the best and most
agreeable option; and minimize unneeded uncertainty. "Although individuals are
designed to be rational, their rationality is limited by limited cognitive and emotional
capacities," Herbert Simon adds.
Thus, rational policymaking necessitates making difficult decisions amongst policy
alternatives. It has several stages:
First, the policymaker recognizes the underlying issue. He develops and prioritizes goals,
which is vital because one aim may be more significant than another.
ii) In the second stage, the policymaker identifies the range of policy alternatives and
options that contribute to the achievement of the goals. He creates a comprehensive set of
30
potential policies and resources, with weights assigned to each. The process of finding
policy alternatives is crucial because it influences both the range and quality of options.
iii) The third step necessitates the estimation of the costs and benefits of policy solutions.
The policymaker must calculate the probability that each policy alternative will achieve
the goal as well as the cost of doing so. It is necessary to calculate the "cost-payoff" ratios
of each alternative in this case.
iv) In addition to calculating net expectation for each alternative, the policymaker must
compare the alternatives with the greatest advantages. It is feasible that by comparing two
options, one can obtain the benefits at a lower cost.
Finally, the policymaker chooses the most efficient policy option.
Once a policy option is implemented, the rational policymaker must monitor it
systematically to determine the correctness of the expectations and estimations. If
necessary, the policymaker may amend the policy or abandon it entirely. This is referred
to as the "feedback stage" of rational policymaking. When policymakers employ input to
monitor and adjust policy, the policy system becomes self-correcting or cybernetic.

1.6.1 Rationality Constraints


Many restrictions impede rational decision-making. The term "rationality" is used so
frequently and indiscriminately that it threatens to lose its meaning. It is more commonly
advocated than performed. Some of the major obstacles to rational policymaking are as
follows:
I Achieving Objectives
Making rational policy is a difficult task. It is unlikely that a logical policy will emerge.
By the time a policymaker suggests a sensible policy, the problem at hand may have
gotten so complex that the prescriptions become decisions based on other goals.
Decision-makers may instead seek to maximize their personal incentives, such as power,
status, money, and re-election. As a result, sensible policy-making may turn out to be
more of an exercise than the actual achievement of a set of goals.
Attempts at rationality, on the other hand, serve some useful objectives. Rationality is
similar to democracy.
"As democracy is the measuring rod of virtue in a political system, so too is rationality,
presumably the yardstick of wisdom in policy-making," explains Line Berry in this
context.
ii) Optimization Security
The rational policy-making model should yield optimal results. However, this does not
always occur. The public interest is regarded as more important than the sum of
individual interests in the policy. If air pollution management is a public interest since
everyone benefits from it, then the plan may mandate that every automobile sold be
outfitted with an expensive set of anti-pollution emission control systems, increasing the
cost of the vehicle. However, few people are ready to spend more of their own money to
minimize automotive emissions. If pollution prevention is a public good, which is an
individual's decision, then others should, too often, be guided by the same rational
perspective when making individual judgments. Contrary to this, many of them operate

31
under the idea that "everyone else is doing it, and my small bit won't really mean much."
As a result, there is no incentive for policymakers to aim to maximize net objective
achievement. Furthermore, government policymakers only aim to meet specific demands
for advancement. They do not search until they find the one and only ideal way.
iii) Disagreement between Rational Choice and the Need for Action
The desire for reasonable behavior and the demand for action are at odds. As previously
stated, policymakers are not motivated to make judgments based on logic, but rather to
maximize their personal rewards, such as power, status, and money. Second, the time for
a full examination of pending legislation may be limited. In an emergency, immediate
action is required. Both times are too short for a thorough examination. In everyday
policymaking, the sheer number of potential concerns restricts the time available to
thoroughly examine any one subject.
There is also disagreement about the societal ideals themselves. Because of the existence
of various opposing values among distinct groups and individuals, policymakers find it
difficult to compare and weigh them.
Iv) Political Feasibility Dilemma
Every policymaker faces the challenge of political feasibility concern. Political feasibility
is defined as "the likelihood that a policy alternative, however rational and desirable,
would be chosen and implemented by the political system." Politicians all too often avoid
conflict in order to address the challenge of political feasibility. Uncertainty regarding the
repercussions of various policy options may also compel governments to continue with
earlier policies. Elected politicians do not want to jeopardize their chances of re-election
by sacrificing policy logic. In the context of political expenses, decision postponement or
other dilatation methods are popular ways to avoid a sensible conclusion. As a result,
political leaders frequently weigh intellectual decision against political feasibility.
v) Cost-Benefit Analysis Issue
When many different social, economic, political, and cultural values are at risk, it is
difficult for policymakers to compute precise cost-benefit ratios. Aside from this,
policymakers have personal wants, inhibitions, and inadequacies that prevent them from
evaluating alternatives and making sensible decisions.
Rational policymaking necessitates making difficult choices between policy alternatives.
However, there are various limits in acquiring the amount of knowledge needed to be
aware of all conceivable policy alternatives and their repercussions, including the time
and expense associated in information gathering.
vi) Bureaucracy's Nature and Environment
The climate of bureaucracy is another significant impediment to rational policymaking.
"The segmented character of policy-making in vast bureaucracies makes it difficult to
coordinate decision-making so that the input of all of the numerous specialists is brought
to bear at the point of decision," observed Thomas Dye. Bureaucracies and other public
institutions' ability to make reasonable policies is restricted by fragmentation of authority,
appeasing personal gods, conflicting ideals, limited technology, ambiguity about possible
policy choices and repercussions, and other issues. Some policy analysts warn against
putting too much faith in the rational model. Patton and Sawicki, for example, contend

32
that "if the rational model were to be followed, many sensible conclusions would have to
be compromised because they were not politically practicable." A policy that is rational,
logical, and technically desirable may not be implemented because the political system
will not accept it. Statistics do not always speak for themselves, and excellent ideas do
not always triumph.
Analysts and decision-makers are continuously confronted with a choice between
technically better and politically viable alternatives."
Following the rational approach by analyzing facts, presenting choices, and selecting the
option with the highest utility weight is frequently undemocratic. Policy analysts,
according to Denhardt, often apply technical answers to pressing difficulties, and "under
such conditions, technical considerations would supersede political and ethical concerns
as the basis for public decision making, therefore changing normative issues into
technical problems." Even minor issues, such as the relocation of a small-&ale business
from New Delhi's capital, are rarely resolved because the people concerned will not
accept a technical solution. Politicians and pressure organizations will intercede unless a
conclusion is imposed, which is frequently undemocratic.
It stands to reason that the rational policy-making paradigm establishes both naive and
utopian aims and methods. It appears that intelligent policymaking is a challenging task.
Some decision-making theorists, and arguably the majority of policymakers, feel that
rational policy-making is impossible. Nonetheless, this paradigm is crucial for analytic
purposes because it aids in identifying rationality limits.
Herbert Simon observes that policymakers "satisfy" rather than "optimize." A "good"
decision will suffice for him, even if it is not the optimal decision. A reasonable decision
requires clear and well-defined goals, as well as adequate authority to coordinate action.
The private organization is a profit-maximizing mechanism that single-mindedly pursues
its purpose, whereas public organizations frequently lack goal specificity.

1.7 The Lindmom Incremental Model


Charles Lindblom proposed the 'incremental model of the policy-making process' as an
alternative to the classic rational model of decision-making. In the development of policy
analysis as concerned with the "process" of generating policy, his article on the "Science
of Muddling Through," published in 1959, earned great acclaim. Lindblom's thinking has
progressed beyond his original thesis since then.
Lindblorn rejects the assumption that decision-making is mainly about identifying goals,
selecting alternatives, and comparing alternatives when he criticizes the rational model
proposed by Simon and others. Lindblom wishes to demonstrate that rational decision-
making is "not practical for complex policy concerns." According to Lindblom,
policymakers are unable to establish society goals and their effects in a reasonable
manner due to limits in time, intelligence, money, and politics. He distinguished between
Simon's advocated comprehensive (or root) reasoning and his own'successive restricted
comparisons' (or branch decision-making).
The incremental decision-making strategy (branch method) entails a process of
"continually building out from the current situation, step by step and by modest degrees."

33
The policy analysts preferred the 'root' method, which was to start from "fun amentals
anew each time, building on the past only as experience embodied in a theory, and
always prepared to start from the ground up time, intelligence, and cost limits.
According to Lindblom, prevent policymakers from discovering the full range of policy
possibilities and their implications. In such a state of "bounded rationality," he proposes
that "successive limited comparison" is both more relevant and more feasible.
1.7.1 Characteristics of Incremental Decision-Making
The following characteristics characterize muddling through decision-making. It will first
go through a series of modest adjustments. Because of the ambiguity regarding the
repercussions of new or different policies, policymakers accept the validity of existing
policies.
It entails reciprocal adaptation and negotiation. Instead of goal achievement, consensus is
the litmus test for a good decision. When the subject under contention involves budget
increases or cutbacks or changes to current programs, reaching an agreement is easier. As
a result, instrumentalism plays an important role in decreasing political tension and
ensuring stability.
Finally, the incremental technique employs the trial and error method. It is superior than a
"futile attempt at superhuman thoroughness." Humans rarely behave to maximize all of
their values; rather, they act to meet specific demands. They rarely look for the "one best
approach," but rather for "a way that will work." This search frequently begins with the
familiar, that is, with policy options that are similar to current policies. Incrementalism is
thus more satisfactory from a theoretical standpoint, scoring high on criteria such as
coherence and simplicity.
Self-Assessment Exercises 2
i. Discuss the institutional model of public policy
ii. Define and explain the institutional model/approach
iii. Explain the application of Institutional model of public policy
iv. Discuss the model of Rational Policy Making
v. Explain the Rationality Constraints
vi. State the Lindmom Incremental Model
vii. State characteristics of Incremental Decision-Making

1.6 Summary
Models of Public Policy Analysis include; David Easton who described the policy-
making process as a "black box" that translates societal demands into policies. In his
analysis of political systems, David Easton contends that the political system is that
component of society that is engaged in the authoritative distribution of 'values
The systems theory can help you comprehend the policy-making process. According to
Thomas Dye (Understanding Public Policy), the importance of the systems model to
policy study rests in the issues it raises. They are as follows:
34
i. What are the key environmental characteristics that place demands on the political
system?
ii. What are the key qualities of the political system that allow it to translate demands
into public policy and sustain itself over time?
In some cases, the bureaucracy can become a dominant institution in designing and
legitimizing policies. The function of bureaucracy in dictating policy direction in Western
democracies is mostly technical and rather minor. The traditional sphere of the political
elite continues to dominate policy decisions.
In a democratic society, a state is a web of government institutions and organizations.
The stale is capable of doing anything. It aims to reconcile clashing social and
commercial interests
The institutional approach can be used to study the connections between institutional
structures and public policy content. Policy issues must be investigated methodically,
with a focus on institutional arrangements

Individuals and groups' activities in a pluralistic society are largely directed towards
governmental institutions such as the legislature, executive, judiciary, and bureaucracy.
Governmental agencies create, execute, and enforce public policy.
Rationality and rationalism are terms that appear and are used far too frequently in social
science literature. Both are more widely advocated than applied in policy-making.
However, in policymaking, rationality is seen as the "yardstick of wisdom": This
approach emphasizes that policymaking is a logical decision among policy alternatives
Many restrictions impede rational decision-making. The term "rationality" is used so
frequently and indiscriminately that it threatens to lose its meaning. It is more commonly
advocated than performed.
Making rational policy is a difficult task. It is unlikely that a logical policy will emerge.
By the time a policymaker suggests a sensible policy, the problem at hand may have
gotten so complex that the prescriptions become decisions based on other goals.
Decision-makers may instead seek to maximize their personal incentives, such as power,
status, money, and re-election. As a result, sensible policy-making may turn out to be
more of an exercise than the actual achievement of a set of goals
Charles Lindblom proposed the 'incremental model of the policy-making process' as an
alternative to the classic rational model of decision-making. In the development of policy
analysis as concerned with the "process" of generating policy, his article on the "Science
of Muddling Through," published in 1959, earned great acclaim. Lindblom's thinking has
progressed beyond his original thesis since then.
Lindblorn rejects the assumption that decision-making is mainly about identifying goals,
selecting alternatives, and comparing alternatives when he criticizes the rational model
proposed by Simon and others. Lindblom wishes to demonstrate that rational decision-
making is "not practical for complex policy concerns
The following characteristics characterize muddling through decision-making. It will first
go through a series of modest adjustments. Because of the ambiguity regarding the

35
repercussions of new or different policies, policymakers accept the validity of existing
policies.
It entails reciprocal adaptation and negotiation. Instead of goal achievement, consensus is
the litmus test for a good decision. When the subject under contention involves budget
increases or cutbacks or changes to current programs, reaching an agreement is easier. As
a result, instrumentalism plays an important role in decreasing political tension and
ensuring stability

1.7 References/Further Readings/Web Resources


Anderson, J. E., (1984), Public Policy-Making, CBS CoIlegePublisl-ting, New York.
David, B. and Lindblom, C. E. (1963) ,A Strategy of Decision, Free Press, New, York.
Peter, D. (1977), Democracy and the Policy Sciences, Suny Press, Albany.
Dror, Y. (1964). Muddling through - science or inertia?" , Public Administration Review,
Vol. 24.
Dros, Y., (1989), Public Policy-Making Re-examined, Transaction Publishers, New
Bmnswick.
Dror, Y. (1968), Public-Making Re-Examined, In-text, New York.
Dye, Thomas R. and V. Gray (Eds.), 1980, TheDeterminants of Public Policy, Heath,
Toronto.
Dye, Thomas R., (1980), Understanding Public Policy, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs.
Easton, D. (1965). A Framework for Political Analysis, N.J. Prentice Hall, Englewood
Cliffs.
Easton, David, E. (1957). "An approach to the Analysis of Political Systems", World
Politics, Vol. 9, April
Etzioni, A. (1967). Mixed Scanning : A 'third' approach to Decision-Making", Public
administration Review, Vol. 27,.
Hogwood, B. and Lewis Gunn, L. (1984), Policy Analysis for the Real World, Oxford
University Press, Oxford.
Huitt, R., (1993). "Political Feasibility", Austin Ranney (Ed.), Political Science and
Public Policy, Markham, Chicago. Indira Gandhi National Open University, BDP
Course Material, EPA.06 Public Policy, Block No.8 Models of Public Policy-
Making.
Lindblom, C. (1968). The Policy-Making Process, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs.
Lindblom C. ((1968). "The Science of Muddling through "Public Administration
Review, Vol, 19
Lindblom, C. (1965), The Intelligence of Democracy, Free Press, New York .
Lindblom, C. (1977), Politics and Markets, Basic Books, New York .
Lindblom, C. (1979). "Still Muddling Through Not yet There", Public Administration
Review, Vol. 39, 1979.

36
Lindblom, C. (1988), Democracy and Market System, Norwegian University Press, Oslo.
1
Ljndblom, C. and Woodhouse, E.J. (1993).The Policy-Making Process, Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs.
Lineberry, R. L., (1984), American Public Policy: What Government does and What
difference it Makes, Marcel Dekker, New York.
Lynn, Laurence, (1987), Managing Public Policy, Little Brown, Boston.
Pattpn, C. V. and David S. S., (1986). Basic Methods of Policy Analysis and planning,
Prentice-Hall, Englwood Cliffs.
Allen, P. and Springer, F. (1989), Policy Research: Concepts, Methods and
Appreciations, Prentice-Qall, EngIewood Cliffs.

Simon, H. (1955), "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice", Quarterly Journal of


.Economics, Vol. 69.
Simon, H. (1957), Administrative Behaviour, Macmillan, London.
Subramanyam,V. and Jaon A. (2000), The Comparative Public Policy Reader, Ajanta,
Delhi.

1.8 Possible Answers to SAEs


Self-Assessment Exercise 1
1. Eastonian’s Model of policy-making Process

David Easton has described the policy-making process as a "black box" that translates
societal demands into policies. In his analysis of political systems, David Easton contends
that the political system is that component of society that is engaged in the authoritative
distribution of 'values
2. Limitations of Eastonian’s Model of policy-making Process

The systems theory can help you comprehend the policy-making process. According to
Thomas Dye (Understanding Public Policy), the importance of the systems model to
policy study rests in the issues it raises. They are as follows:
i. What are the key environmental characteristics that place demands on the political
system?
ii. What are the key qualities of the political system that allow it to translate demands
into public policy and sustain itself over time?
3. Application of Eastonian’s Model of policy-making Process

In some cases, the bureaucracy can become a dominant institution in designing and
legitimizing policies. The function of bureaucracy in dictating policy direction in Western

37
democracies is mostly technical and rather minor. The traditional sphere of the political
elite continues to dominate policy decisions.
4. institutional model of public policy
In a democratic society, a state is a web of government institutions and organizations.
The stale is capable of doing anything. It aims to reconcile clashing social and
commercial interests
The institutional approach can be used to study the connections between institutional
structures and public policy content. Policy issues must be investigated methodically,
with a focus on institutional arrangements
5. Application of Institutional model of public policy
Individuals and groups' activities in a pluralistic society are largely directed towards
governmental institutions such as the legislature, executive, judiciary, and bureaucracy.
Governmental agencies create, execute, and enforce public policy.

Self-Assessment Exercise 2

1. Model of Rational Policy Making


Rationality and rationalism are terms that appear and are used far too frequently in social
science literature. Both are more widely advocated than applied in policy-making.
However, in policymaking, rationality is seen as the "yardstick of wisdom": This
approach emphasizes that policymaking is a logical decision among policy alternatives
2. Rationality Constraints
Many restrictions impede rational decision-making. The term "rationality" is used so
frequently and indiscriminately that it threatens to lose its meaning. It is more commonly
advocated than performed. Some of the major obstacles to rational policymaking are as
follows:
I Achieving Objectives
Making rational policy is a difficult task. It is unlikely that a logical policy will emerge.
By the time a policymaker suggests a sensible policy, the problem at hand may have
gotten so complex that the prescriptions become decisions based on other goals.
Decision-makers may instead seek to maximize their personal incentives, such as power,
status, money, and re-election. As a result, sensible policy-making may turn out to be
more of an exercise than the actual achievement of a set of goals
3 The Lindmom Incremental Model
Charles Lindblom proposed the 'incremental model of the policy-making process' as an
alternative to the classic rational model of decision-making. In the development of policy
analysis as concerned with the "process" of generating policy, his article on the "Science
of Muddling Through," published in 1959, earned great acclaim. Lindblom's thinking has
progressed beyond his original thesis since then.
Lindblorn rejects the assumption that decision-making is mainly about identifying goals,
selecting alternatives, and comparing alternatives when he criticizes the rational model
proposed by Simon and others. Lindblom wishes to demonstrate that rational decision-
making is "not practical for complex policy concerns

38
4 Characteristics of Incremental Decision-Making
The following characteristics characterize muddling through decision-making. It will first
go through a series of modest adjustments. Because of the ambiguity regarding the
repercussions of new or different policies, policymakers accept the validity of existing
policies.
It entails reciprocal adaptation and negotiation. Instead of goal achievement, consensus is
the litmus test for a good decision. When the subject under contention involves budget
increases or cutbacks or changes to current programs, reaching an agreement is easier. As
a result, instrumentalism plays an important role in decreasing political tension and
ensuring stability

Unit 4: Models of Public Policy-MakingII


1.1 Introduction
1.2 Learning Outcomes
1.3 Institutional Model
1.4 Group Model
1.5 Systems Model
1.6. Streams and Windows Model
1.7 Mixed Approaches
1.7 Summary
1.8 References/Further Readings/Web Resources
1.9 Possible Answers to Self-Assessment Exercise(s) within the content

1.1 Introduction
Models and frames that form and provide context for analysis discourse originally
appeared in the 1970s and 1980s. They were viewed as problem-solving strategies that
provided structure and coherence. A model is the concept of drawing a line around reality
that is shared by a group of academics or theorists. When studying public policy, we must
be aware of how many different models of analysis exist to define and explain situations,
as well as how these models clash and shift: ' We will explore at some of the models
analysts employ are explained in this Unit.

1.2 Learning Outcomes


At the end of this unit, you should be able to:
i. Explain the Institutional Model
ii. Discuss the Group Model
iii. Analyze the Systems Model
iv. Explain the Streams and Windows Model

1.3 Institutional Model

39
Institutional Model focuses on the traditional organization of government. It describes
the duties and arrangements of bureaus and departments. It considers constitutional
provisions, administrative and common law, and judicial decisions. It focuses on formal
arrangements such as federalism executive reorganizations, presidential commission, etc.
Traditionally political science has studied government institutions--Congress, presidency,
courts, political parties, etc.--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. Traditional studies using the institutional approach
focused on institutional structures, organization, duties and function, without
investigating their impact on public policy.
1.4 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

40
3) There are checks and balances on group‘s competition
1.5 Systems Model
This model relies on informational theoretical concepts such as input, output, and
feedback. The model sees the policy process as cyclical. Asks, "what are the significant
variables and patterns in the public policy-making system?" What goes on within the
'black box' of conversion of demands into public policy? 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
(compromises are arranged, enacted and enforced). 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 re\quest from the "home" district.
The incentive to engage in micro-politics increases as the extent of government benefits,
programs and regulations increases.
It asks questions such as:
1) What are the significant characteristics of the environment that generate demands?
2)What are the significant characteristics of the political system that enable it to endure
over time and turn demands into output?
3)How do environmental inputs affect the political system?
4)How do characteristics of the political system affect public policy?
5)How do environmental characteristics affect public policy?

41
6)How does public policy through feedback, affect the environment and the political
system itself?
1.6. 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, the makeup of government
personnel, etc). The players are often quite visible, as members of the administration,
appointees and staff, Congress, medica, interest groups, those associated with elections,
parties and campaigns, and public opinion. A consensus is achieved among those groups
and a bandwagon effect or title effect occurs as everyone wants to be in on the policy
resolution and not excluded.
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,
OMB staff, 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
itsown, but all three must converge for a policy decision to emerge.

1.7Hogwood and Gunn’s Mixed scan model


In addition to the above approach, there is another approach described by Hogwood and
Gunn which is mixed and concerned both with the application of techniques and with
political process.
They value the political aspects of the policy process. Hogwood and Gunn set out a nine-
step approaches the policy process, which they say is 'mixed', that is, can be used for both
description and prescription. The nine steps of their model are:
i) Deciding to decide (issue search or agenda-setting);
ii) Deciding how to decide;
iii) Issue definition;
42
iv) Forecasting;
V) Setting objectives and priorities;
vi) Options analysis;
vii) Policy implementation, monitoring, and control;
viii) Evaluation and review; and
ix) Policy implementation succession, or termination
James Anderson's model of the policy process reduces these stages into five. They
include:
i) problem identification and agenda formation; ii) formulation; iii) adoption; iv)
implementation; and v) evaluation. The policy process model by Hogwood and Gunn is a
typical one. While its roots may be in the rational model, it does deal with the political
aspects of the policy process. They argue for a
"process-focused rather than a technique-oriented approach to policy analysis". It is seen
as "supplementing the more overtly political aspects of the policy process rather than
replacing them", As to the main difference between the two approaches, it may be
emphasized that policy analysis looks for, one alternative, that is, best or satisfactory
from a set of alternatives and is aided by empirical methods in their selection. On other
hand, political public policy sees information in an advocacy role, that is, it realizes that
cogent cases will be made from many perspectives, which then feed into the political
process.

1.8 Summary
Models and frames that form and provide context for analysis discourse originally
appeared in the 1970s and 1980s. They were viewed as problem-solving strategies that
provided structure and coherence. A model is the concept of drawing a line around reality
that is shared by a group of academics or theorists
Institutional Model focuses on the traditional organization of government. It describes the
duties and arrangements of bureaus and departments. It considers constitutional
provisions, administrative and common law, and judicial decisions. It focuses on formal
arrangements such as federalism executive reorganizations, presidential commission, etc
Group Model is a 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
Systems Modelrelies on informational theoretical concepts such as input, output, and
feedback. The model sees the policy process as cyclical. Asks, "what are the significant
variables and patterns in the public policy-making system?" What goes on within the
'black box' of conversion of demands into public policy? What are the inputs and

43
outputs? Public policy is viewed as the response of the political system to forces brought
to bear on it from the outside environment
Streams and Windows 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.

1.8 References/Further Readings/Web Resources


CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY (2002). Women & public policy. Graduate centre for
oublic policy and administration, 2002, THIRD SESSION
Dye, T. R. (2013).Understanding public policy. US Library of Congress Cataloging in
Publication,

1.9 Possible Answers to SAEs


Self-Assessment Exercise 1
Models and frames that form and provide context for analysis discourse originally
appeared in the 1970s and 1980s. They were viewed as problem-solving strategies that
provided structure and coherence. A model is the concept of drawing a line around reality
that is shared by a group of academics or theorists
1. Institutional Model focuses on the traditional organization of government. It
describes the duties and arrangements of bureaus and departments. It considers
constitutional provisions, administrative and common law, and judicial decisions. It
focuses on formal arrangements such as federalism executive reorganizations,
presidential commission, etc
2. Group Model is a 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
Self-Assessment Exercise 2
1. Systems Modelrelies on informational theoretical concepts such as input, output, and
feedback. The model sees the policy process as cyclical. Asks, "what are the significant
variables and patterns in the public policy-making system?" What goes on within the

44
'black box' of conversion of demands into public policy? 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
2. Streams and Windows 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

Unit 5: Rational Model


1.1 Introduction
1.2 Learning Outcomes
1.3 Rationalism
1.3.1 Rational Model.
1.4 Barriers to rational decision making
1.5 Deficiencies of Rationalism--gap between planning and implementation
1.6 Summary
1.7 References/Further Readings/Web Resources
1.8 Possible Answers to Self-Assessment Exercise(s) within the content

1.1 Introduction
A rational policy is one that achieves "maximum social gain"; that is, governments
should choose policies resulting in gains to society that exceed costs by the greatest
amount, and governments should refrain from policies if costs exceed gains.
Note that there are really two important guidelines in this definition of maximum social
gain.
First, no policy should be adopted if its costs exceed its benefits. Second, among policy
alternatives, decision makers should choose the policy that produces the greatest benefit
over cost. Inother words, a policy is rational when the difference between the values it
achieves and the valuesit sacrifices is positive and greater than any other policy
alternative. One should not view rationalism in a narrow dollars and centsframework, in
which basic social values are sacrificed for dollarsavings. Rationalism involves the
calculation of all social, political, and economic values sacrificedor achieved by a public
policy, not just those that can be measured in Naira (CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY,
2002)

45
1.2 Learning Outcomes
At the end of this unit you should be able to:
i. Explain the concept of Rationalism
ii. Discuss the concept of Rational Model.
iii. Outline the barriers to rational decision making
i. Explain the Deficiencies of Rationalism--gap between planning and implementation

1.3 Rationalism
To select a rational policy, policymakers must (1) know all the society's value
preferences and their relative weights, (2) know all the policy alternatives available, (3)
know all the consequences of each policy alternative, ( 4) calculate the ratio of benefits to
costs for each policy alternative, and (5) select the most efficient policy alternative. This
rationality assumes that the value preferences of society as a wholecan be known and
weighted. It is not enough to know and weigh the values of some groups and not others.
There must be a complete understanding of societal values (CALIFORNIA STATE
UNIVERSITY, 2002).
Rational policymaking also requires information about alternative policies, the predictive
capacity to foresee accurately the consequences of alternate policies, and the
intelligenceto calculate correctly the ratio of costs to benefits. Finally, rational
policymaking requires a decision-making systemthat facilitates rationality in policy
formation (CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, 2002)
1.3.1 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. Related to techniques such as PERT, CPM, OR,
and linear programming. 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

Self-Assessment Exercises 1
1. Explain the concept of Rationalism

46
2. Discuss the Rational Model
1.4 Barriers to rational decision making
However, there are many barriers to rational decision making, so many, in fact, that it
rarely takes place at all in government. Yet the model remains important for analytic
purposes because it helps to identify barriers to rationality. It assists in posing the
question, Why is policymaking not a more rational process? At the outset we can
hypothesize several important obstacles to rational policymaking:
Many conflicting benefits and costs cannot be compared or weighed; for example, it is
difficult to compare or weigh the value of individual life against the costs of regulation.
Policymakers may not be motivated to make decisions on the basis of societal goals but
instead try to maximize their own rewards-power, status, reelection, and money.
Policymakers may not be motivated to maximize net social gain but merely to satisfy
demands for progress; they do not search until they find "the one best way"; instead they
halt their search when they find an alternative that will work. Large investments in
existing programs and policies (sunk costs) prevent policymakers from reconsidering
alternatives foreclosed by previous decisions.
There are innumerable barriers to collecting all the information required to know all
possible policy alternatives and the consequences of each, including the cost of
information gathering, the availability of the information, and the time involved in its
collection.
Neither the predictive capacities of the social and behavioral sciences nor those of the
physical and biological sciences are sufficiently advanced to enable policymakers to
understand the full benefits or costs of each policy alternative.
Policymakers, even with the most advanced computerized analytical techniques, do not
have sufficient intelligence to calculate accurately costs and benefits when a large
number of diverse political, social, economic, and cultural values are at stake.
Uncertainty about the consequences of various policy alternatives compels policymakers
to stick as closely as possible to previous policies to reduce the likelihood of
unanticipated negative consequences.
The segmentalized nature of policymaking in large bureaucracies makes it difficult to
coordinate decision making so that the input of all the various specialists is brought to
bear at the point of decision.

Self-Assessment Exercises 2
1. Outline the Barriers to rational decision making
2. Explain the Deficiencies of Rationalism--gap between planning and
implementation

1.5 Deficiencies of Rationalism--gap between planning and implementation.

47
The most deficiencies of Rationalism--gap between planning and implementation is that
it ignores the 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 (CALIFORNIA STATE
UNIVERSITY, 2002)

1.6 Summary
This unit sees Rational Model as 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. Related to techniques such as PERT, CPM, OR,
and linear programming. This model tries to improve the content of public policy.

1.7 References/Further Readings/Web Resources


CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY (2002). Women & public policy. Graduate centre for
oublic policy and administration, 2002, THIRD SESSION
Dye, T. R. (2013).Understanding public policy. US Library of Congress Cataloging in
Publication,

1.8 Possible Answers to SAEs


Self-Assessment Exercise 1
1. Rationalism
To select a rational policy, policymakers must (1) know all the society's value
preferences and their relative weights, (2) know all the policy alternatives available, (3)
know all the consequences of each policy alternative, ( 4) calculate the ratio of benefits to
costs for each policy alternative, and (5) select the most efficient policy alternative
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

48
feedback, and the weighing of values. Related to techniques such as PERT, CPM, OR,
and linear programming. This model tries to improve the content of public policy.

Self-Assessment Exercise 2
1. Barriers to rational decision making
However, there are many barriers to rational decision making, so many, in fact, that it
rarely takes place at all in government. Yet the model remains important for analytic
purposes because it helps to identify barriers to rationality. It assists in posing the
question, Why is policymaking not a more rational process? At the outset we can
hypothesize several important obstacles to rational policymaking:
Many conflicting benefits and costs cannot be compared or weighed
2. Deficiencies of Rationalism--gap between planning and implementation.
The most deficiencies of Rationalism--gap between planning and implementation is that
it ignores the role of people, entrepreneurs, leadership, etc. Technical competence along
is not enough (ignores the human factor). Too mechanical an approach, organizations are
more organic

49
MODULE 2
Unit 1: Theories of Public Policy: Structural-Functional Theory
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Learning Outcomes
1.3 Title of the main
1.3.1 Origin of Structural-Functional Theory
1.4 Assumption of the Structural functionalism theory
1.5 Goal of structural functionalism as a theoretical framework
1.6 A critique of the structural functionalist perspective theory
1.7 Summary
1.8 References/Further Readings/Web Resources
1.9 Possible Answers to Self-Assessment Exercise(s) within the content

1.1 Introduction
It is possible to trace the origins of the structural-functional Theory back to earlier
applications of functionalism and systems models in the fields of anthropology,
sociology, biology, and political science. Around the same time that it became apparent
that the methods of studying politics in the United States and Europe were not applicable
to the study of politics in newly independent countries, structural functionalism began to
gain popularity as an alternative method of analysis. A bounded "nation-state system" is
assumed to exist by the structural-functionalist school of thought, which then analyses
structures in terms of the functions they play within the system.

1.2 Learning Outcomes


At the end of this unit you should be able to:
ii. Explain the Structural-Functional Theory
iii. Discuss the assumption of the Structural functionalism theory
iv. Evaluate the critique of the structural functionalist perspective theory

1.3 Theory of Structural-Functional


1.3.1 Origin of Structural-Functional Theory

50
Gabriel Almond is credited with being the one who first proposed this notion in the year
1960. The political structure served as the foundation for Almond's study. He defined a
political system as a system of interactions that can be found in all independent societies.
This system fulfills the functions of integration and adaptation (both internally and vis-à-
vis other societies) by employing, or threatening to employ, more or less legitimate
physical compulsion. He said that political systems can be found in all independent
societies (Almond and James, 1960). The legitimate system for preserving or modifying
order in a society is the political system.
Almond proposes that all political systems share the following four characteristics: (a) all
political systems contain political structures; (b) the same functions are carried out in all
political systems, albeit at varying frequencies and by a variety of structures; (c) all
political structures are capable of performing more than one function; and (d) all political
structures are "mixed" systems in the cultural sense. Almond's functional categories for
the study of political systems are political (input) functions and governmental (output)
functions. Political functions are considered to be input functions. (a) Political
socialization and recruitment, (b) interest articulation, (c) interest aggregation, and (d)
political communication are the functions that make up the political input. Rule creation
(a), rule application (b), and rule adjudication (c) are the three functions that fall under
the category of governmental output. The theory distinguishes between political function
and political structure by outlining the components that make up each set: the first set
consists of functions, and the second set is comprised of structures. He proposed that the
political systems might be evaluated based on the possibilities that the given functions
would be carried out by the specified structures.
1.4 Assumption of the Structural functionalism theory
The idea that society can be viewed as a system with pieces that are interconnected is
central to the structural functionalist perspective. According to Varma's (2003) definition,
a system is an entity that is made up of pieces that are both interconnected and
interrelated to one another. According to this theory, society is seen of as an entity that
consists of various components, each of which fulfills a certain role in the whole. Easton
(1965) refers to these components as sub-systems, while Almond refers to them as
structures (1963). According to Almond's way of thinking, every structure has a purpose
or a part to play; this line of thinking is known as structural functionalism.
According to Varmas (2003), "the underlying assumption of the theory is that, in order
for a social system to survive and sustain its going concern, a certain degree of order and
stability is required." This is the basic assumption that underpins the theory. According to
this theory, in order for there to be order and consistency in society, each component of
the social system must fulfill the purpose that it was designed for. Because of this
functional condition, the various sections of the social system can be connected to one
another, thereby integrating the social system as an organic system. In light of this,
Haralambos and Heald (2003) came to the conclusion that, from a functionalist
perspective, "the social system has some fundamental demands that must be addressed in
order for it to survive." The term "functional prerequisites" refers to these requirements.

51
Contributing to the upkeep of the society is the responsibility of every member of the
society; this is their role.
According to Gauba (2003), political theory implies an intellectual effort to attain
systematic knowledge about the goals and methods of politics. Political theory
seeks to explain political phenomenon, predicts political future or prescribes
solutions to political problems. It is concerned with issues pertaining to
politics, state power, government, structures and institutions relating to the state
or government.
For Sabine and Thorson (1973), Political theory is, quite simply, man‘s attempt to
consciously understand and solve the problem of his group life and organization.
Thus, political theory is an intellectual tradition and its history consists of the
evolution of men‘s thought about political problems overtime‟. Sabine concluded that it
is the ―disciplined investigation of political problems‖. With respect to political theory,
it is evident that political theory is as old as human existence. It is applied to
defend, justify or question the status quo and aims at describing, explaining,
rationalizing, justifying or criticizing existing political structures, institutional
arrangements, balance of power or power equations in political communities or
societies. No wonder Johari (1987) agreed that ―political theory is an objective
description of politics‖ and one of the principal functions of political theory is not
only to demonstrate what political practice should be, but also what it actually
means and every political theorist is bound to play both the role of a scientist
and a philosopher. Political theory is also concerned with individual or group
political belief systems, orientations and values, ideologies and aspirations.
According to Thakurdas (1982);―Political theory is the speculation of a single individual
who is attempting to offer a Theoretical explanation of political reality, namely the
phenomenon of the state. Every theory by its very nature is an explanation built upon a
certain hypothesis which is always open to criticism‖.
Political theory is often used interchangeably with political thought, political
philosophy, political ideology, political inquiry and political analysis.
However, thereare still marked differences among them.
There are variants of political theory such as formal political theory, empirical political
theory and normative political theory. Formal political theories are theories which
emanate from an existing political theory, for example, Neo-Marxist political theory.
Empirical political theory which is descriptive in character makes use of scientific
methods such as observation, hypothesis formulation, generalization etc. Itis almost
value free and is concerned with political realities.
Normative political theory is a value-laden theory. It takes the study of politics into the
arena of what is good or bad and suggests how political system can be made
―perfect‖.Having conceptualized political theory, it can be aptly contended that
political theorizing is concerned with the ability to have one‘s own political view and the
capacity not only to express and defend it, but to do so intelligently and persuasively.

Self-Assessment Exercises 1

52
1. The origins of the structural-functional Theory back to earlier applications of
functionalism and systems models. Discuss
2. Explain the underlying assumption of structural-functional Theory

1.5 Goal of structural functionalism as a theoretical framework


In positing this theory, Almond asserted that in any political system, there are four input
functions that are performed by the governmental system, by society, and by the general
environment. These functions are referred to as the "four input functions of any political
system." A few examples of these are political socialization and recruiting, interest
articulation and aggregation, political communication, and interest aggregation (Varma,
2003).
The goal of structural functionalism as a theoretical framework is to explain the factors
that contribute to the preservation of order and appropriateness in society, as well as
meaningful arrangement within society. The fields of biology and medicine were the ones
who came up with this hypothesis first. In the fields of sociology, social science, and
anthropology, it was utilized as a method of research and analysis. Almond and Verma
(2003) emphasized that structural-functionalism contains two primary notions, such as
structures and functions, and that it was developed for the purpose of political analysis by
Almond and Verma. The internal configurations of a system that are responsible for its
functions are referred to as structures. In addition, structure refers to the manner in which
the components are linked to one another in order to produce an arrangement or an
organization. Robert (2009) has proposed the following definition of function: function is
"those observed outcomes that make for the adoption or adjustment of a particular
system."
The fundamental presumption behind the structural functionalism conceptual framework
is that all systems contain structures that are capable of being recognized, and that these
structures carry out specific functions within the system that are essential to the system's
continued existence. It makes reference to the components that are present in every
system as well as the functions that are carried out by the components. The term
"political system" refers to the numerous societal organizations and institutions that are
responsible for carrying out political tasks or that have some bearing on the process of
political decision-making policy (Verma, 2003:134).
When broken down, the three pillars or arms of a nation's government are the legislative,
executive, and judicial branches, respectively. The structure can be investigated on three
primary levels: the human level, the institutional level, and the subsystem level. The
entirety of the structure is broken down into its component elements, each of which
focuses on a different field of endeavor, such as the political, economic, or social
subsystems.
As a result, the structure of the government led to the formation of substructure. It is the
government and its bureaucracy that are responsible for making rules, administering,
adjudicating, and formulating economic policies through the legislative process, and the

53
executive branch is responsible for putting those policies into action in order to promote
economic growth and development in the nation.
Self-Assessment Exercises 2
1. Explain the goal of structural functionalism as a theoretical framework
2. Discuss the critique of the structural functionalist perspective theory

1.6 A critique of the structural functionalist perspective theory


Critics have pointed out that the structural functional method is fundamentally
unchanging, despite the fact that it offers a valuable framework for classifying and
contrasting different types of data. It was not particularly helpful for assessing or
anticipating change; the question of why political development occurs, how it happens,
when it happens, and in what direction it happens. The problem of progress or
transformation is, of course, of the utmost importance for the Third World.
In response to criticisms, structural functionalists looked at history and came to the
conclusion that political development occurs when an existing political system is unable
to cope with problems or challenges confronting it without further structural
differentiation or cultural secularization. This was the conclusion that structural
functionalists came to after looking at history. Political advancement can be defined as
the process of successfully overcoming such hurdles. When Almond spoke to
"challenges," he meant shifts in the scale, nature, and frequency of inputs (particularly
demands) for the system

1.7 Summary
This unit tracethe origins of the structural-functional theory back to earlier applications of
functionalism and systems models in the fields of anthropology, sociology, biology, and
political science. Around the same time that it became apparent that the methods of
studying politics in the United States and Europe were not applicable to the study of
politics in newly independent countries, structural functionalism began to gain popularity
as an alternative method of analysis. A bounded "nation-state system" is assumed to exist
by the structural-functionalist school of thought, which then analyses structures in terms
of the functions they play within the system
Varma (2003), ―the underlying assumption of the theory is that, in order for a social
system to survive and sustain its going concern, a certain degree of order and stability is
required‖. This is the basic assumption that underpins the theory. According to this
theory, in order for there to be order and consistency in society, each component of the
social system must fulfill the purpose that it was designed for. Because of this functional
condition, the various sections of the social system can be connected to one another,
thereby integrating the social system as an organic system. In light of this,
The goal of structural functionalism as a theoretical framework is to explain the factors
that contribute to the preservation of order and appropriateness in society, as well as
meaningful arrangement within society. The fields of biology and medicine were the ones

54
who came up with this hypothesis first. In the fields of sociology, social science, and
anthropology, it was utilized as a method of research and analysis. Almond (1966)
emphasized that structural-functionalism contains two primary notions, such as structures
and functions, and that it was developed for the purpose of political analysis by Almond
and VermaCritics have pointed out that the structural functional method is fundamentally
unchanging, despite the fact that it offers a valuable framework for classifying and
contrasting different types of data. It was not particularly helpful for assessing or
anticipating change; the question of why political development occurs, how it happens,
when it happens, and in what direction it happens. The problem of progress or
transformation is, of course, of the utmost importance for the Third World.

1.8 References/Further Readings/Web Resources


Almond, G. A. (1966).Political theory and political science. American Political Science
Review, 60(4), 869-879.
Gauba, O. P. (2003), An Introduction to Political Theory. Fourth Edition. Macmillan
India ltd.
Haralambos and Heald (2003) cited in: Uzoma, R. C. (2004). Religious pluralism,
cultural differences, and social stability in Nigeria. BYU L. Rev., 651.
Johari, J. C (1987). Contemporary Political Theory. New Delhi: Sterling Publishers‟
Private Limited
Sabine, G.H. and Thorson, T.L. (1973). A History of Political Theory. New Delhi:
Oxford & IBH Publishing Co. Private Limited.
Thakurdas, F. (1982). Essays in Political Theory. New Delhi: Gitanjali.
Varma, S.P (2003), Modern Political Theory. New Delhi: Vikas publishing House Put.
Ltd.

1.9 Possible Answers to SAEs


Answers to SAEs 1
1. The origins of the structural-functional Theory back to earlier applications of
functionalism and systems models in the fields of anthropology, sociology,
biology, and political science. Around the same time that it became apparent that
the methods of studying politics in the United States and Europe were not
applicable to the study of politics in newly independent countries, structural
functionalism began to gain popularity as an alternative method of analysis. A
bounded "nation-state system" is assumed to exist by the structural-functionalist

55
school of thought, which then analyses structures in terms of the functions they
play within the system
2. The underlying assumption of the theory is that, in order for a social system to
survive and sustain its going concern, a certain degree of order and stability is
required." This is the basic assumption that underpins the theory. According to this
theory, in order for there to be order and consistency in society, each component
of the social system must fulfill the purpose that it was designed for. Because of
this functional condition, the various sections of the social system can be
connected to one another, thereby integrating the social system as an organic
system.
Answers to SAEs 2
1. The goal of structural functionalism as a theoretical framework is to explain the
factors that contribute to the preservation of order and appropriateness in society, as
well as meaningful arrangement within society. The fields of biology and medicine
were the ones who came up with this hypothesis first. In the fields of sociology,
social science, and anthropology, it was utilized as a method of research and analysis.
Almond and Verma (2003:122) emphasized that structural-functionalism contains
two primary notions, such as structures and functions, and that it was developed for
the purpose of political analysis by Almond and Verma
2. Critics have pointed out that the structural functional method is fundamentally
unchanging, despite the fact that it offers a valuable framework for classifying and
contrasting different types of data. It was not particularly helpful for assessing or
anticipating change; the question of why political development occurs, how it
happens, when it happens, and in what direction it happens. The problem of progress
or transformation is, of course, of the utmost importance for the Third World

Unit 2:Theories of Public Policy: Institutional Theory


1.1 Introduction
1.2 Learning Outcomes
1.3 Title of the main
1.3.1 Explain the Content of the Institutional Theory
1.4 Discuss the Framework of the Institutional theory
1.5 formation of public policy as an institutional product
1.6 Theoretical and Model-Based Criticism of Institutionalism
1.7 Summary
1.7 References/Further Readings/Web Resources
1.8 Possible Answers to Self-Assessment Exercise(s) within the content

1.1 Introduction
Institutional theory was first developed in the United States of America in 1983 by Paul J.
DiMaggio and Walter W. Powell. In 2004, W. Richard Scott conducted a review of this

56
theory. Institutional theory is a sociological school of thought that examines the more
fundamental and enduring components of social structure. It examines the mechanisms
through which structures, such as schemes; rules, norms, and routines, become
established as authoritative standards for social behavior. This can include rules, norms,
and routines.

1.2 Learning Outcomes


At the end of this unit you should be able to:
i. Explain the Content of the Institutional Theory
ii. Discuss the Framework of the Institutional theory
iii. Assess the formation of public policy as an institutional product
iv. Explain the Theoretical and Model-Based Criticism of Institutionalism

1.3 Institutional Theory


1.3.1 Content of the Institutional Theory
The Institutionalism Theory and Model primarily address, with regard to the evolution of
public policy, the terrain on which much advancement in political sociology and political
science have taken place, as well as an occasional battleground for this methods
(Campbell, 1998).
Something that is discovered at a higher level is used to explain processes and
consequences that occur at a lower level of analysis. This is the fundamental similarity
that can be found in all institutional theoretical statements (Clemens and James, 1999;
Amenta 2005). Institutionalists have a propensity to steer clear of explanations located at
the person level as well as explanations that are situated at the same level of analysis.
Policy is a product that is authoritatively determined, implemented, and evaluated by the
institutions of the government. These institutions include Congress, the presidency, and
other elected officials, as well as local and national bureaucracies.
According to this paradigm, a policy does not become a public policy until it is
legitimized by the government entity that is involved with it. Policies enacted by the
government grant citizens legal powers, which in turn demand obligations from them and
command their devotion. The implementation of this kind of strategy often involves the
use of punitive measures (Musa, Ibrahim, Yakubu, 2020).
1.3.2 Assumption of Institutionalism Theory
According to Campbell, (1998), Assumption of Institutionalism Theory is:

57
a) The study of government institutions or organizations
b) Public policy is authoritatively determined, implemented and enforced by institutions
c) No outside influence in the policy making
d) Types of institutions: Congress, Executive Branch, political parties
e) A public policy created from institutional theory – No child Left Behind Act
Self-Assessment Exercises 1
1. Institutionalism Theory and Model primarily address, with regard to the evolution
of public policy. Discuss
2. Explain the framework of the many different governmental institutions has an
effect on the context in which public policy is formulated

1.4 Framework of the Institutional theory


The framework of the many different governmental institutions has an effect on the
context in which public policy is formulated. The Constitution represents the greatest and
most important sort of policy, and all other policies are required to adhere to it. In terms
of both significance and priority, the laws that have been passed by Congress,
presidential orders, and judicial rulings come in second.
One of the earliest focuses of political science was the examination of the various
governmental organizations. Institutions of government, including the Legislative,
Executive, and Judicial branches, as well as political parties, are typically at the center of
political activity. The institutions of the state are the ones responsible for the first
authoritative determination and implementation of public policy. Even while older
studies of institutions had a tendency to put more of a focus on formal and structural
aspects, one could nevertheless make use of them in policy analysis. A collection of
regularized patterns of human behavior that are maintained over a period of time is
known as an institution. As a result, they have the potential to influence the process of
decision making as well as the content of public policy. Rules and structural
arrangements inside organizations are typically not neutral in their fundamental nature;
rather, they have a tendency to favor certain interests in society over others and certain
policy results rather than others.
The many political and institutional factors at the macro level have the potential to impact
the broad patterns of domestic politics. There is room for either centralized or
decentralized authority structures within state political institutions.
Within a given political authority, the legislative, executive, judicial, and other
governmental functions might be located within the same set of organizations, or they
might be spread out among several different organizations, each of which has its own
level of autonomy and its own set of operating procedures. To use Mann's (1986)
terminology, the degree to which state rulers possessed "despotic power," or control
"over" others, may be a significant factor in determining the form of government that was
in place (Lukes 1974). The political institutions of the state were subject to varying
degrees of democratization and political rights at varying rates, depending on the subjects

58
and citizens. Once democracies were subject to distinct electoral rules governing the
selection of political officials, the state executive organizations were also subject to
distinct levels and paces of bureaucratization and professionalization. This was the case
once democracies were subject to different and consequential electoral rules. Every one
of these processes has the potential to significantly impact political life (Campbell, 2002).
The other primary line of thought, which was seen to be of secondary importance in the
grand scheme of things, was that states mattered as actors. State actors were understood
on an organizational level, with a primary focus on how they depended on resources. As
organizations, various sectors of states may have varying degrees of autonomy and
distinct capabilities, depending on the degree to which they are autonomous. It was
determined that the ability of states or parts of states to designate independent courses of
action constituted their level of autonomy. According to Mann's (1986) conceptualization
of "infrastructural power," state capacities were conceptualized as the ability to carry out
various courses of action (Skocpol, 1985). The concepts of state autonomy and capacity
introduced the "power to" do anything into the conversation, without ignoring the "power
over" topic, which political scientists and sociologists had been concentrating on up until
that point (Lukes, 1974). It was suggested that the variations in state autonomy and
capability in executive bureaucracies were crucial factors in explaining the political
results of different times and places
1.5 The formation of public policy as an institutional product
According to Musa, Ibrahim and Yakubu (2020), ―the Government institutions are
responsible for formulating public policy and ensuring the legitimacy of policies. The
policy is applied equally to all members of society by the government, which also
maintains a monopoly on the use of force to implement policy. Institutions such as those
found in the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government are all instances
of those that confer legitimacy on policies. i.e., these institutions have the authority to
make policy, put it into effect, and monitor its compliance (legitimacy, universality, and
coercion) focuses on the role of policy as an institutional output (Institutions refers to
government institutions). The study of political science has traditionally focused
extensively on governmental organizations. Political science has traditionally been seen
as the study of governmental structures such as states, municipalities, and other such
entities. These institutions are responsible for the authoritative determination,
implementation, and enforcement of public policy. Because a public policy cannot
become a public policy until it is opted, implemented, and enforced by some government
institutions, the relationship between public policy and government institutions is a close
one‖.
Institutions of the state are responsible for formulating public policy. Legitimacy, as well
as legal obligations that demand devotion from the populace, Universality refers to the
fact that only policies established by the government are applicable to all members of the
community. Coercion/Force That is, the government has the legal authority to put people
in jail for breaking laws and regulations. It is specifically the capacity of the government
to demand the devotion of its citizens, to establish policies that regulate the entirety of
society, and to monopoly the legitimate use of force that inspires individuals and groups

59
to work toward the enactment of their preferences into policy. Inferences and
presumptions: the actions of single people don't have much of an effect, but the structure
and design of a system do (Musa, Ibrahim and Yakubu, 2020).
1.6 Theoretical and Model-Based Criticism of Institutionalism
They are sometimes attacked for being "structurally biased," despite the fact that this is a
characteristic of institutional reasoning that has different advantages and disadvantages
when it comes to providing explanations. Institutionalists usually struggle when
attempting to explain social and political change, particularly inside institutions
themselves, and frequently resort to making assertions about exogenous and
unpredictable shocks or the acts of a variety of players (Amenta, 2005).
Self-Assessment Exercises 2
1. Explain the formation of public policy as an institutional product
2. Discuss the theoretical and Model-Based Criticism of Institutionalism

1.6 Summary
This unit explain that Institutionalism Theory and Model primarily the evolution of
public policy, the terrain on which many advancements in political sociology and
political science have taken place, as well as an occasional battleground for this methods
(Campbell, 1998).
Something that is discovered at a higher level is used to explain processes and
consequences that occur at a lower level of analysis
The framework of the many different governmental institutions has an effect on the
context in which public policy is formulated. The Constitution represents the greatest and
most important sort of policy, and all other policies are required to adhere to it. In terms
of both significance and priority, the laws that have been passed by Congress,
presidential orders, and judicial rulings come in second.
One of the earliest focuses of political science was the examination of the various
governmental organizations. Institutions of government, including the Legislative,
Executive, and Judicial branches, as well as political parties, are typically at the center of
political activity
Government institutions are responsible for formulating public policy and ensuring the
legitimacy of policies. The policy is applied equally to all members of society by the
government, which also maintains a monopoly on the use of force to implement policy.
Institutions such as those found in the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of
government are all instances of those that confer legitimacy on policies
They are sometimes attacked for being "structurally biased," despite the fact that this is a
characteristic of institutional reasoning that has different advantages and disadvantages
when it comes to providing explanations. Institutionalists usually struggle when
attempting to explain social and political change, particularly inside institutions

60
themselves, and frequently resort to making assertions about exogenous and
unpredictable shocks or the acts of a variety of players

1.7 References/Further Readings/Web Resources


Amenta, E. (2005). State-Centered and Political Institutionalists Theory: Retrospect and
Prospect. Pp. 96–114 in Handbook of Political Sociology: States, Civil Societies, and
Globalization edited by T. Janoski, R. Alford, Hicks, and M. A. Schwartz. New York,
NY: Cambridge University Press.
Campbell, J. L. (1998). Institutional Analysis and the Role of Ideas in Political Economy:
Theory and Society. London.Cambridge University Press 27:377–409
Clemens, E. S. and James M. C. (1999).Politics and Institutionalism: Explaining
Durability and Change.‖ Annual Review of Sociology 25:441–466
Lukes, S. (1974). Power: A Radical View. New York, NY: Macmillan.
Mann, M. 1986. The Sources of Social Power, Vol. 1. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press.
Musa, Z. Ibrahim I. S. Yakubu S. I. (2020).An Introduction to Public Policy Analysis and
Administration; Germany.LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing.
Skocpol, T., &Amenta, E. (1986).States and social policies. Annual Review of
Sociology, 131-157.

1.8 Possible Answers to SAEs


Answers to SAEs 1
1. the evolution of public policy, the terrain on which many advancements in
political sociology and political science have taken place, as well as an occasional
battleground for this methods (Campbell, 1998). Something that is discovered at a
higher level is used to explain processes and consequences that occur at a lower
level of analysis
2. The framework of the many different governmental institutions has an effect on
the context in which public policy is formulated. The Constitution represents the
greatest and most important sort of policy, and all other policies are required to
adhere to it. In terms of both significance and priority, the laws that have been
passed by Congress, presidential orders, and judicial rulings come in second.

Answers to SAEs 2

61
1. One of the earliest focuses of political science was the examination of the various
governmental organizations. Institutions of government, including the Legislative,
Executive, and Judicial branches, as well as political parties, are typically at the
center of political activity
2. Government institutions are responsible for formulating public policy and
ensuring the legitimacy of policies. The policy is applied equally to all members of
society by the government, which also maintains a monopoly on the use of force
to implement policy. Institutions such as those found in the legislative, executive,
and judicial branches of government are all instances of those that confer
legitimacy on policies
They are sometimes attacked for being "structurally biased," despite the fact that this is a
characteristic of institutional reasoning that has different advantages and disadvantages
when it comes to providing explanations. Institutionalists usually struggle when
attempting to explain social and political change, particularly inside institutions
themselves, and frequently resort to making assertions about exogenous and
unpredictable shocks or the acts of a variety of players

Unit 3: Theories of Public Policy: Process Theory


1.1 Introduction
1.2 Learning Outcomes
1.3 Process Theory
1.3.1 Functional analysis of Process Theory
1.3.2 Public policy as a Process Output
1.4 The Policy Process
1.5 Process Theory has the following Steps
1.6 Implications/assumptions:
1.7 Summary
1.8 References/Further Readings/Web Resources
1.9 Possible Answers to Self-Assessment Exercise(s) within the content

1.1 Introduction
Process theory is a system of ideas that explains how an entity changes and develops.
Process theories are often contrasted with variance theories, that is, systems of ideas that
explain the variance in a dependent variable based on one or more independent variables.
While process theories focus on how something happens, variance theories focus on why
something happens. Process theory, ―stability and change are explained by reference to
the balance of power between opposing entities.

62
1.2 Learning Outcomes
At the end of this unit you should be able to:
i. Discuss the Process Theory
ii. Explain the Functional analysis of Process Theory
iii. Evaluate the Public policy as a Process Output
iv. Outline the Policy Process
v. Identify the Process Theory has the following Steps
vi state the Implications/assumptions

1.3 Process Theory


1.3.1 Functional analysis of Process Theory
Using this approach, policy formulation actors focus on the various functional activities
that occur in the policy process. Lasswell (1954) presents a scheme involving seven
categories of functional analysis that will serve as the basis for our discussion:
i. Intelligence: How is the information on policy matters that come to the attention of
policy makers gathered and processed?
ii. Recommendation: How are recommendations (or alternatives) for dealing with a given
issue made and promoted?
iii. Prescription: How are general rules adopted or enacted, and by whom?
Invocation: Who determines whether given behaviour contravenes rules or laws and
demands application of rules or laws thereto?
v. Application: How are laws and rules actually applied or enforced?
vi. Appraisal: How is the operation of policies, their successes and failures appraised?
vii. Termination: How are the original rules or laws terminated or continued in modified
or changed from?
The scheme of analysis is not tied to particular institutions or political arrangements and
lends itself readily to comparative analysis of policy formation. One can inquire how
these different functions are performed, to what effect, and by whom in different political
systems or government units. However, its emphasis on functional grounds may lead to
neglect of the politics of policy formulation and the effect of environmental variables on
the process. Obviously, policy formulation is more than an intellectual process.
1.3.2 Public policy as a Process Output
Who: voters, interest groups, legislators, presidents, bureaucrats, judges
How: ID problem, set agenda, formulate policy proposals, legitimate policies, implement
policies and evaluate policies.
Self-Assessment Exercises 1
1. Discuss the Functional analysis of Process Theory
2. Explain the Public policy as a Process Output

63
1.4 The Policy Process
Dye (2013) identified Policy Process as follows:
i. Problem Identification. The identification of policy problems through demand
from individuals and groups for government action.
ii. Agenda Setting. Focusing the attention of the mass media and public officials on
specific public problems to decide what will be decided.
iii. Policy Formulation. The development of policy proposals by interest groups,
White House staff, congressional committees, and think tanks.
iv. Policy Legitimation. The selection and enactment of policies through actions by
National Assembly and the president.
v. Policy Implementation. The implementation of policies through government
bureaucracies, public expenditures, regulations, and other activities of executive
agencies.
vi. Policy Evaluation. The evaluation of policies by government agencies themselves,
outside consultants, the media, and the general public.
In short, one can view the policy process as a series of political activities-problem
identification, agenda setting, formulation, legitimation, implementation, and evaluation.
The process model is useful in helping us to understand the various activities involved in
policymaking. We want to keep in mind that policymakinginvolves agenda setting
(capturing the attention of policymakers), formulating proposals (devising and selecting
policy options), legitimating policy (developing political support; winning congressional,
presidential, or court approval), implementing policy (creating bureaucracies, spending
money, enforcing laws), and evaluating policy (finding out whether policies work,
whether they are popular) (Dye, 2013).

1.5 Process Theory has the following Steps


i. Identification of a problem and demand for government action
ii. Formulation of policy proposals by various parties
iii. Policy Legitimating - Selection and enactment of policy
iv. Implementation of the chosen policy
v. Evaluation of policy
1.6 Implications/assumptions:
Who participates has a critical or determinant impact on the process.
Self-Assessment Exercises 2
1. Itemized thePolicy Process
2. Outline the Process Theory has the following Steps

1.6 Summary

64
This unit explained thatpolicy formulation actors focus on the various functional
activities that occur in the policy process. The Public policy as a Process Output
Includes Who: voters, interest groups, legislators, presidents, bureaucrats, judges; How:
ID problem, set agenda, formulate policy proposals, legitimate policies, implement
policies and evaluate policies
Policy Process as follows:
a. Problem Identification. The identification of policy problems through demand from
individuals and groups for government action.
vii. Agenda Setting. Focusing the attention of the mass media and public officials on
specific public problems to decide what will be decided.
viii. Policy Formulation. The development of policy proposals by interest groups,
White House staff, congressional committees, and think tanks.
ix. Policy Legitimation. The selection and enactment of policies through actions by
Congress, the president, and the courts
The Process Theory has the following Steps
a. Identification of a problem and demand for government action
b. Formulation of policy proposals by various parties
c. Policy Legitimating - Selection and enactment of policy
d. Implementation of the chosen policy
e. Evaluation of policy

1.7 References/Further Readings/Web Resources


Dye, T. R. (2013).Understanding public policy. US Library of Congress Cataloging-in-
Publication

1.8 Possible Answers to SAEs


Answers to SAEs 1
1. Functional analysis of Process Theory
Using this approach, policy formulation actors focus on the various functional activities
that occur in the policy process. Lasswell (1954) presents a scheme involving seven
categories of functional analysis that will serve as the basis for our discussion:
i. Intelligence: How is the information on policy matters that come to the attention of
policy makers gathered and processed?
ii. Recommendation: How are recommendations (or alternatives) for dealing with a given
issue made and promoted?
iii. Prescription: How are general rules adopted or enacted, and by whom?
2. Public policy as a Process Output
Who: voters, interest groups, legislators, presidents, bureaucrats, judges

65
How: ID problem, set agenda, formulate policy proposals, legitimate policies, implement
policies and evaluate policies
Answers to SAEs 2
1. The Policy Process
Dye (2013) identified Policy Process as follows:
a. Problem Identification. The identification of policy problems through demand from
individuals and groups for government action.
b. Agenda Setting. Focusing the attention of the mass media and public officials on
specific public problems to decide what will be decided.
c. Policy Formulation. The development of policy proposals by interest groups, White
House staff, congressional committees, and think tanks.
d. Policy Legitimation. The selection and enactment of policies through actions by
Congress, the president, and the courts
2. Process Theory has the following Steps
i. Identification of a problem and demand for government action
ii. Formulation of policy proposals by various parties
iii. Policy Legitimating - Selection and enactment of policy
iv. Implementation of the chosen policy
v. Evaluation of policy

Unit 4: Theories of Public Policy: Political SystemsTheory


1.1 Introduction
1.2 Learning Outcomes
1.3 Title of Main Content
1.3.1 Proponent of Political Systems Theory
1.3.2 Assumption of Political Systems Theory
1.4 Types of Political Theory
1.5 Contemporary Political Theory
1.6 Implications

1.7 Summary
1.8 References/Further Readings/Web Resources
1.9 Possible Answers to Self-Assessment Exercise(s) within the content

1.1 Introduction
An crucial foundation for explaining, comprehending, and comparing the parts and
players that make up the world in the early 21st century may be found in the study of
political systems and ideologies. The study of political systems, the driving factors of the
rising world, the dynamics of international change and continuity, and the foundations of

66
theoretical development are all topics covered in Political Systems and Theories courses.
The study of political systems and theories gives students the chance to learn about and
compare different perspectives on fundamental topics including authority, democracy,
institutions, peace, and war. The field is (or should be) fundamental to and a precondition
for the more applied courses in the curriculum. If you're going to study international and
comparative politics, you need know the fundamental theories that guide the area.
Courses in international relations cover a wide range of themes, including but not limited
to: theories of statecraft; bureaucracy; democratization; ethno-religious conflict; iden-tity;
sovereignty; nationalism; and self-determination. Students working on their Master's or
Doctoral theses in linguistics or polisci, or those contemplating careers in academia,
should give this area a lot of thought. Students interested in learning more about the ideas
and assumptions that inform policymakers' decisions may also find this book to be
illuminating.

Public policy may be viewed as a political systems response to demands arising from its
environment. The political system comprises those identifiable and interrelated
institutions and activities (what we usually think of as governmental institutions and
political processes) in a society that make authoritative allocations of values (decisions)
that are binding on society.

1.2 Learning Outcomes


At the end of this unit you should be able to:
i. Explain the Political Theory
ii. Outline the Proponent of Political Systems Theory
iii State the assumption of Political Systems Theory
iv Itemized the types of Political Theory
v Explain the Contemporary Political Theory
vi briefly explain theImplications of the theory

67
1.3 Political Theory
Political systems theory is an all-encompassing theory that places an emphasis on the
broader social, economic, and cultural settings that put pressure on policymakers to act
and result in policy outputs and outcomes.
1.3.1 Proponent of Political Systems Theory
David Easton's The Political System (1953), conceived the political system as integrating
all activities through which social policy is formulated and executed—that is, the political
system is the policy-making process
Public Policy may be viewed as the response of a political system to demands arising
from its environment. Easton (1965), states that the political system theory, is composed
of those identifiable and interrelated institutions and activities in a society that make
authoritative decisions (or allocations of values) that are binding on society.

1.3.2 Assumption of Political Systems Theory


Public policy as system output

Who: individuals, groups, or nations depending upon the scope of the problem

How: environment may stimulate inputs into political system, producing outputs and
feedback

Inputs into the system from the environment consist of demands and supports for the
policy. The environment consists of all those conditions and events external to the
boundaries of the political system. Demands are the claims made by individuals and
groups on the political system for action to satisfy their interests. Support is rendered
when groups and individuals abide by election results, pay taxes, obey laws, and
otherwise accept the decisions and actions of the authoritative political system made in
response to demands. These authoritative allocations of values constitute public policy
(David, 1965). The usefulness of systems is limited by its highly general nature. It does
not say much concerning how decisions are made and policies developed within the
political system. Despite these limitations, systems theory is a useful concept in
68
organizing inquiries into policy formation. It also gives alerts of some significant aspects
of the political process, such as: How do environmental inputs affect the content of public
policy and the nature of the political system? How does public policy affect demands for
action? What factors or forces in the environment act to generate demands upon the
political system? How is the political system able to convert demands into public policy
and preserve itself over time? The environment consists of all phenomena—the social
system, the economic system, the biological setting—that are external to the boundaries
of-the political system. Thus at least analytically one can separate the political system
from all the other components of a society.
The concept of feedback indicates that public policies (or outputs) made at a given time
may subsequently alter the environment and the demands arising therefrom, as well as the
character of the political system itself. Policy outputs may produce new demands, which
lead to further outputs, and so on in a never-ending flow of public policy.
Self-Assessment Exercises 1
1. What is Political Theory
2. Explain the Proponent of Political Systems Theory

1.4 Types of Political Theory


In his book ‗Political Theory‘, describes political theory by dividing into two categories.
One is the traditional political approach which deals with the history of political ideas and
the other is the modern political approach which deals with modern political behavior and
scientific study (Andrew, 2012)
Political Theory is a set of an idea or observation that intends to explain the political,
social, and economic conditions in the state.
Man by nature has the capacity of thinking and analyzing the individual‘s political
behavior as well as the state in the form of political theory. Therefore the political theory
is the core area of political science. Without theory, no subject cannot be considered as an
academic discipline. Earlier those who engaged in this enterprise styled themselves as
philosophers or scientist.
From ancient Greece to the present, the history of political theory has dealt with
fundamental and perennial ideas of political science.
To better understand the changing pattern of political theory from ancient times to the
present, we need to know the types of political theory. Because the types of political
theory basically mean what it meant at different times.
Easton the classified political theory into two parts:

69
Value Theory
Causal Theory
Traditional political theories are value theory. This kind of theory focuses on human
preferences.
All the political theories that discuss the relationship between different political events
are called causal theories.
The contribution of causal theory in making human knowledge reliable or trustworthy is
undeniable.
Pennock (2001) divides political theory into five parts.
Speculative Theory: Such doctrines speak of the establishment of ideal social structures
and systems on the basis of imagination. Plato‘s theory of the establishment of
communism is notable as an example.
Ethical Theory: In this theory, all discussions about the state and political life are based
on the question of what ought to be and ought not to be.
Legal Theory: In this theory, the state can be considered as a legal institution and all the
relations of political life are reviewed from a legal point of view.
Sociological Theory: In this theory, the state is basically seen as a social organization,
and the emphasis is placed on empirical theory.
Scientific Theory: In this theory, based on the information and statistical data, the
method of reaching general conclusions through observation, analysis, etc. is adopted.
According to Rajeev (2003)classified political theory into three categories in his
book Political Theory: An Introduction.
1. Explanatory Theory
In explanatory theory he meant that different political theories of society have been
interpreted by different political theorists according to their point of view and every
theorist has found their theory acceptable.
For the clarification, he has said that- suppose that we wish to understand the birth of
capitalist socio-economic formations. In the social sciences, we have several different
explanations. For example, Karl Marx offered a general theory of fundamental social
change. In his theory, Marx explains the reasons behind the birth of the socio-economic
structure of capitalism.
The main basis of his analysis was the relationship between productive force and means
of production. Max Weber, on the other hand, argues that –capitalism could not have
come into existence without a change in the cultural climate, in the attitudes of a specific
set of people.
This change of attitude was a component of and was brought about by transformation in
the dominant religion of particular societies.
2. Normative Theory
To him, the normative political theorist must begin with assumptions that most people
can endorse. In simple, this theory focuses on all the things by which a system goes from
imperfect to perfect. (This theory have discussed in details in next section.)
3. Contemplative Theory

70
He draws Hannah Arendt‘s context to explain this theory. Hannah Arendt in his, ‗The
Human Condition‘ has argued that ―reconsideration of the human condition from the
vantage point of our newest experience and our most recent fears‖.
Human experiences are changing due to the new developments like satellite, man-made
object stayed in skies, Atom Bomb, birth of a new language of mathematical symbols
which cannot be replaced by speech, etc.

Self-Assessment Exercises 2
1. State the Types of Political Theory
2. Examine the Contemporary Political Theory

1.5 Contemporary Political Theory


Since the 1970s there has been growing interest in political theory in the US, Europe, and
other parts of the world.
Passing away from the shadow of World War 2, the reemergence of Europe and crisis in
ideologies like socialism and communism bought about a new grace in political
ideologies.
As a result of great debate, a number of important innovations in the study of political
theory followed which culminated in a broad understanding of contemporary political
theory.
If the task of political theory is, as it had been, to make us understand the political
phenomenon, then it becomes necessary that it should confine itself to the explanation,
investigation, and ultimate comprehension of what relates to politics- concepts,
principles, and institutions. This is what contemporary political theory is doing.
According to David Held, contemporary political theory has four tasks.
It is philosophical in nature which means it is concerned with the normative and
conceptual framework.
It is philosophical as well as empirical. It is concerned with the problems understanding
and explanation of the concept.
It is also historical which means it is concerned with the examination of the key concept
of the political theory in historical context.
It is strategic means it concerns within the assessment of the feasibility of moving from
where we are where we might likely to be.
So it can be said that contemporary political theory basically involves these four different
tasks (Philosophical, Empirical, Historical and Strategic).
In fact, there is a mixture of normative and empirical theory in the contemporary political
theory where scientific explanations as well as the importance of values have got enough
space.
1.6 Implications

71
systems implies an identifiable set of institutions and activities in society that functions to
transforms demands into authoritative decisions requiring the support of the whole
society; implies that the elements of the system are interrelated, that the system can
respond to forces in its environment, and that it will do so to preserve itself

1.6 Summary
This unit from the above discussion on 3 Most Important Types of Political Theory, it can
be concluded that over time, political theory has changed its character.
Normative political theory has dominated since ancient times, and its main focus has
been on state and government. Normative political theory is essentially value oriented.
But the development of empiricism in the twentieth century influences political theory.
Empirical theory is basically a value free theory. It is based on observation, data
collection and testing.
Today‘s political theory is the combination of normative and empirical political theory.
As a social scientist, we need facts and its values as well.

1.7 References/Further Readings/Web Resources


Andrew, H. (2012). Types of political theory.Retrieved from
https://schoolofpoliticalAndrew, H. (2002). Political Theory: Philosophy, Ideology,
Science. Macmillan,.
Easton, D. (2004) The Political System: an Inquiry into the State of Political Science.
Knopf.
Pennock, J.R. Political Theory. E.C Smith and A.J Zurcher (ed.s): A Dictionary of
American Politics. New York, 1944.
Rajeev, B. (2008). Political Theory: an Introduction. Pearson Education India, 2008.
Mahajan, V. Political theory. 5th ed. India: S Chand & Company Ltd, 2015

1.8 Possible Answers to SAEs


Possible Answers to SAEs
1. Theory

72
Political systems theory is an all-encompassing theory that places an emphasis on the
broader social, economic, and cultural settings that put pressure on policymakers to act
and result in policy outputs and outcomes
2 Proponent of Political Systems Theory
David Easton's The Political System (1953), conceived the political system as integrating
all activities through which social policy is formulated and executed—that is, the political
system is the policy-making process
1. Types of Political Theory
In his book ‗Political Theory‘, describes political theory by dividing into two categories.
One is the traditional political approach which deals with the history of political ideas and
the other is the modern political approach which deals with modern political behavior and
scientific study (Andrew, 2012)
Political Theory is a set of an idea or observation that intends to explain the political,
social, and economic conditions in the state
2. Contemporary Political Theory
Since the 1970s there has been growing interest in political theory in the US, Europe, and
other parts of the world.
Passing away from the shadow of World War 2, the reemergence of Europe and crisis in
ideologies like socialism and communism bought about a new grace in political
ideologies.

Unit 5: Theories of Public Policy: Group Theory


1.1 Introduction
1.2 Learning Outcomes
1.3 Group Theory
1.3.1Assumption of Group Theory
1.4 Component of Group Theory
1.5 Limitations of Group theory
1.6 Summary
1.7 References/Further Readings/Web Resources
1.8 Possible Answers to Self-Assessment Exercise(s) within the content

1.1 Introduction
Group Theory
Group theorists perceive the political system as a gigantic network of groups in a constant
state of interaction with one another. This interaction takes the form of pressures and
counter pressures, the outcome of which defines the state of the political system at any
given time. A group may be defined as an aggregate of individuals who interact in
varying degrees in pursuance of a common interest (David, 1965). Examples of groups
are Trade unions, Cooperatives, Business, Ethnic and Religious Organizations;
institutional interest groups such as Legislatures, Bureaucracies, Political parties, the

73
Military, Churches etc. There are also interest groups in the form of spontaneous and
eruptive aggregations such as riots, demonstrations and other manifestations of mob
activity. A group becomes a political interest group when it makes claims through or
upon any institutions of government. This group believes that public policy is the product
of the group struggle. From this perspective, public policy is the equilibrium reached in
the group‘s struggle at any given moment, and it represents a balance which the
contending factions or groups constantly strive to weigh in their favour. Public Policy at
any given time will reflect the interests of dominant groups. As groups gain and lose
power and influence, public policy could be altered in favour of the interests of those
gaining influence against the interests of those losing influence.
Public policy is the product of the group struggle.

1.2 Learning Outcomes


At the end of this unit you should be able to:

i. Explain the Concept of Group Theory


ii. Discuss the Component of Group Theory
iii. State the Limitations of Group theory
iv. Explain the Application of Group theory

1.3 Group Theory


Group theory rests on the contention that interaction and struggle among groups are the
central facts of political life. A group is a collection of individuals that may, on the basis
of shared attitudes or interests, make claims upon other groups in society.

It becomes a political interest group "when it makes a claim through or upon any of the
institutions of government."

The individual is significant in politics only as a participant in or a representative of


groups. It is through groups that individuals seek to secure their political preferences.
A central concept in group theory is that of access. To have influence and to be able to
help shape governmental decisions, a group must have access, or the opportunity to
express its viewpoints to decision-makers.

Obviously, if a group is unable to communicate with decision-makers, if no one in


government will listen, its chances of affecting policymaking are slim. Access may result
from the group's being organized, from its having status, good leadership, or resources
such as money for campaign contributions.

74
Social lobbying—the wining, dining, and entertaining of legislators and other public
officials—can be understood as an effort to create access by engendering a feeling of
obligation to the groups involved.
In the nature of things, some groups will have more access than others. Public policy at
any given time will reflect the interests of those who are dominant. As groups gain and
lose power and influence, public policy will be altered in favor of the interests of those
gaining influence against the interests of those losing it.

1. One of the main agents for policy change is the initiative by the interest groups.

2. They pressure and interact with the policy makers on preferences and self interest

3. Thus, the role of the political system is to establish and enforce compromise between
various, conflicting interests in society.

1.3.1Assumption of Group Theory


The group model assumes that public policy is a balance of interest group influence;
policies change when particular interest groups gain or Lose influence. Group theory
starts with the idea that the most important thing in politics is how groups interact with
each other. People with similar goals get together, either formally or informally, to put
pressure on the government. David Truman, a political scientist, says that an interest
group is "a group with a shared attitude that makes claims on other groups in society." He
says that an interest group becomes political "if and when it makes a claim through or on
any of the government institutions." People are only important in politics when they do
something for or on behalf of a group. Putting the Model to Use
In "Tax Policy: Battling Special Interests," for example, we'll see how powerful interest
groups can be when it comes to getting special treatment in the tax code and stopping
efforts to change the country's tax laws.
The group becomes the most important link between the government and the individual.
Politics is really the fight between groups over how public policy is made. The job of the
political system is to deal with group conflicts. It does this by: 1) setting the rules of the
game in the group struggle, 2) making compromises and balancing interests, 3) making
compromises into public policy, and 4) making sure these compromises are followed.
Group theorists say that the balance reached in the group struggle is the public policy at
any given time. The relative power of different interest groups determines how well this
balance works. Changes in the relative power of any interest group are likely to lead to
changes in public policy. Policy will groups is determined by their numbers, wealth,
organizational strength, leadership, access to decision makers, and internal cohesion
away from the wants of groups that are losing power.
Forces that affect how the interest group system works
Several forces keep the whole system of interest groups, which is the political system
itself, in balance. First, there is a large, almost universal, hidden group in American
society that supports the Constitution and the rules of the game as they are now. This

75
group isn't always visible, but it can be used to punish any group that attacks the system
and threatens to upset the balance with a huge blow.
Second, group members who belong to more than one group help keep the balance by
keeping any one group from moving too far away from the values that are already in
place. People who are part of one group are also part of other groups. Because of this,
groups have to be careful not to offend their members who are part of other groups.
Lastly, the checks and balances that come from group competition also help to keep the
system in balance. For example, in Nigeria, no single group has more people than any
other. Each group's power is kept in check by the power of other groups.
"Countervailing" centers of power work to keep any one group from having too much
power and to protect individuals from being used.
Self-Assessment Exercises 1
i. Explain the Concept of Group Theory
ii. Discuss the Component of Group Theory

1.4 Limitations of Group theory


Even though it focuses attention on one of the major dynamic elements in policy
formulation in pluralist societies, group theory seems both to overstate the importance of
groups and to understate the independent and creative role that public officials, political
leaders, institutions and ideas play in the policy process. Group analysis has traditionally
assumed that individuals are bound together in order to enhance their chances of
obtaining a common goal or good. Implicit in this reasoning is the assumption that groups
pursue their self-interest in the same manner as individuals seek their self-interest.
(Olson, 1997) Shown in his Theory of Collective Goods is that individuals within large
groups will not ac t to achieve the common or group interest. This conclusion is based on
the premise that individuals act rationally and in their own self-interest. However, Olson
(1997) states that, If the members of a large group rationally seek to maximize their
personal welfare, they will not act to advance their common or group objectives unless
there is coercion to force them to do so, or unless some separate incentive, distinct from
the achievement of the common or group interest, is offered to the members of the group
individually on the condition that they help bear the costs or burdens involved in the
achievement of group objectives. Despite these limitations, real or perceived inter-group
hostilities and struggles have sometimes been exploited in the process of colonial or neo-
imperialist penetration of political systems in the less/technologically developed
countries.
Another shortcoming of group theory is that in actuality many people (e.g., the poor and
disadvantaged) and interests (such diffuse interests as natural beauty and social justice)
are either not represented or only poorly represented in the group struggle
Self-Assessment Exercises 2
i. State the Limitations of Group theory
ii. Explain the Application of Group theory

76
1.5 Application of Group theory
a) Public policy is the result of a fight between organized groups of people.
b) A group can become an interest group in politics. A political interest group can make
demands or change what people want from a government institution. c) A group should
have good leadership, a good status or reputation, resources, sources, social skills, and a
good relationship with people who make decisions.
d) Policy will be based on what the dominant group wants. e) What's wrong with group
theory? The poor and those with problems are not shown. The group isn't well put
together or doesn't have a clear goal.

1.6 Summary
This unit stated that, Group theory rests on the contention that interaction and struggle
among groups are the central facts of political life
It becomes a political interest group "when it makes a claim through or upon any of the
institutions of government
The group model assumes that public policy is a balance of interest group influence;
policies change when particular interest groups gain or Lose influence. Group theory
starts with the idea that the most important thing in politics is how groups interact with
each other Even though it focuses attention on one of the major dynamic elements in
policy formulation in pluralist societies, group theory seems both to overstate the
importance of groups and to understate the independent and creative role that public
officials, political leaders, institutions and ideas play in the policy process
Application of Group theory: a) Public policy is the result of a fight between organized
groups of people. b) A group can become an interest group in politics.

1.7 References/Further Readings/Web Resources

1.8 Possible Answers to SAEs


Answers to SAEs 1
1. Group Theory

77
Group theory rests on the contention that interaction and struggle among groups are the
central facts of political life. A group is a collection of individuals that may, on the basis
of shared attitudes or interests, make claims upon other groups in society.

It becomes a political interest group "when it makes a claim through or upon any of the
institutions of government

2. Assumption of Group Theory


The group model assumes that public policy is a balance of interest group influence;
policies change when particular interest groups gain or Lose influence. Group theory
starts with the idea that the most important thing in politics is how groups interact with
each other. People with similar goals get together, either formally or informally, to put
pressure on the government. David Truman, a political scientist, says that an interest
group is "a group with a shared attitude that makes claims on other groups in society
Answers to SAEs 2
1. Limitations of Group theory
Even though it focuses attention on one of the major dynamic elements in policy
formulation in pluralist societies, group theory seems both to overstate the importance of
groups and to understate the independent and creative role that public officials, political
leaders, institutions and ideas play in the policy process. Group analysis has traditionally
assumed that individuals are bound together in order to enhance their chances of
obtaining a common goal or good. Implicit in this reasoning is the assumption that groups
pursue their self-interest in the same manner as individuals seek their self-interest
2. Application of Group theory
a) Public policy is the result of a fight between organized groups of people.
b) A group can become an interest group in politics. A political interest group can make
demands or change what people want from a government institution. c) A group should
have good leadership, a good status or reputation, resources, sources, social skills, and a
good relationship with people who make decisions.
d) Policy will be based on what the dominant group wants. e) What's wrong with group
theory? The poor and those with problems are not shown. The group isn't well put
together or doesn't have a clear goal

78
MODULE 4

Unit 1:Elite Theory of Public Policy


1.1 Introduction
1.2 Learning Outcomes
1.3 Elite Theory
1.3.1 Briefly explain the Origin of Elite Theory
1.3.2 Highlight the basic assumption of Elite Theory
1.4 Discuss the Elite-Mass Model
1.5 Explain the implications of elite theory for policy analysis
1.6 Summary
1.7 References/Further Readings/Web Resources
1.8 Possible Answers to Self-Assessment Exercise(s) within the content

1.1 Introduction
Public policy can also be seen as the likes and dislikes of the people who run the country.
People often say that public policy reflects what "the people" want, but this may be a
myth about American democracy rather than the truth. Elite theory says that most people
don't care about public policy and don't know much about it. It also says that elites
influence public opinion on policy questions more than the public does. So, it turns out
that what the government does is really based on what the elites want. The elite set the
policies that public officials and administrators have to follow. Policies come from the
top down to the people; they don't come from what the people want.

1.2 Learning Outcomes


At the end of this unit you should be able to:
i. Briefly explain the Origin of Elite Theory
ii. Highlight the basic assumption of Elite Theory
iii. Discuss the Elite-Mass Model
iv Explain the implications of elite theory for policy analysis

1.3 Elite Theory


1.3.1 Origin of Elite Theory
The "classic" elite theories were developed by Vilfredo Pareto (1848-1923), Gaetano
Mosca (1858-1941), and Robert Michels in the late 19th and early 20th centuries (1876–
1936). Especially in regards to the importance of political power and charismatic

79
leadership, Max Weber's thoughts were strongly imprinted on subsequent iterations of
these beliefs
As a radical critique of two competing theoretical-ideological streams of thought—the
democratic theory ("government of the people, by the people, for the people," as Lincoln
put it in his Gettysburg Address) and the Marxist vision of class conflict leading to
revolution and egalitarian socialism—the classic theorists focused on the inevitable
existence of a group of powerful "elites" in all large-scale societies. In contrast to these
two ideologies, "elite theories" postulated a permanent split between a small group of
powerful people (named "elites," "ruling classes," "political classes," "oligarchies,"
"aristocracies," etc.) and the vast majority of people (called "masses") (Bottomore, 1993).
Pareto based elite domination on the talent and psychological dispositions of such groups,
combined with the skillful use of force and persuasion; Mosca saw the dominance of
"oligarchies" as the inevitable outcome of large-scale org structures; and Michels saw the
domination of "oligarchies" as reflecting a "material, intellectual, or even moral
superiority" (1939, p. 50) of ruling minorities. None of the three argued that economic
class differences could be reduced to or derived from preexisting social and political
hierarchies based on political power rather than property. Most crucially, elite theorists
claimed there was no way out of elite power, arguing that revolutions just mark the
circulation of elites and, as the Russian Revolution showed, do not reduce the disparity in
power between the elites and the masses. It follows that ideas like a truly democratic and
egalitarian political order are merely utopian ideals. According to Pareto, history is a
cemetery for failed aristocracies (1963, p. 1430).
The rise of fascist and communist movements and regimes, the consolidation of corporate
power, the expansion of bureaucratized mass parties, the consolidation of powerful and
centralized mass media, and the weakening of liberal capitalism are all consequences of
"modern trends" that strengthened the state. These developments were seen as the result
of bureaucratic industrialism by Mosca, Pareto, Michels, and Weber. They believed that
elites were best suited to manage democratic institutions, amass the privileges that power
brings, orchestrate mass support, and protect their positions by controlling access to the
top, given the increasing complexity of modern society and the need for progressive
bureaucratic organization of all activities. The basic assumption of classic elite theory is
its perspective on power stratification, which includes the insistence on the universality
of elites and the presentation of elite characteristics as crucial explanatory factors.
The second theoretical tenet deals with the ability of those in authority to coalesce into
coherent groups. Even among a tightly knit elite group, disagreements and splits over
particular policy issues are not out of the question. There is no way to stand in the way of
the elite when they are acting in concert to protect their shared power interests.
Third, elites are interconnected with "social forces," which might include things like
social movements, socioeconomic strata, and racial and ethnic communities. The
traditional elite theorists are hazy on the specific nature of such ties, but they assert that
they are necessary for elite dominance.
Fourth tenet: there must be a clear path to leadership. Access to the elite ranks is strictly
regulated by the elites themselves, both directly and indirectly, and requires the

80
acquisition of uncommon traits (such as wealth, prestige, and education). Institutional
"gatekeepers" (e.g., corporate hierarchies, political party machines) and elite
"selectorates" working at each level of hierarchical promotion are two ways that elites
manage the recruitment of their successors. One result of such discriminatory behaviors
is a skewed social make-up, while another is the maintenance of elite worldviews even in
the face of high rates of social mobility and elite turnover (i.e., the frequent replacement
of elite members).
The fourth principle describes the normal behavior of powerful people. Every theory of
the elite agrees on the concept of "manufactured" elite dominance by influence and
manipulation, sometimes backed up by force. democratic elections are largely symbolic
and serve as a useful instrument for the orderly movement of elite individuals, but they
do little to really change the structure of the elite themselves.
Scholars who study elites after World War II (1939–1955) downplayed elite coherence
and questioned the skepticism of classic theorists about democratization's chances.
According to Joseph Schumpeter's fundamental concept from 1954, regular elections for
political leadership are necessary in a modern democracy because of the importance of
elites. Many "plural," "democrat," and "neo-" elite theorists followed in Robert Dahl's
(1971) and Giovanni Sartori's (1981) footsteps in developing this concept. Empirical
investigations of contemporary elites (summarized by Robert Putnam in 1976) provided
support for this theory, finding that, unlike cohesive minority, modern democracies are
characterized by complex networks of competing and collaborating elite groups. The
central issue was whether or not elites (mostly in the United States) formed a
homogeneous and impregnable "power elite," or whether they were instead organized
into looser but no less powerful "plural" or "strategic" groups. However, these
investigations could not produce definitive results since any image of power distribution
is contingent on the definition and measurement of power. Those who relied on
reputation and tenure in high positions inside organizations to determine who held sway
painted an image of tightly knit "establishments" and "power elites." Those who instead
focused on key decision-makers as elites painted an image of "plural" elites, or groups of
contending elites.
Modern elite theorists, especially those who focus on postcommunist transformations,
look beyond these debates to see elites as part of larger power and stratification schemes,
to recognize the multifaceted nature of power, and to see elites as crucial "crafters" and
"sustainers" of democratic regimes. WlodzimierzWesolowski and Eva Etzioni-Halevi,
who both considered elites and classes as related, attempted perhaps the most well-known
theoretical synthesis of the class and elitevisions of the power system. According to this
theory, elites form coalitions ("couples") with powerful social groups and institutions.
Political elites are the most powerful minorities, whereas economic classes are
characterized by their respective roles as owners or laborers. John Higley and his
coworkers have investigated the connections between elite and regime types of power
(such as postcommunist regimes and well-established liberal democracies) by focusing
on two elite characteristics—structural integration and value/normative consensus—as
key determinants of political stability and the democratic character of regimes. Stable

81
liberal democracies can only be maintained by elites that are consensually united, that is,
elites that are characterized by inclusiveness and open access (broad integration) as well
as strong and widely shared agreement regarding the norms of political activity ("rules of
the game"). Stable yet undemocratic governments are run by elites who are united by
ideological formulas (like the Chinese), while disunited elites follow and prolong
unstable regimes.
Elite theory can be summed up in a few sentences: • There are a few people with power
and a lot of people who don't. Society's values are set by a small group of people; public
policy is not made by the masses.The few people who run things are not like the many
people who are run by them. Elites are mostly made up of people from the wealthiest
parts of society.
The movement of non-elites into positions of power must be slow and steady to keep
things stable and prevent a revolution. The only way for non-elites to join governing
circles is if they agree with the basic elite consensus.
The elites agree on what the basic values of the social system are and how to keep the
system going. In Nigeria, the elites agree on the importance of private property, the limits
of government, and the freedom of each person.
Public policy doesn't reflect what most people want, but rather what the elite value most.
Changes to public policy will be small and gradual, not big and sudden.The apathetic
masses don't have much direct power over the active elites. The elites have more power
over the masses than the masses do over the elites.
What does elite theory mean for the way policy analysis is done? Elitism means that
public policy is based less on what the people want and more on what the elites want,
value, and care about. Because of this, re-definitions lead to change and new ideas in
public policy.
1.3.2Assumption of Elite Theory
a) Reflects the values and preference of the elite
b) The ruling elite has presence and influence of the governmental decision-making
c) Society is divided between the haves and have nots The elite is the selected few but
does not reflex the needs of the masses
d) Elite consensus includes private enterprise, private property, and favors minimal
government intervention – big business.
e) Focus on the role of leadership in policy formation, the few govern the many
Self-Assessment Exercises 1
iii. Briefly explain the Origin of Elite Theory
iv. Highlight the basic assumption of Elite Theory

1.4 Elite-Mass Model


A policy-making elite operates in an atmosphere marked by apathy and information
distortion, and they are responsible for governing a mass population that is primarily
passive. The elite determine policy, which is then implemented by the masses. Those who
82
hold power in society are differentiated from those who do not hold power. Values that
set elites apart from the general population are held in common. The policies that are now
in place are reflective of elite beliefs, and as a result, they tend to maintain the status quo.
The elites enjoy greater income, greater education, and higher prestige than the majority
of the population. One way to look at the values and preferences of a ruling elite is to
consider how they influence public policy. More often than not, elite opinion determines
that of the masses. The elite make policy decisions, while public officials and
administrators merely implement those policies so that they can be "pushed down" to the
masses. It presupposes that 1)society is stratified between a dominant minority and a
helpless majority, and that only the minority may distribute value (the mass do not decide
public policy).
2)Elites are recruited disproportionately from the upper layers, which means that the few
do not represent the bulk in any way.
3) In order to keep the status quo and prevent a revolution, there needs to be a gradual
and ongoing ascent of those who are not part of the elite into positions of power; but, this
ascent can only occur once the non-elites embrace the values of the elites.
4) All members of society's elites are in agreement with the most fundamental social
system values, including private property, limited government, and individual liberty.
5) Changes in public policy will be more evolutionary than revolutionary, reflecting
shifts in the ideals held by elites in society (not mass demands).
6) The uninterested masses have very little impact on the behavior of influential elites.
The implication here is that the responsibility for the current condition of affairs, which
includes the welfare of the general populace, lies with the elites. The masses are
uninterested and poorly informed; the elite are able to manipulate the attitudes of the
masses; the masses only have a limited and indirect influence on decisions and policy.
Since information can only travel in a downward direction, democratic elections of the
people are only symbolic in the sense that they link the masses to the system through
political parties and the act of voting occasionally. Policies might shift slightly over time,
but the ruling elites are notoriously resistant to fundamental reform and won't let it
happen. The only policy options that will be given serious consideration are those that
fall within the range of elites' commonly held values. Competition centers on a narrow
range of issues, and elites agree more often 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, freedom to form
political parties and run for office, freedom to form political parties and run for office,
freedom to form political parties and run for office, 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. Because it is not possible to depend
on the people to constantly support these principles, the elite are required to support them
(CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, 2002).
Self-Assessment Exercises 2

83
1. Discuss the Elite-Mass Model
2. Explain the implications of elite theory for policy analysis

1.5 Implications of elite theory for policy analysis


What are the implications of elite theory for policy analysis? Elitism implies that public
policy does not reflect the demands of the people so much as it does the interests, values,
and preferences of elites. Therefore, change and innovations in public policy come about
as a result of redefinitions by elites of their own values. Because of the general
conservatism of elites-that is, their interest in preserving the system-change in public
policy will be incremental rather than revolutionary. Changes in the political system
occur when events threaten the systern, and elites, acting on the basis of enlightened self-
interest, institute reforms to preserve the system and their place in it. The values of elites
may be very "public regarding." A sense of noblesse oblige may permeate elite values,
and the welfare of the masses may be an important element in elite decision making.
Elitism does not necessarily mean that public policy will be hostile toward mass welfare
but only that the responsibility for mass welfare rests on the shoulders of elites, not
masses (CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, 2002).

1.6 Summary
This unit discussed the "classic" elite theories as developed by Vilfredo Pareto (1848-
1923), Gaetano Mosca (1858-1941), and Robert Michels in the late 19th and early 20th
centuries (1876–1936). Especially in regards to the importance of political power and
charismatic leadership, Max Weber's thoughts were strongly imprinted on subsequent
iterations of these beliefs. The basic assumption of Elite Theory are:
a) Reflects the values and preference of the elite
b) The ruling elite has presence and influence of the governmental decision-making
c) Society is divided between the haves and have nots The elite is the selected few but
does not reflex the needs of the masses
d) Elite consensus includes private enterprise, private property, and favors minimal
government intervention – big business.
e) Focus on the role of leadership in policy formation, the few govern the many.
A policy-making elite operates in an atmosphere marked by apathy and information
distortion, and they are responsible for governing a mass population that is primarily
passive. The elite determine policy, which is then implemented by the masses. Those who
hold power in society are differentiated from those who do not hold power. Values that
set elites apart from the general population are held in common. The policies that are now
in place are reflective of elite beliefs, and as a result, they tend to maintain the status quo.
The elites enjoy greater income, greater education, and higher prestige than the majority
of the population. One way to look at the values and preferences of ruling elite is to
consider how they influence public policy More often than not; elite opinion determines
that of the masses.

84
Elitism implies that public policy does not reflect the demands of the people so much as it
does the interests, values, and preferences of elites. Therefore, change and innovations in
public policy come about as a result of redefinitions by elites of their own values.
Because of the general conservatism of elites-that is, their interest in preserving the
system-change in public policy will be incremental rather than revolutionary.

1.7 References/Further Readings/Web Resources


Bottomore, T. (1993). Elites and Society. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.
Dahl, R. A. (1971). Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition. New Haven, CT: Yale
University Press.
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY (2002).women& public policy. LONG BEACH, GRADUATE
CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION.SUMMER 2002, THIRD SESSION
Domhoff, W. (1967). Who Rules America? Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Etzioni-Halevi, E. (1993). The Elite Connection: Problems and Potential of Western
Democracy. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.
Field, G. L., and John, H. (1980). Elitism. London: Routledge.
Higley, J., and Michael, B. (2006). Elite Foundations of Liberal Democracy. Lanham,
MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Higley, J., and Jan, P. (1995).Elites and Democratic Transitions in Eastern
Europe. Australian Journal of Political Science 30 (2): 32–54
Higley, J., Jan, P., and Wlodzimierz, W. (1998). Post-communist Elites and Democracy
in Eastern Europe. New York: St. Martin‘s.
Keller, S. (1963). Beyond the Ruling Class: Strategic Elites in Modern Society. New
York: Random House.
Mills, C. W. (1956). The Power Elite. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mosca, G. (1939). The Power Elite. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gaetano.M. (1939). The Power Elite. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pareto, V. (1963). A Treatise on General Sociology. New York: Dover.
Putnam, R. (1976). The Ruling Class. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Sartori, G. (1987). The Theory of Democracy Revisited. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.
Schumpeter, J. (1943). Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. London: Allen and
Unwin.
Wesolowski, W. (1977). Classes, Strata, and Power. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul

85
1.8 Possible Answers to SAEs
Answers to SAEs 1
1. The "classic" elite theories were developed by Vilfredo Pareto (1848-1923),
Gaetano Mosca (1858-1941), and Robert Michels in the late 19th and early 20th centuries
(1876–1936). Especially in regards to the importance of political power and charismatic
leadership, Max Weber's thoughts were strongly imprinted on subsequent iterations of
these beliefs
As a radical critique of two competing theoretical-ideological streams of thought—the
democratic theory ("government of the people, by the people, for the people," as Lincoln
put it in his Gettysburg Address) and the Marxist vision of class conflict leading to
revolution and egalitarian socialism—the classic theorists focused on the inevitable
existence of a group of powerful "elites" in all large-scale societies. In contrast to these
two ideologies, "elite theories" postulated a permanent split between a small group of
powerful people (named "elites," "ruling classes," "political classes," "oligarchies,"
"aristocracies," etc.) and the vast majority of people (called "masses") (Bottomore, 1993).
2. Highlight the basic assumption of Elite Theory
a) Reflects the values and preference of the elite
b) The ruling elite has presence and influence of the governmental decision-making
c) Society is divided between the haves and have nots The elite is the selected few but
does not reflex the needs of the masses
d) Elite consensus includes private enterprise, private property, and favors minimal
government intervention – big business.
e) Focus on the role of leadership in policy formation, the few govern the many.
Answers to SAEs 2
1. A policy-making elite operates in an atmosphere marked by apathy and information
distortion, and they are responsible for governing a mass population that is primarily
passive. The elite determine policy, which is then implemented by the masses. Those who
hold power in society are differentiated from those who do not hold power. Values that
set elites apart from the general population are held in common. The policies that are now
in place are reflective of elite beliefs, and as a result, they tend to maintain the status quo.
The elites enjoy greater income, greater education, and higher prestige than the majority
of the population. One way to look at the values and preferences of a ruling elite is to
consider how they influence public policy More often than not, elite opinion determines
that of the masses. The elite make policy decisions, while public officials and
administrators merely implement those policies so that they can be "pushed down" to the
masses. It presupposes that 1)society is stratified between a dominant minority and a
helpless majority, and that only the minority may distribute value (the mass do not decide
public policy).
2)Elites are recruited disproportionately from the upper layers, which means that the few
do not represent the bulk in any way.

86
3) In order to keep the status quo and prevent a revolution, there needs to be a gradual
and ongoing ascent of those who are not part of the elite into positions of power; but, this
ascent can only occur once the non-elites embrace the values of the elites.
2. What are the implications of elite theory for policy analysis? Elitism implies that
public policy does not reflect the demands of the people so much as it does the interests,
values, and preferences of elites. Therefore, change and innovations in public policy
come about as a result of redefinitions by elites of their own values. Because of the
general conservatism of elites-that is, their interest in preserving the system-change in
public policy will be incremental rather than revolutionary.

Unit 2:Public Choice Theory


1.1 Introduction
1.2 Learning Outcomes
1.3.1 Explain the Origin of Public Choice Theory
1.3.2 Discuss the School of Public Choice Theory
1.4 Explain the Critics Public Choice Theory
1.5 Briefly explain the Public Choice Theory and Collective Decision-Making
1.6 Summary
1.7 References/Further Readings/Web Resources
1.8 Possible Answers to Self-Assessment Exercise(s) within the content

1.1 Introduction
The public choice theory is a constructive theory of advocacy group politics that applies
the microeconomic perspectives of market exchange to issues pertaining to public policy
and political decision-making. Public choice theory is an approach that considers the
ways in which interest groups' policy preferences and relative bargaining power will
affect government policies

1.2 Learning Outcomes


At the end of this unit you should be able to:
2. Explain the Origin of Public Choice Theory
3. Discuss the School of Public Choice Theory
4. Explain the Critics Public Choice Theory
5. Briefly explain the Public Choice Theory and Collective Decision-Making

1.3 Public Choice theory


1.3.1 Origin of Public Choice Theory
87
This approach was borrowed from Anthony Downs' approach to policy selection (1957),
in which governments select policies to appeal to a winning coalition of voters. The
rationale underlying this idea holds that the government should give policy goods to
those organizations that are in the best position to campaign for their interests. In spite of
the fact that it has its roots in economics, the public choice approach has primarily been
utilized for the purpose of conducting research on political issues. In general, public
choice theory and interest group politics have been applied in a variety of political
contexts, including tax policy (Becker 1983), trade protection (Schattschneider 1935;
Eichengreen 1989), public good provision (Olson 1965), and economic sanctions. These
applications can be found in a number of different political works (Kaempfer and
Lowenberg 1992).
Although a market analogy is a helpful way to conceive of policy selection, according to
public choice theory, there remain significant differences between economic exchange
markets and political exchange markets. This is despite the fact that a market analogy is a
useful way to conceive of policy selection. For instance, it is commonly assumed that
economic market trades are: (1) carried out voluntarily; (2) beneficial to everyone
concerned; and (3) the ideal solution according to the Pareto principle. On the other hand,
political markets have a propensity to favor one group over others. As a result, political
markets are distributional and intrinsically conflictual. As a result, the political market is
defined by rivalry between opposing interest groups that use their political capital to
acquire the policies that best suit their needs.

The policy goods that are finally given by a government will, as a result of this
competition over policies between competing interest groups with opposing goals,
represent the influence-weighted preferences of the competing interest groups. Formally
speaking, an equilibrium will be reached in the political market when the influence-
weighted utilities of the stronger organizations are equal to the influence-weighted
disutilities of their weaker opponents. In addition, shifts in either the fundamental
distribution of power between competing groups or shifts in the relative importance that
different groups attach to different concerns will lead to changes in policy. These shifts
can occur independently of one another. In turn, these adjustments will influence
judgments on where these groups choose to employ the limited political capital that they
have.
1.3.2 School of Public Choice Theory
The "Chicago School," which considers the awarding of policy goods through a political
market to be relatively benign, and the "Virginia School," which is based at George
Mason University and is concerned about how competition over government largess
undermines social welfare through deadweight costs and inefficiencies, are the two
primary variants of public choice theory. The "Chicago School" considers the awarding
of policy goods through a political market to be relatively benign. Gary Becker and other
members of the Chicago School suggest that there are two reasons why these social
deadweight costs will be kept to a minimum in the future. First, because the utility of

88
policy goods increases at a diminishing rate (as market distortion and deadweight costs
accumulate), winner groups will become less likely to lobby for additional rents, while
loser groups will become more likely to lobby for relief and a rationalization of the
political economy. This is due to the fact that the utility of policy goods increases at a
diminishing rate (as market distortion and deadweight costs accumulate). Second,
because loser groups will fight to ensure that they experience the least amount of
disutilitiesfeasible, this will lead to a further reduction in the costs associated with
deadweight. As a consequence of this, the competition between opposing parties will
bring the expenses to society down to an absolute minimum.

On the other hand, members of the Virginia School point out that rent transfers, because
of their political nature, are frequently highly inefficient in order to disguise the extent to
which beneficiary groups are stealing from the community chest. This is done in order to
cover up the fact that rent transfers are politically motivated. Worse, when rents are
highly concentrated and their costs are widely defused, narrow rent-seeking interests may
be able to exploit collective action problems on behalf of the larger body politic for their
own benefit, resulting in further net social and economic inefficiencies. This is especially
problematic in situations in which rents are highly concentrated and their costs are widely
defused. For instance, the economist Gordon Tullock observes that farm support is
frequently provided through inefficient market manipulation, as opposed to the more
efficient cash subsidies, in order to conceal the true scope of the abnormal returns to
farming interests through the political process. This is done in order to avoid the
appearance of a conflict of interest (1989). As a result, the Virginia School has a
pessimistic outlook on the normative impact that interest groups have on the outcomes of
policy debates. This is because they are concerned about the interaction between the
pressures of interest groups and rent-seeking on governments, as well as the tendency of
governments to overregulate.
Self-Assessment Exercises 1
1. Explain the Origin of Public Choice Theory
2. Discuss the School of Public Choice Theory

1.4 Critics Public Choice Theory


In spite of the fact that the public choice theory and interest group politics have been used
in the literatures of political economy and economics with some degree of success.
Critics have pointed out two issues with this body of work that have the potential to be
important. Because the groups of interest are frequently portrayed as if they were
working in an institutionally unconstrained policy market, public choice theory may pay
short shrift to the essential role that domestic institutions play in shaping policy
outcomes. However, despite the fact that many works in the public choice tradition do not
address institutions in an explicit manner, it is still possible to incorporate them into such
a framework. Institutions, which are means for politically determining rules and setting
89
agendas, are subject to the same lobbying and bargaining processes as were detailed in
the previous section. To put it another way, if one considers institutions to be meta-
policies, then public choice methods can be utilized to endogenously assess the
construction of institutions as well as their impacts downstream.
Second, detractors argue that public choice theory, which was developed primarily within
the political context of the United States of America, is not appropriate for use in non-
democratic countries such as those in which opposition groups' abilities to lobby for their
policy preferences are restricted. However, it is essential to keep in mind that the term
"lobbying" is merely a metaphor, and it is not necessary to take it in its literal sense.
According to the public choice theoretical framework, the term "lobbying" can apply to
any form of influence. No matter what kind of government is in place, political
negotiation of some kind will always take place, even if it is just covert. Disenfranchised
groups in nondemocratic countries can signal their policy preferences by engaging in acts
of political resistance such as fomenting armed rebellion. This can have the effect of
having an indirect influence on the political process, even though the preferences of
excluded groups in nondemocratic countries may not directly affect the political process.
Because it raises the expenses of enforcement and administration, this opposition, or the
possibility of it, effectively works as a tax on the ruling group's willingness and ability to
unilaterally determine policy. This is because it causes the costs to increase. Therefore,
even in nondemocratic nations, policies will be set through a process of bargaining
between different groups with opposing interests. However, ruling groups in authoritarian
regimes are, of course, likely to enjoy policies that are far closer to their desires. In these
regimes, political capital is extremely concentrated, in contrast to the relatively
widespread distribution of political capital that exists within democratic regimes.
Self-Assessment Exercises 2
1. Explain the Critics Public Choice Theory
2. Briefly explain the Public Choice Theory and Collective Decision-Making

1.5 Public Choice Theory and Collective Decision-Making


The field of public choice is the economic study of non-market decision making, with a
particular emphasis on applying economic analysis to the process of formulating public
policy. Traditionally, economics studied behavior in the marketplace and assumed that
individuals pursued their own private interests. Political science, on the other hand,
studied behavior in the public arena and assumed that individuals pursued their own
personal conception of what was in the public interest. The theory of homo economicus
posited a self-interested actor aiming to maximize personal profits, while the idea of
homo-politicus suggested a public-spirited actor seeking to promote social welfare. As a
result, separate versions of human motivation arose in economics and political science.
The theory of public choice, on the other hand, casts doubt on the idea that people's
actions in politics are qualitatively distinct from those they display in the market. This
theory operates under the premise that all political actors, including voters, taxpayers,

90
candidates, lawmakers, bureaucrats, interest groups, parties, and governments, are
motivated by a desire to maximize their own interests, not only in the marketplace but
also in politics. James Buchanan, an economist who won the Nobel Prize and is
considered the leading scholar in the field of contemporary public choice theory,
contends that individuals come together in politics for their own mutual benefit, just as
they come together in the marketplace; and by agreement (contract) among themselves,
they can improve their own well-being, in the same way that they can enhance their own
well-being by trading in the marketplace. 6 In a nutshell, people seek their own self-
interest in both politics and the marketplace; but, even when people are motivated by
their own self-interest, they can still gain from collective decision making and help one
other out.
Individuals enter into a social contract with one another for their mutual advantage,
wherein they agree to respect laws and support the government in exchange for
protection of their own lives, liberty, and possessions. This agreement gives rise to the
institution of government. Therefore, proponents of the public choice theory assert that
they are the intellectual successors of the English political philosopher John Locke, as
well as of Thomas Jefferson, who included the concept of a social contract in the
Declaration of Independence of the United States of America. Individuals are motivated
by their enlightened self-interest to reach a constitutional bargain that establishes a
government to defend life, liberty, and property.
According to the public choice theory, the government is required to undertake certain
duties that the free market is unable to manage; more specifically, the government is
required to fix certain "market failures." To begin, the government is responsible for
providing what are known as "public goods," which are defined as commodities and
services that must be provided to anyone who receives them. Because their expenses
exceed their value to any single buyer, the market is unable to offer public goods;
additionally, a single buyer would not be in a position to prevent non-buyers from
utilizing the product in question. The most famous example is national defense: security
from foreign invasion is too expensive for a single person to purchase, and once it is
granted, no one can be excluded from its benefits once they have been provided.
Therefore, in order to provide for the common defense, the people must act jointly
through the government. Second, externalities are an additional type of market failure
that is widely acknowledged and provides reason for government action. When the
actions of one person, group of people, or local government inflict costs on other people
without compensating them, this is known as an externality. The most common instances
are pollution of the air and water; the discharge of pollutants into the air and water causes
additional expenditures for other people. In response, governments either choose to
regulate the activities that produce externalities or to impose penalties (fines) on these
activities in order to pay for the costs that these activities have on society. The general
failure of political parties and politicians to present voters with distinct policy alternatives
during election campaigns can be partially explained by public choice theory. The
advancement of ideals is not a priority for political parties or candidates; rather, their
focus is on winning elections. It is not the case that they win elections in order to

91
establish policy; rather, they win policy positions in order to win elections. As a result,
every political party and candidate strives to adopt policy stances that will appeal to the
largest possible number of voters. Parties and candidates tend to shift toward the center of
the political spectrum in order to maximize the number of votes they receive when the
distribution of opinions on any policy subject is unimodal. Ideologues, or those who are
illogical and motivated by ideology, are the only ones who disregard the vote-
maximizing centrist strategy.

1.6 Summary
This unit explained explains the Origin of Public Choice Theory. It was said that, the
theory was borrowed from Anthony Downs' approach to policy selection (1957), in
which governments select policies to appeal to a winning coalition of voters. The
rationale underlying this idea holds that the government should give policy goods to
those organizations that are in the best position to campaign for their interests. In spite of
the fact that it has its roots in economics, the public choice approach has primarily been
utilized for the purpose of conducting research on political issues. In general, public
choice theory and interest group politics have been applied in a variety of political
contexts, including tax policy (Becker 1983), trade protection (Schattschneider 1935;
Eichengreen 1989), public good provision (Olson 1965), and economic sanctions. These
applications can be found in a number of different political works (Kaempfer and
Lowenberg 1992)
The "Chicago School," which considers the awarding of policy goods through a political
market to be relatively benign, and the "Virginia School," which is based at George
Mason University and is concerned about how competition over government largess
undermines social welfare through deadweight costs and inefficiencies, are the two
primary variants of public choice theory. The "Chicago School" considers the awarding
of policy goods through a political market to be relatively benign
On the other hand, members of the Virginia School point out that rent transfers, because
of their political nature, are frequently highly inefficient in order to disguise the extent to
which beneficiary groups are stealing from the community chest. This is done in order to
cover up the fact that rent transfers are politically motivated
In spite of the fact that the public choice theory and interest group politics have been used
in the literatures of political economy and economics with some degree of success.
Critics have pointed out two issues with this body of work that have the potential to be
important. Because the groups of interest are frequently portrayed as if they were
working in an institutionally unconstrained policy market, public choice theory may pay
short shrift to the essential role that domestic institutions play in shaping policy
outcomes. However, despite the fact that many works in the public choice tradition do not
address institutions in an explicit manner, it is still possible to incorporate them into such
a framework. Institutions, which are means for politically determining rules and setting
agendas, are subject to the same lobbying and bargaining processes as were detailed in
the previous section. To put it another way, if one considers institutions to be meta-
92
policies, then public choice methods can be utilized to endogenously assess the
construction of institutions as well as their impacts downstream.
Second, detractors argue that public choice theory, which was developed primarily within
the political context of the United States of America, is not appropriate for use in non-
democratic countries such as those in which opposition groups' abilities to lobby for their
policy preferences are restricted
The field of public choice is the economic study of non-market decision making, with a
particular emphasis on applying economic analysis to the process of formulating public
policy. Traditionally, economics studied behavior in the marketplace and assumed that
individuals pursued their own private interests. Political science, on the other hand,
studied behavior in the public arena and assumed that individuals pursued their own
personal conception of what was in the public interest. The theory of homo economicus
posited a self-interested actor aiming to maximize personal profits, while the idea of
homo-politicus suggested a public-spirited actor seeking to promote social welfare.

1.7 References/Further Readings/Web Resources


Becker, G. S. (1983). A Theory of Competition Among Pressure Groups for Political
Influence. Quarterly Journal of Economics 98 (3): 371–400
Downs, A. (1957). An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper.
Eichengreen, Barry. 1989. The Political Economy of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff. Research
in Economic History 12: 1–43.
Kaempfer, W., and Lowenberg, A. (1992). International Economic Sanctions: A Public
Choice Perspective. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Major, S., and McGann, A. J. (2005). Caught in the Crossfire: ―Innocent Bystanders‖ as
Optimal Targets of Economic Sanction. Journal of Conflict Resolution 49 (3): 337–
359.
Mueller, D. C. (2003). Public Choice III. New York: Cambridge University Press

1.8 Possible Answers to SAEs


Answers to SAEs 1
1. This approach was borrowed from Anthony Downs' approach to policy selection
(1957), in which governments select policies to appeal to a winning coalition of
voters. The rationale underlying this idea holds that the government should give
policy goods to those organizations that are in the best position to campaign for
their interests. In spite of the fact that it has its roots in economics, the public
choice approach has primarily been utilized for the purpose of conducting research
on political issues. In general, public choice theory and interest group politics have
93
been applied in a variety of political contexts, including tax policy (Becker 1983),
trade protection (Schattschneider 1935; Eichengreen 1989), public good provision
(Olson 1965), and economic sanctions. These applications can be found in a
number of different political works (Kaempfer and Lowenberg 1992)
2. The "Chicago School," which considers the awarding of policy goods through a
political market to be relatively benign, and the "Virginia School," which is based at
George Mason University and is concerned about how competition over government
largess undermines social welfare through deadweight costs and inefficiencies, are
the two primary variants of public choice theory. The "Chicago School" considers the
awarding of policy goods through a political market to be relatively benign
On the other hand, members of the Virginia School point out that rent transfers, because
of their political nature, are frequently highly inefficient in order to disguise the extent to
which beneficiary groups are stealing from the community chest. This is done in order to
cover up the fact that rent transfers are politically motivated.

Answers to SAEs 2
1. In spite of the fact that the public choice theory and interest group politics have been
used in the literatures of political economy and economics with some degree of
success.
Critics have pointed out two issues with this body of work that have the potential to be
important. Because the groups of interest are frequently portrayed as if they were
working in an institutionally unconstrained policy market, public choice theory may pay
short shrift to the essential role that domestic institutions play in shaping policy
outcomes. However, despite the fact that many works in the public choice tradition do not
address institutions in an explicit manner, it is still possible to incorporate them into such
a framework. Institutions, which are means for politically determining rules and setting
agendas, are subject to the same lobbying and bargaining processes as were detailed in
the previous section. To put it another way, if one considers institutions to be meta-
policies, then public choice methods can be utilized to endogenously assess the
construction of institutions as well as their impacts downstream.
Second, detractors argue that public choice theory, which was developed primarily within
the political context of the United States of America, is not appropriate for use in non-
democratic countries such as those in which opposition groups' abilities to lobby for their
policy preferences are restricted
2. The field of public choice is the economic study of non-market decision making, with
a particular emphasis on applying economic analysis to the process of formulating
public policy. Traditionally, economics studied behavior in the marketplace and
assumed that individuals pursued their own private interests. Political science, on the
other hand, studied behavior in the public arena and assumed that individuals pursued
their own personal conception of what was in the public interest. The theory of homo
economicus posited a self-interested actor aiming to maximize personal profits, while

94
the idea of homo-politicus suggested a public-spirited actor seeking to promote social
welfare.

Unit 3: Agenda Setting


1.1 Introduction
1.2 Learning Outcomes
1.3 Agenda Setting
1.3.1 Explain the Problem Identification and Agenda Setting
1.4 Discuss the AGENDA Setting
1.5 Evaluate the Agenda, Starting From the Top Down
1.6 Explain the Interest Groups and Policymaking
1.7 Define the concept Lobbying
1.8 Summary
1.9References/Further Readings/Web Resources
1.10 Possible Answers to Self-Assessment Exercise(s) within the content

1.1 Introduction
Studies on public policy typically concentrate on the process by which policies are
formulated rather than the policies themselves or the factors that contribute to their
creation. The examination of the actions or procedures that take place inside a political
system is typically included in the scope of the study of the formulation of public policy.
Although it may be useful to think of policymaking as a series of procedures, in practice,
these activities very rarely take place in a clean, step-by-step sequence. This is despite the
fact that thinking about policymaking in this way may be helpful. Rather, these processes
frequently take place at the same time, with each one blending into the others as it goes.
It is possible for various political players and institutions, such as lawmakers, interest
groups, lobbyists, executives and bureaucrats, reporters and commentators, think tanks,
attorneys and judges, to be involved in separate processes at the same time, even within
the same policy domain. The act of policymaking is rarely as orderly as the process
model suggests. In spite of this, it is frequently helpful for analytical purposes to break
policy making down into its component components in order to have a better
understanding of how policies are formulated.

1.2 Learning Outcomes


At the end of this unit you should be able to:
i. Explain the Agenda Setting
ii. Discuss the AGENDA Setting
iii. Evaluate the Agenda, Starting From the Top Down

95
iv. Explain the Interest Groups and Policymaking
v. Define the concept Lobbying

1.3 Agenda Setting


1.3.1what is Agenda Setting
Who makes the decisions regarding what will be decided? In the process of developing
policies, having the authority to choose which issues will be prioritized is of the utmost
importance. It is of even greater significance to determine what the difficulties will be
than it is to determine what the remedies will be.
A significant number of civics textbooks give the impression that agenda setting simply
"happens." In a culture that is open and pluralistic like ours, it is sometimes said that the
lines of access and communication to the government are constantly available, which
allows for any topic to be debated and placed on the agenda of national decision making.
It has been suggested that individuals and groups can organize themselves to take on the
jobs of defining problems and providing solutions to those problems. People are able to
identify their own interests, organize themselves and people around them, convince
others to support their cause, acquire access to government officials, influence decision
making, and monitor the implementation of government policies and programs. In point
of fact, there is a school of thought that suggests that contentment can be inferred from
the absence of political activity of this kind. But the fact of the matter is that problems
with public policy do not simply "happen." Important political strategies include the
creation of a problem, the dramatization of that problem, the drawing of attention to that
problem, and the exertion of pressure on the government to do something about the
problem. These strategies are utilized by politically significant individuals, well-
organized interest groups, organizations concerned with policy formulation, and political
candidates and office-holders, and perhaps most important, the mass media. These are the
tactics of "agenda setting."

TABLE 3-1 Policymaking as a Process Policymaking can be seen as process-how


policies are made
S/N Process Activity Activity
Participants

Problem Publicizing societal Mass media


Identification problems Interest groups
Expressing demands for Citizen initiatives
government action Public opinion

Agenda Setting Deciding what issues Elites, including president,


will be National Assembly

96
decided, what problems
will be
addressed by
government
.ij.
Developing policy
proposals to
resolve issues and
ameliorate
problems
Policy Selecting a proposal Candidates for elective office
Formulation Developing political Mass media
support for it
Enacting it into law
Policy Deciding on its Think tanks
Legitimation constitutionality President and executive office
Budgeting and National Assembly committees
appropriations Interest groups
Organizing departments
and agencies
Providing payments or
services
Levying taxes
Policy Reporting outputs of Interest groups
Implementation government President
Programs National Assembly , Courts
Policy Evaluating impacts of President and presidential staff
Evaluation policies on Executive departments and
target and non-target agencies
groups Independent agencies and
Proposing changes and government corporations
"reforms"

1.3.2 AGENDA Setting


The "bottom-up," popularly driven paradigm of decision making is the one that is most
commonly used in the study of policymaking in the field of American political science.
This "democratic-pluralist" model presumes that any problem can be identified by
individuals or groups, by candidates seeking election, by political leaders seeking to
enhance their reputation and prospects for reelection, by political parties seeking to
define their principles and/or create favorable popular images of themselves, by the mass
media seeking to "create news," and even by protest groups deliberately seeking to call
attention to a particular issue. And of course, the public's attention is drawn to a variety
97
of crises and catastrophes, which can range from those caused by nature, such as storms
and droughts, to those caused by humans, such as mass murders in schools and airplane
crashes, which push public leaders to take action.
Opinion Polling and Agenda-Setting Events, as well as the media's coverage of such
events, have the ability to bring topics, problems, and so-called "crises" to the forefront
of public consciousness. Following the tragic attacks that were broadcast live on
television on September 11, 2001 against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the
public's primary concern was with terrorism. After some time had passed, opinion polls
indicated that the war in Iraq had become "the most critical concern facing the country."
During the legislative elections that took place in 2006, when Democrats from the
opposition won control of both houses of Congress, the problem of Iraq appeared to be
the most important policy concern facing the country.
However, the prospect of a complete collapse of the financial system and a severe
economic downturn quickly displaced all other matters on the public's mind. The fight
against corruption, along with maintaining national security, was elevated to the position
of "top priority" under the administration of President Buhari. The majority of Americans
now rank preventing future terrorist attacks lower on their list of policy priorities than
they did previously. Other topics, including but not limited to Social Security, education,
healthcare, budget deficits, the poor, crime, defense, and taxation, followed following.
Only a small percentage of Americans ranked immigration, foreign commerce, lobbying,
and the environment as their highest priority topics. The nation's focus was ultimately not
on the issue of global warming.
The Agenda, Starting From the Top Down
When V.O. Key Jr. was faced with the same challenge that we are, determining the
impact that popular preferences have on public policy, he came to the conclusion that
"the missing piece of the puzzle" was "that thin stratum of persons referred to variously
as the political elite, the political activists, the leadership echelons, or the influentials."
This is the same group of people that we refer to as "the political elite," "the political
activists," "the leadership echelons," and "the influential The longer one spends
pondering the mystery of how democratic regimes are able to operate, the more plausible
it appears that a significant portion of the explanation is to be found in the motives that
activate the leadership echelon, the values that it upholds, the rules of the political game
to which it adheres, in the expectations that it entertains about its own status in society,
and possibly in some of the objective circumstances, both material and institutional, in
which it operates. This idea is supported by the observation that 1
Opinions of the General Public Regarding Policy Making. It is interesting to note that the
majority of American citizens believe that the government pays very little heed to their
views on public affairs and that persons who work in government have little awareness of
what the general public believes. The vast majority of people living in the United States
believe that their country is "controlled by a small number of powerful interests, the
sources of wealth used in the development of national policy come from both
corporations and individuals. The endowments, grants, and contracts that result from this
money are distributed to various foundations, educational institutions, and think tanks

98
that are concerned with policy. Additionally, corporation presidents, directors, and other
top wealth-holders also sit on the governing boards of these organizations and monitor
the broad direction of their work themselves, rather than "for the benefit of all of the
people."" And an overwhelming majority of people in the country are of the opinion that
things would be better for the country if public
Self-Assessment Exercises 1
1. Explain the Problem Identification and Agenda Setting
2. Discuss the AGENDA Setting
1.4 Interest Groups and Policymaking
Washington is awash in special interest groups, lawyers and law firms, lobbyists, and
influence peddlers. Interest groups are active in both policy formulation and policy
legitimating. Organized interests frequently develop policy proposals of their own and
forward them to the White House or to members of Congress or the mass media to place
on the agenda of decision making. And they are even more active in policy legitimating.
Indeed, political life in Washington is a blur of "lobbying," "fund-raising," "opening
doors," "mobilizing grassroots support," "rubbing elbows," and "schmoozing."
Interest groups influence government policy in a variety of ways. It is possible to
categorize efforts to influence government policy as follows:
1. Direct lobbying, including testifying at committee hearings, contacting government
offices directly, presenting research results, and assisting in the writing of legislation
2. Campaign contributions made through political action committees (PACs)
3. Interpersonal contacts, including travel, recreation, entertainment, and general
"schmoozing," as well as the "revolving door" exchange of personnel between
government offices and the industries and organizations representing them
4. Litigation designed to force changes in policies through the court system, wherein
interest groups and their lawyers bring class actionsuits on behalf of their clients or
file amicus curiae(friend of the court) arguments in cases in which they are interested
5. Grassroots mobilization efforts to influence Congress and the White House by
encouraging letters, calls, and visits by individual constituents and campaign contributors
Self-Assessment Exercises 2
1. Evaluate the Agenda, Starting From the Top Down
2. Explain the Interest Groups and Policymaking
3. Define the concept Lobbying

1.5Lobbying
Washington's influence industry is a billion dollar business. Each year lobbyists spend
almost $3 billion trying to influence policy-more than $5 million for each member of
Congress. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce regularly ranks at the top of the lobbying
spenders. At the industry group level, pharmaceutical and health product manufacturers
spend a great deal on lobbying. The insurance industry also ranks high in direct lobbying

99
expenditures, followed by telephone utilities, the oil and gas industry, the defense
industry, and electric utilities.

1.6 Summary
This unit discussed Public Policy Process with emphases in Problem Identification and
Agenda Setting. Problem Identification and Agenda Setting asserted that, the decisions
regarding what will be decided? In the process of developing policies, having the
authority to choose which issues will be prioritized is of the utmost importance. It is of
even greater significance to determine what the difficulties will be than it is to determine
what the remedies will be. A significant number of civics textbooks give the impression
that agenda setting simply "happens.
AGENDA Setting is the process ofPublic Policy Process. The "bottom-up," popularly
driven paradigm of decision making is the one that is most commonly used in the study
of policymaking in the field of American political science. This "democratic-pluralist"
model presumes that any problem can be identified by individuals or groups, by
candidates seeking election, by political leaders seeking to enhance their reputation and
prospects for reelection, by political parties seeking to define their principles and/or
create favorable popular images of themselves, by the mass media seeking to "create
news," and even by protest groups deliberately seeking to call attention to a particular
issue. And of course, the public's attention is drawn to a variety of crises and
catastrophes, which can range from those caused by nature, such as storms and droughts,
to those caused by humans, such as mass murders in schools and airplane crashes, which
push public leaders to take action.
Opinion Polling and Agenda-Setting Events, as well as the media's coverage of such
events, have the ability to bring topics, problems, and so-called "crises" to the forefront
of public consciousness
When V.O. Key Jr. was faced with the same challenge that we are, determining the
impact that popular preferences have on public policy, he came to the conclusion that
"the missing piece of the puzzle" was "that thin stratum of persons referred to variously
as the political elite, the political activists, the leadership echelons, or the influentials
Interest Groups and Policymaking for instance,Washington is awash in special interest
groups, lawyers and law firms, lobbyists, and influence peddlers. Interest groups are
active in both policy formulation and policy legitimating. Organized interests frequently
develop policy proposals of their own and forward them to the White House or to
members of Congress or the mass media to place on the agenda of decision making
Lobbying for instance,Washington's influence industry is a billion dollar business. Each
year lobbyists spend almost $3 billion trying to influence policy-more than $5 million for
each member of Congress. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce regularly ranks at the top of
the lobbying spenders. At the industry group level, pharmaceutical and health product
manufacturers spend a great deal on lobbying

100
1.7 References/Further Readings/Web Resources
Dye, T R. (2005).Understanding public policy. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-
Publication Data

1.8 Possible Answers to SAEs


Answers to SAEs 1
1. Public Policy Process with emphases in Problem Identification and Agenda Setting.
Problem Identification and Agenda Setting asserted that, the decisions regarding what
will be decided? In the process of developing policies, having the authority to choose
which issues will be prioritized is of the utmost importance. It is of even greater
significance to determine what the difficulties will be than it is to determine what the
remedies will be. A significant number of civics textbooks give the impression that
agenda setting simply "happens.
2. AGENDA Setting is the process ofPublic Policy Process. The "bottom-up," popularly
driven paradigm of decision making is the one that is most commonly used in the
study of policymaking in the field of American political science. This "democratic-
pluralist" model presumes that any problem can be identified by individuals or groups,
by candidates seeking election, by political leaders seeking to enhance their reputation
and prospects for reelection, by political parties seeking to define their principles
and/or create favorable popular images of themselves, by the mass media seeking to
"create news," and even by protest groups deliberately seeking to call attention to a
particular issue. And of course, the public's attention is drawn to a variety of crises
and catastrophes, which can range from those caused by nature, such as storms and
droughts, to those caused by humans, such as mass murders in schools and airplane
crashes, which push public leaders to take action. Opinion Polling and Agenda-Setting
Events, as well as the media's coverage of such events, have the ability to bring topics,
problems, and so-called "crises" to the forefront of public consciousness

Answers to SAEs 2
1. When V.O. Key Jr. was faced with the same challenge that we are, determining
the impact that popular preferences have on public policy, he came to the
conclusion that "the missing piece of the puzzle" was "that thin stratum of persons
referred to variously as the political elite, the political activists, the leadership
echelons, or the influentials

101
2. Interest Groups and Policymaking for instance,Washington is awash in special
interest groups, lawyers and law firms, lobbyists, and influence peddlers. Interest
groups are active in both policy formulation and policy legitimating. Organized
interests frequently develop policy proposals of their own and forward them to the
White House or to members of Congress or the mass media to place on the agenda
of decision making
3. Lobbying for instance,Washington's influence industry is a billion dollar business.
Each year lobbyists spend almost $3 billion trying to influence policy-more than
$5 million for each member of Congress. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce
regularly ranks at the top of the lobbying spenders. At the industry group level,
pharmaceutical and health product manufacturers spend a great deal on lobbying

Unit 4: Public Policy Cycle


1.1 Introduction
1.2 Learning Outcomes
1.3 Problem Definition
1.4 Policy Alternatives/Policy Formulation
1.5 Policy Option
1.6 Policy Design
1.7 Policy Implementation and Monitoring
1.8 Evaluation
1.9 Summary
1.10 References/Further Readings/Web Resources
1.11 Possible Answers to Self-Assessment Exercise(s) within the content

1.1 Introduction
There are different approaches to the policy-making process depending on the context
and purpose(s), the textbook model commonly accepted within the field of policy science
is called the public policy cycle. Anderson (1994); Bardach (1996) and Dye (1992)
identified the following process:
1. Problem Definition
2. Constructing the Policy Alternatives/Policy Formulation
3. Choice of Solution/Selection of Preferred Policy Option
4. Policy Design
5. Policy Implementation and Monitoring
6. Evaluation

1.2 Learning Outcomes


At the end of this unit you should be able to:

102
1.3 Public Policy Cycles
1.3.1Problem definition:
Problem definition means that, a problem exists that requires government actions. As a
starting point in the policy-making process, a problem is usually identified by a group of
people in a particular society. If you as the policy specialist are also interested in finding
a solution to this problem, you will attempt to get it onto the government‘s political
agenda, i.e., turn the problem into an issue, or make it a higher priority issue if it is
already on the agenda. In order to do this, it is necessary to convince both the relevant
government agency and the broader policy community that a real problem exists which
requires government action. In order to achieve this in the politicized world of public
policy, you will need to present a suitably persuasive and comprehensive argument which
details the causes, effects and extent of the problem based on a wide variety of sources.
Policy Making Arena: Negotiating(Actors), Bargaining (Groups) and Struggling
(Implementer)
Political Process: Pressure and Supports
Administrative Process: Competence and capacity, Decision and Action
Legislative Process: Review, Investigation and Enactments
Judicial Process: Restraint and resolving conflict
According to Birkland (1997) an agendais a collection of problems, understandings of
causes, symbols, solutions, and other elements of public problems that come to the
attention of members of the public and their governmental officials.
The political agenda is the set of issues that are the subject of decision making and debate
within a given political system at any one time.
While Agenda Setting is the process by which problems and alternative solutions gain or
lose public and elite attention ; group competition to set the agenda is fierce because no
society or political institutions have the capacity to address all possible alternatives to all
possible problems that arise at any one time ; group must therefore fight to earn their
issues places among all the other issues sharing the limited space or to prepare for the
time when a crisis makes their issue more likely to occupy a more prominent on the
agenda.
Unlike traditional academia which focuses on building knowledge within a group of
peers, policy science must address real-world problems, and therefore provide
recommendations and a framework for their application within the targeted society.
For example, it is not enough to analyze the causes and patterns of unemployment in a
particular society in order to contribute to its understanding as a social phenomenon; a
policy study must apply this knowledge to the real situation on the ground by
understanding the causes, showing that it is a problem within the community in question
and suggesting a course of action to address the problem. Hence, the problem solution
relationship must be seen at the heart of the discipline, which means that any analysis
undertaken must be driven and targeted on the search for a practical, implementable and
comprehensive outcome. Problem inherence in society could be any of the following;
103
inability to define social welfare Limits to democracy and the paradox of voting, Inability
to define the marginal benefits and costs of public goods, Political constraints, Cultural
constraints, Institutional constraints, Legal constraints, Knowledge constraints and
Analytical constraints (Birkland,1997).
The search for such a practical outcome not only requires a well-elaborated and
comprehensive analysis of all available data, but as the issues under consideration are of
a societal nature, the policy researcher or analyst will also have to make some value-
driven judgments about the outcome that would best address the specific problem. Hence,
proposing specific solutions in the highly politicized environment of public policy and to
such a broad audience, means that central to the work of the policy specialist is not just
the cold empiricism of data analysis, but probably even more important is the ability to
convince your audience of the suitability of your policy recommendations. In other
words, the presentation of the outcomes of your data analysis will probably not be
enough to make an impact in the policy debate on a particular issue, but through the use
of this data as evidence in a comprehensive and coherent argument of your position, you
will give your work the best possible chance of having this impact (Birkland, 1997).
1.3.2Policy alternatives/Policy formulation:
Policy alternatives/Policy formulation means that, Considerations are given to all
possible solutions. Once the nature of the problem is sufficiently detailed and the issue is
on the government agenda, the first step in attempting to address the issue is to elaborate
the possible ways it can be solved, i.e., determine the policy options. In order to construct
appropriate alternatives, you will need to consider what is currently being done, what
options others are suggesting as well as your own suggestions. You should try to make
the different options mutually exclusive, i.e., avoid options that are simply variations of
the same idea. Also, consider that it will be difficult to find the ideal alternative, so you
should try to search for the most feasible and realistic policy alternatives for the context
Self-Assessment Exercises 1
1. Explain the Problem Definition
2. Discuss the Policy Alternatives/Policy Formulation
3. Examine the Policy Option

1.4Policy Options
Choice of solution/Selection of preferred policy option: Evaluate each option and choose
your preferred one.Following the elaboration of the alternatives, a preferred policy option
to address the particular problem is then selected based on a set of evaluation criteria. The
use of this criteria-based evaluation process not only allows you to choose a suitable
alternative, but it will also form the basis on which you can authoritatively argue for the
legitimacy of your policy option. Although the issue in question and the context will
determine the specifics of the evaluation criteria, commonly used criteria in this process
are as follows (Bardach, 1996):
i. Effectiveness: To what extent will this alternative produce the desired outcomes, i.e.,
solve the current problem?
104
ii. Efficiency: Based on a cost-benefit analysis of both money and social impact, how will
this option affect the target groups?
iii. Equity: Is there a fair distribution of costs and benefits?
vi. Feasibility/Implementable: Is there a suitable political, administrative and legal
framework in place to allow for the effective and efficient implementation of this option?
– Flexibility/Improvability: Does this option have the flexibility to be changed to suit
other possible situations or allow for improvements?
Bardach (1996) gives some useful advice for this step by suggesting that you should try
to quantify (in terms of both monetary and social costs) as many aspects of your option
and projections as possible, use causal modelling approaches and try to be realistic rather
than optimistic about the possible outcomes of alternatives. When you have evaluated all
your alternatives, compared the outcomes and weighed up the differences, you need to
decide which the best outcome is.
1.5Policy designs:
Government chooses a policy instrument and a delivery organization mix. Once you have
selected your preferred policy option and presented it to the relevant government agency,
and assuming that they also accepted it fully or modify your proposal, it now becomes
public policy. The government agencies must now decide how they can most effectively
implement the policy. In order to elaborate an effective policy design, the agency must
choose a policy instrument mix (e.g., legal, organizational or network empowerment) and
a delivery organization mix (e.g., governmental or non-governmental, public or private)
to provide the services or products outlined in the policy.
1.6 Policy implementation and monitoring
Government implements and monitors policy. Next, the policy is implemented according
to the policy design. A balance between good policy design and effective implementation
usually leads to the most effective outcomes. Also, an on-going process of monitoring
needs to be conducted which forms the basis of a comprehensive evaluation procedure
relying on multiple sources of data. According to both Anderson (1994) and Howlett and
Ramesch (1996), many policy specialists have taken a keen interest in implementation
strategies as they have a direct effect on the quality of policy outcomes and some choose
to publish on these issues.
1.7Evaluation
Government and delivery organization evaluate the effectiveness of the policy. Within
the framework of any good policy design and implementation plan, acomprehensive
evaluation procedure is essential in determining the effectiveness ofthe implemented
policy and in providing the basis for future decision-making. Indesigning a policy
evaluation plan, government agencies and delivery organizationsneed to consider how the
policy objectives can be accurately and effectively measuredand how the evaluation data
collected will be used as a basis for decision-making.
The evaluation process consists of looking at the particular public policy in practice, both
in terms of objectives and means employed. It will probably involve a broad group of
people including bureaucrats, politicians as well as non-governmental agencies and other
stakeholders.

105
As can be seen from the circular and iterative nature of the policy cycle, following the
evaluation stage any of the following may be reconsidered: the problem, the chosen
policy option, the policy design or implementation. This means that the issue may be put
back on the agenda, put back to another stage of the process or may continue to be
implemented in the same way.
Self-Assessment Exercises 2
1. Discuss the Policy Design
2. Explain Policy Implementation and Monitoring
3. Evaluate Evaluation

1.8 Summary
This unit discussed Public policy cycle as the bedrock of any government. It is what
differentiates one government from another. The programmes and projects of the
governments are usually derived from the policies. This therefore makes the development
of policy management skills necessary for both public servants and public office holders.
A bad policy can make a government loose an election. It is therefore important that
public policy formulation process should include a very robust consultation stage which
will enable all the ramifications of the policy to be considered

1.9 References/Further Readings/Web Resources

Bardach, Eugene (1996). The eight step path of policy analysis: A handbook for practice.
Berkeley: Berkeley Academic Press.
Birkland, T. A. (1997) After Disaster: Agenda Setting, Public Policy, and Focusing
Events. Georgetown University Press, Washington,DC
Ranney, A. (1975), The governing of Men; 4th edition; Hinsdale; the Dryden press.

1.10 Possible Answers to SAEs


Answers to SAEs 1
1. Problem definition:
Problem definition means that, a problem exists that requires government actions. As a
starting point in the policy-making process, a problem is usually identified by a group of
people in a particular society. If you as the policy specialist are also interested in finding

106
a solution to this problem, you will attempt to get it onto the government‘s political
agenda, i.e., turn the problem into an issue, or make it a higher priority issue if it is
already on the agenda
2. Policy alternatives/Policy formulation:
Policy alternatives/Policy formulation means that, Considerations are given to all
possible solutions. Once the nature of the problem is sufficiently detailed and the issue is
on the government agenda, the first step in attempting to address the issue is to elaborate
the possible ways it can be solved, i.e., determine the policy options. In order to construct
appropriate alternatives, you will need to consider what is currently being done, what
options others are suggesting as well as your own suggestions
3. Policy Options
Choice of solution/Selection of preferred policy option: Evaluate each option and
choose your preferred one.Following the elaboration of the alternatives, a
preferred policy option to address the particular problem is then selected based on
a set of evaluation criteria. The use of this criteria-based evaluation process not
only allows you to choose a suitable alternative, but it will also form the basis on
which you can authoritatively argue for the legitimacy of your policy option.
Answers to SAEs 2
1. Policy designs:
Government chooses a policy instrument and a delivery organization mix. Once you have
selected your preferred policy option and presented it to the relevant government agency,
and assuming that they also accepted it fully or modify your proposal, it now becomes
public policy.
2. Policy implementation and monitoring
Government implements and monitors policy. Next, the policy is implemented according
to the policy design. A balance between good policy design and effective implementation
usually leads to the most effective outcomes. Also, an on-going process of monitoring
needs to be conducted which forms the basis of a comprehensive evaluation procedure
relying on multiple sources of data
3. Evaluation
Government and delivery organization evaluate the effectiveness of the policy. Within
the framework of any good policy design and implementation plan, acomprehensive
evaluation procedure is essential in determining the effectiveness ofthe implemented
policy and in providing the basis for future decision-making.

Unit 5: Public Policy Implementation


1.1 Introduction
1.2 Learning Outcomes
1.3 Implementation of Public Policy
1.3.1 Instrument of Public Policy Implementation
1.3.2 Feature of Implementable Public Policy
1.4 Model/Approaches to Policy Implementation

107
1.4.1 Iglesias Model of Implementation
1.4.2 Smith Model of Policy Implementation
1.4.3 Grindle‘s Model of Implementation
1.5 Metaphor of implementation failure and Challenges of Project/Policy
Implementation
1.6 Challenges of Project/Policy Implementation
1.7 Summary
1.8 References/Further Readings/Web Resources
1.9 Possible Answers to Self-Assessment Exercise(s) within the content

1.1 Introduction
Implementation of public policy follows its initiation or formulation policy,
implementation process would be seen as all activities that must be undertaken to carry
out an intention from its conception to realization.
The policy implementation to some policy analysts includes the time lag or period when
an action is being conceived to the point when the objectives being conceived have been
realized. There are three elements in the implementation of a given policy namely (i) a
decision to be made concerning the organizational structure.
(ii) Policy goals must be translated into specific rules and regulations. (iii) Resources
must be allocated and rules must be applied to the specific problems addressed by the
policy. Bearing the three major elements in mind, one can make a reference into a
comment of Bamisaye (1983) when he asserts that ―the success of any given policy
depends on how well it has been implemented. ―A policy that is well formulated may end
in failure if not well implemented. But a policy that is badly formulated with good
implementation may end into successful ground‖.

1.2 Learning Outcomes


At the end of this unit, you should be able to:
i. Explain the various instrument of Public Policy Implementation
ii. State Feature of Implementable Public Policy
iii. Examine the Model/Approaches to Policy Implementation
iv. Explain the Iglesias Model of Implementation
v. Evaluate Smith Model of Policy Implementation
vi. Explain the Grindle‘s Model of Implementation
vii. Discuss the metaphor of implementation failure and Challenges of
Project/Policy Implementation

1.3 Implementation of Public Policy


1.3.1 Instrument of Public Policy Implementation

108
According to Cobb & Ross (1976), Instrument of Public Policy Implementation are;
Organizational unit, Bureaucratic structure, organization, standard operational procedure,
disposition, authority, planning, coordination, communication, modality, Resources and
resource allocation
1.3.1 Feature of Implementable Public Policy
1. All issues commonly perceived by members of a political community as meriting
public attention of public authorities.
2. To get access to systemic agenda an issue must have: widespread attention/awareness
shared concern of a sizeable portion of public and shared perception that it is a matter
of concern to a public authority.
3. Explicitly up for active and serious consideration by decision makers.
4. May be an old item which is up for regular review or is of periodic concern. Or it
may be a ‗new‘ item.
5. governmental/ formal oriented problem
Self-Assessment Exercise 1
1. Explain the various instrument of Public Policy Implementation
2. State Feature of Implementable Public Policy

1.4 Model/Approaches to Policy Implementation

This is the stage where policy goals and objectives are translated into concrete
achievements through various programmes. Scholars contend that this is the most
difficult phase of the policy process, in view of several assumptions can take the form of
faithful implementation, changes contemplated are technically feasible and that resources
like money, materials and men (knowledge) are adequate and available to implement the
policy. To this extent, distortions arise in the course of implementation.
The above therefore suggests that the socio-political context of the policy process,
institutional performance/capabilities and identification of the target group should be
carefully done and built into policy implementation. Some of these approaches are:
1.4.1 Iglesias Model of Implementation
This model argues that implementation worldwide is a problem. The model which was
developed by David U.Iglesias sees implementation process as a function of an
administrative agency and so if the policy is not well implemented the administrative
agency ought to be blamed. He tried to isolate and identify factors which will enhance or
increase the capability of administrative agencies to implement programmes. Thus,
Iglesias was concerned with the factor that will help to implement programmes, example,
if one wants to go into a water project; Iglesias says there should be good water engineers
for that project to succeed and not just any engineer. He listed the following factors that
will help in implementing projects:
The Structure: For any policy to succeed there must be a stable organized structure.

109
The Technology: This refers to information essential for the operation of the
organization.
For instance, if any external affairs minister is brought into a system he is not familiar
with, he cannot perform. He needs good knowledge of what is involved.
The Support: This refers to the range of actual potential roles and behaviour of persons
and entities which tend to promote attainments of set organizational goals. Any policy
that does not have support, input, and compliance from the people will not work. Thus,
part of the reason why the Structural Adjustment Programme in Nigeria failed is because
people did not support the programme following the hardship it brought on the people.
The Resources: These refer to personnel, without good expertise the project will not
succeed.
Leadership: Good leadership that can influence, facilitate implementation and change
things is necessary for any organization to succeed. Poor leadership hinders progress.
1.4.2 Smith Model of Policy Implementation
Smith says that government policies are deliberate policies to establish new transaction
pattern or to bring about a change. Policies are not by chance; thus, public policy is a
purposive action by government to establish new transaction pattern. When government
takes any new issue, the reason is to take action or cause a change in the society or
organization. For instance, Poverty Alleviation Programmes are established to solve the
problem of poverty so that those who have been at certain level of poverty can move up,
and some to get a job and start earning money. Operation Feed the Nation was to produce
food.
The model maintained that policy serve as tension generating force in society, since,
policies are intended to bring about change in the society, some people will be affected so
there is bound to be tension in the society. There are people who used to serve as maids
but with provision of free education, those maids may not want to continue as maids
anymore, and this will cause tension to those masters. Even as school becomes free, and
children go to school, no mother releases her child as maid; it generates tension. So
changes at times bring tension and can generate conflict. Smith went further to say that in
the process of implementation, tension, stress and conflicts are created between the
implementer and those affected by the policy. When government wants to dualize roads,
some houses will be affected.
Smith, the chief exponent of the model argues that stress and conflict occur within
components of the implementation process, and they are: (i) Idealized policy
implementation, which involves the interaction of policy makers with particular idealized
elements. This is done to set a standard or practice that must be followed as ideal. (ii)
Implementing organization: This emphasizes that there should be the organization
responsible for implementation of the policy. That organization is a unit of governmental
bureaucracy. Among all the categories of theory, smith model says an unqualified and
unstable administrative organization may reduce the capacity to implement public policy.
(iii) Target groups: These are groups affected by the policy, when the target group is
against the policy or indifferent; there will not be any good implementation; this
indifference could be because of prior policy failure.

110
1.4.3 Grindle’s Model of Implementation
Grindle‘s model argues that the implementation of a programme is influenced by
thoseinterested and affected by the programme. That policy implementation brings
changes insocial, political and economic life of the people, and when a good policy
produces socialchange the programme will attract people in that area, some looking for
jobs, some tochange their social life style. He mentions that when people are going to
benefit from aparticular programme they will show a lot of supports. For example, if the
government decides to provide electricity, it is for all the people and the support theygive
to that programme will affect or influence the implementation. Those whose interestsare
threatened by such project are bound to oppose the project, and those who stand to
gainare bound to encourage the implementation of the project. If Nigeria is to have a
constantsupply of light, many people will not buy generator, in that case the people
selling generatorwill lose market and will not be happy, and they will make sure the
implementation ofelectricity policy in the community is not efficiently done.
Grindles tried to explain the contextual variables that influence project implementation
process in Third World countries. He outlined some factors that influenced
implementation of policies as: inadequate definition of goals, Socio -political context in
which the policy is proposed and executed, the political nature of the place which the
policy is to be implemented matters a lot for the smooth implementation of the plan. In
Nigeria for instance, the instability in the political sphere of the country affects the
implementation of such policies due to political changes. Available institutional
capabilities- most time provision is not made for the institution that is going to implement
such a policy, it is always good to consider whether the institution will have the means to
implement such policies. Lack of identification of target group, when a policy is
formulated, and the target group is not determines, there is always a problem of sabotage.
Lack of continuity and commitment: Poor monetary term, a situation where there is many
project competing for resources, the success of the competing interest group depends on
the political resources at their disposal with which to bargain as well as the strategies
adopted, sometimes there is no money to complete a project that has been started or it
could be due to financial misappropriation. Also, the power base and strategies of actors
involved in the implementation can influence the course of implementation.
1.5 Metaphor of implementation failure and Challenges of Project/Policy
Implementation

i. Machine Metaphor: Result of poor chain of command – problems with structure and
roles
ii. Organism metaphor: Result of ‗human relations‘ or the ‗environment‘
iii. Brain metaphor: Result of poor Information flows-or ‗learning/ problems
iv. Domination Metaphor: Result of labour/management conflict.
v. Culture metaphor: Result of the ‗culture‘of the organization
vi. Psychic metaphor: Result of subconsciousforces - groupthink/ego
defenses/repressedsexual instincts.
vii. Power metaphor: Result of power in and around the implementationprocess

111
1.6 Challenges of Project/Policy Implementation
Most projects suffer some failures at implementation stage. Reasons for this are as
follows:
1. Inadequate definition of goals. Most times the goals lack clarity, compatibility,
where various goals are pursued, implementation is also complicated.
i. Over ambitious Goals. Doing many things without achieving any.
ii. Lack of well defined programme: In Nigeria, for example, specific actions aimed at
achieving policy goals and objectives are often not well articulated. Hence,
implementation usually takes the form of trial and error. In some cases programme
chosen may not be politically acceptable and politically attractive to the national
policy decision.
2. Cultural consideration: Cultural consideration hampers project implementation in
many areas. Policies in some communities are difficult to implement due to the belief
of the people-the people see it as a taboo or violation of their culture.
i. Compromises: Compromises during implementation could be a problem; it could alter
the basic goals. Policies could be formulated but at the implementation in order to
favour some factions of the country changes its direction which tends to alter the sole
aim of such projects.
3. Political Opposition: This refers to the resistance of all sorts which manifest
themselves from all groups of people or individuals during the implementation
process. Here primordial interests often overcome the rational, practical process.
Decision makers only think of themselves and their immediate families (Felicia Okim,
1988).
4. Lack of continuity and commitment. A situation where there has been a developed
plan and stated in the plan like building of shopping complex. Leader ‗1‘ might start
the project only for leader ‗2‘ to come in and abandon the project.
5. Insufficient capital to handle projects. For any project to be effectively
implemented, the resources for its implementation must be adequately put in place,
when money is not available at the right time it hinders implementation. –
6. Social economic factor: This is one of the problems of policy implementation in
Nigeria. Predatory elites in Nigeria go out to borrow but do not invest the money.
They exploit and deplete the economy.
i. Inexperienced implementers, I know it all disposition.
ii. Lack of data to follow up events (Egonmwam, 2000).
iii. Abuse of Contract Awards: In some cases, contracts are awarded to contractors who
have connections, even when their estimates exceed those of others and their
efficiency is in doubt. Some collect mobilization fees, misuse them and perform very
poorly. In certain cases, bad jobs are approved by officials who bribed to do so. Also,
because there is no rigid law to be invoked against any defaulting contractor than to
terminate the contract agreement and re-award it to another contractor, the
indiscriminate abuses by contractors tend to delay project execution and seriously
affect plan, implementation and cost (Ayo, 1987)

112
6. Corruption: The 2004 corruption perception index, released by Transparency
International (TI) the watchdog on global corruption rank, for Instance, Nigeria as the
third most corrupt country in the world. In 2003, the organization ranked Nigeria
second, one step improvement from the previous position as the most corrupt country
in the world. Although President OlusegunObasanjo disputed the rating, many
Nigerians agreed that it was correct. No doubt these unfortunate and corrupt practices
affect project implementation as they occur at various stages of project execution
(Ejiogu, 2005:11).
Self-Assessment Exercise 2
1. Explain the three Model/Approaches to Policy Implementation
2. State metaphor of implementation failure

1.7 Summary
This unit explained the public policy implementation. Various instruments and models of
public policy implementation were also discussed. It concluded that, a policy that is
formulated which is not implemented cannot solve the problem. Implementation is
putting the goals and objectives set forth in a policy decision into practice. Policy
implementation therefore, includes all activities that must be undertaken on the course of
action to be followed in order to realize the intended objectives of a given policy.

1.8 References/Further Readings/Web Resources


Cobb R W, Ross J.K., Ross, M. H. (1976) Agenda building as a comparative political
process.American Political ScienceRe.iew70: 126-38
David U.I. (2000). Public Policy Analysis, Concept and Applications. Benin, Resyin
(Nig) Company
Iglesias, D. U. (2000). Public Policy Analysis, Concept and Applications. Benin, Resyin
(Nig) Company.
Smith, D. G. (2000) in Egonmwam.Public Policy Analysis, Concept And Applications.
Benin, Resyin (Nig) Company.

1.9 Possible Answers to SAEs


Answers to SAEs 1
1. According to Cobb & Ross (1976), Instrument of Public Policy Implementation are;
Organizational unit, Bureaucratic structure, organization, standard operational
procedure, disposition, authority, planning, coordination, communication, modality,
Resources and resource allocation
2. Feature of Implementable Public Policy

113
a. All issues commonly perceived by members of a political community as meriting
public attention of public authorities.
b. To get access to systemic agenda an issue must have: widespread attention/awareness
shared concern of a sizeable portion of public and shared perception that it is a matter
of concern to a public authority.
c. Explicitly up for active and serious consideration by decision makers.
d. May be an old item which is up for regular review or is of periodic concern. Or it
may be a ‗new‘ item.
e. governmental/ formal oriented problem

Answers to SAEs 1
1 Model/Approaches to Policy Implementation
Iglesias Model of Implementation
This model argues that implementation worldwide is a problem. The model which was
developed by David U.Iglesias sees implementation process as a function of an
administrative agency and so if the policy is not well implemented the administrative
agency ought to be blamed
Smith Model of Policy Implementation
Smith says that government policies are deliberate policies to establish new transaction
pattern or to bring about a change. Policies are not by chance; thus, public policy is a
purposive action by government to establish new transaction pattern. When government
takes any new issue, the reason is to take action or cause a change in the society or
organization. For instance, Poverty Alleviation Programmes are established to solve the
problem of poverty so that those who have been at certain level of poverty can move up,
and some to get a job and start earning money. Operation Feed the Nation was to produce
food
Grindle’s Model of Implementation
Grindle‘s model argues that the implementation of a programme is influenced by
thoseinterested and affected by the programme. That policy implementation brings
changes insocial, political and economic life of the people, and when a good policy
produces socialchange the programme will attract people in that area, some looking for
jobs, some tochange their social life style
2 Metaphor of implementation failure and Challenges of Project/Policy
Implementation

i. Machine Metaphor: Result of poor chain of command – problems with


structure and roles
ii. Organism metaphor: Result of ‗human relations‘ or the ‗environment‘
iii. Brain metaphor: Result of poor Information flows-or ‗learning/ problems
iv. Domination Metaphor: Result of labour/management conflict

114
MODULE 5
Unit 1: Public Policy Analysis I
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Learning Outcomes
1.3 Models of Public Policy Analysis
1.4 Process policy model Analysis
1.5 Rational policy model Analysis
1.6 Incremental policy model Analysis
1.7 Summary
1.8 References/Further Readings/Web Resources
1.9 Possible Answers to Self-Assessment Exercise(s) within the content

1.1 Introduction
Jenkins-Smith, (1990) Policy analysis is a set of techniques and criteria with which to
evaluate public policy options and select among them to rationalize the development and
implementation of public policy and as the means to greater efficiency and equity in
allocation of public resources
Policy analysis can be divided into two major fields (Bührs, Bartlett and Robert, 1993):
Analysis of existing policy, which is analytical and descriptive – it attempts to explain
policies and their development.
Analysis for new policy, which is prescriptive – it is involved with formulating policies
and proposals (for example: to improve social welfare).
The areas of interest and the purpose of analysis determine what types of analysis are
conducted. A combination of two kinds of policy analyses together with program
evaluation would be defined as policy studies. According to Hambrick (1998) Public
Policy analysis is frequently deployed in the public sector, but is equally applicable to
other kinds of organizations, such as non-profit organizations and non-governmental
organizations. Policy analysis has its roots in systems analysis, an approach used by
United States Secretary of DefenceRobert McNamara in the 1960s.

1.2 Learning Outcomes


At the end of this unit, you should be able to:
i. Discuss the Models of Public Policy Analysis
ii. Explain the Process policy model Analysis
iii. Analyze the Rational policy model Analysis
iv. Evaluate the Incremental policy model Analysis

1.3 Models of Public Policy Analysis

115
Many models exist to analyze the development and implementation of public policy.
Analysts use these models to identify important aspects of policy, as well as explain and
predict policy and its consequences. Each of these models is based upon the types of
policies (Hugo, 1972).
Government (e.g. federal, provincial, municipal)
Policies adopted within public institutions (e.g. hospitals, child care centres, schools)
Workplace (e.g. policies that govern employees and employee-manager relations)
Some evidence supported models are (Sharkansky, 1978):
Public policy is determined by a range of political institutions, which give policy
legitimacy to policy measures. In general, the government applies policy to all citizens
and monopolizes the use of force in applying or implementing policy (through
government control of law enforcement, court systems, imprisonment and armed forces).
The legislature, executive and judicial branches of government are examples of
institutions that give policy legitimacy. Many countries also have independent, quasi-
independent or arm's length bodies which, while funded by government, are independent
from elected officials and political leaders. These organizations may include government
commissions, tribunals, regulatory agencies and electoral commissions
1.4 Process policy model Analysis
Policy creation is a process that typically follows a sequence of steps or stages (Hugo,
1972):
Identification of a problem (also called "problem definition") and demand for government
action. Different stakeholders may define the same issue as different problems. For
example, if homeless people are using illegal drugs such as heroin in a city park, some
stakeholders may define this as a law enforcement issue (which, in their view, could be
best solved if police presence in the park is stepped up and if the individuals using illegal
drugs are arrested and punished); on the other hand, other stakeholders may view this as a
poverty and public health issue (which, in their view, could be best solved if public health
nurses and government medical doctors and substance abuse counsellors were sent to the
park to do outreach with the drug-using individuals, and encourage them to voluntarily
enter "detoxification" or rehabilitation programs)
Agenda setting policy analysis
Formulation of policy proposals by various parties (e.g., citizen groups, congressional
committees, think tanks, interest groups, lobby groups, non-governmental organizations)
(Hugo, 1972).
Policy selection/adoption and legal enactment of a selected policy by elected officials
and/or houses of representatives. At this stage, policy legitimating is conferred upon the
selected policy solution(s) (Starling, 1988).
Policy implementation, which involves civil servants putting the selected policy option
into practice. Depending on the choice made by the executive or legislative branch, this
could involve creating new regulation (or removing existing regulations), creating new
laws, creating a new government program or service, creating a new subsidy or grant, etc.

116
Policy evaluation: After the policy has been in place for a year or several years, civil
servants or an independent consulting firm assesses the policy, to see if the goals were
achieved, if the policy was implemented effectively, etc.
This model, however, has been criticized for being overly linear and simplistic (Young,
and Enrique, 2009). In reality, stages of the policy process may overlap or never happen.
For example, in some cases, a political Also, this model fails to take into account the
multiple factors attempting to influence the process itself as well as each other, and the
complexity this entails.
One of the most widely used model for public institutions are of Herbert A. Simon, the
father of rational models. It is also used by private corporations. However, many criticize
the model due to characteristics of the model being impractical and relying on unrealistic
assumptions. For instance, it is a difficult model to apply in the public sector because
social problems can be very complex, ill-defined and interdependent. The problem lies in
the thinking procedure implied by the model which is linear and can face difficulties in
extraordinary problems or social problems which have no sequences of happenings
Self-Assessment Exercises 1
Discuss the Models of Public Policy Analysis
Explain the Process policy model Analysis

1.5 Rational policy model Analysis


The rational model of decision-making is a process for making sound decisions in policy-
making in the public sector. Rationality is defined as ―a style of behaviour that is
appropriate to the achievement of given goals, within the limits imposed by given
conditions and constraints‖ (Herbert, 1976). It is important to note the model makes a
series of assumptions, such as: 'The model must be applied in a system that is stable';
'The government is a rational and unitary actor and that its actions are perceived as
rational choices'; 'The policy problem is unambiguous'; 'There are no limitations of time
or cost.
Furthermore, in the context of the public sector policy models are intended to achieve
maximum social gain. Simon identifies an outline of a step by step mode of analysis to
achieve rational decisions. Ian Thomas describes Simon's steps as follows:
Intelligence gathering — A comprehensive organization of data; potential problems and
opportunities are identified, collected and analyzed.
Identifying problems — accounting for relevant factors.
Assessing the consequences of all options — Listing possible consequences and
alternatives that could resolve the problem and ranking the probability that each potential
factor could materialize in order to give a correct priority to said factor in the analysis.
Relating consequences to values — With all policies there will be a set of relevant
dimensional values (for example, economic feasibility and environmental protection) and
a set of criteria for appropriateness, against which performance (or consequences) of each
option being responsive can be judged.

117
Choosing the preferred option — the policy is brought through from fully understanding
the problems, opportunities, all the consequences & the criteria of the tentative options
and by selecting an optimal alternative with consensus of involved actors (Thomas,
2007).
The model of rational decision-making has also proven to be very useful to several
decision making processes in industries outside the public sphere. Nonetheless, there are
some who criticize the rational model due to the major problems which can be faced &
which tend to arise in practice because social and environmental values can be difficult to
quantify and forge consensus around (Morgan; Kandlikar; Risbey; Dowlatabadi, 1999).
Furthermore, the assumptions stated by Simon are never fully valid in a real world
context.
Further criticism of the rational model include: leaving a gap between planning and
implementation, ignoring of the role of people, entrepreneurs, leadership, etc., the
insufficiency of technical competence (i.e. ignoring the human factor), reflecting too
mechanical an approach (i.e. the organic nature of organizations), requiring of
multidimensional and complex models, generation of predictions which are often wrong
(i.e. simple solutions may be overlooked), & incurring of cost (i.e. costs of rational-
comprehensive planning may outweigh the cost savings of the policy).
However, Thomas R. Dye, the president of the Lincoln Center for Public Service, states
the rational model provides a good perspective since in modern society rationality plays a
central role and everything that is rational tends to be prized. Thus, it does not seem
strange that ―we ought to be trying for rational decision-making‖ (Dye, 2007).
1.6 Incremental policy model Analysis
An incremental policy model relies on features of incremental decision-making such as:
satisfying, organizational drift, bounded rationality, and limited cognition, among others.
Such policies are often called "muddling through" & represent 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; as such, past policies are
accepted as having some legitimacy. When 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. Such models necessarily struggle to improve the acceptability of
public policy.
Criticisms of such a policy approach include: challenges to bargaining (i.e. not successful
with limited resources), downplaying useful quantitative information, obscuring real
relationships between political entities, an anti-intellectual approach to problems (i.e. the
preclusion of imagination), and a bias towards conservatism (i.e. bias against far-reaching
solutions).
For instance, there are many contemporary policies relevant to gender and workplace
issues. Actors analyze contemporary gender-related employment issues ranging from
parental leave and maternity programs, sexual harassment, and work/life balance to
gender mainstreaming. It is by the juxtaposition of a variety of research methodologies
focused on a common theme the richness of understanding is gained. This integrates what

118
are usually separate bodies of evaluation on the role of gender in welfare state
developments, employment transformations, workplace policies, and work experience.
Self-Assessment Exercises 2
Analyze the Rational policy model Analysis
Evaluate the Incremental policy model Analysis

1.6 Summary
The unit examined the models of Public Policy Analysis, many models exist to analyze
the development and implementation of public policy. Analysts use these models to
identify important aspects of policy, as well as explain and predict policy and its
consequences. Each of these models is based upon the types of policies (Hugo, 1972).
Government (e.g. federal, provincial, municipal)
Policies adopted within public institutions (e.g. hospitals, child care centres, schools)
Workplace (e.g. policies that govern employees and employee-manager relations)
Policy creation is a process that typically follows a sequence of steps or stages (Hugo,
1972):
Identification of a problem (also called "problem definition") and demand for government
action. Different stakeholders may define the same issue as different problems. For
example, if homeless people are using illegal drugs such as heroin in a city park, some
stakeholders may define this as a law enforcement issue (which, in their view, could be
best solved if police presence in the park is stepped up and if the individuals using illegal
drugs are arrested and punished); on the other hand, other stakeholders may view this as a
poverty and public health issue (which, in their view, could be best solved if public health
nurses and government medical doctors and substance abuse counsellors were sent to the
park to do outreach with the drug-using individuals, and encourage them to voluntarily
enter "detoxification" or rehabilitation programs)
The rational model of decision-making is a process for making sound decisions in policy-
making in the public sector. Rationality is defined as ―a style of behaviour that is
appropriate to the achievement of given goals, within the limits imposed by given
conditions and constraints‖ (Herbert, 1976). It is important to note the model makes a
series of assumptions, such as: 'The model must be applied in a system that is stable'
An incremental policy model relies on features of incremental decision-making such as:
satisfying, organizational drift, bounded rationality, and limited cognition, among others.
Such policies are often called "muddling through" & represent 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; as such, past policies are
accepted as having some legitimacy

1.7 References/Further Readings/Web Resources

119
Bührs, T.; B., Robert V. (1993).Environmental Policy in New Zealand.The Politics of
Clean and Green.Oxford University Press.
Hugo, H. (1972). Review Article: Policy Analysis, British Journal of Political Science, 2:
85.
Morgan M.G., Kandlikar M., Risbey J.; Dowlatabadi H. (1999). Why Conventional Tools
for Policy Analysis Are Often Inadequate for Problems of Global Change". Climatic
Change.41 (3-4): 271–281
National Open University of Nigeria Online materials on Public Administration and
Public Policy Analysis (2017).National Open University of Nigeria Printing Press.
Retrieved from http://nouedu.net/sites/default/files/
National Open University of Nigeria, (NOUN) (2010). Course Guide on PAD 802:
Ecology of Public Administration. Lagos. National Open University of Nigeria Printing
Press. Retrieved from http://nouedu.net/sites/default/files/
Nyong, M.O. (2001) Public Policy, Public Sector Economics and Management in
Nigeria.Calabar. A & A. Communication.
Sharkansky, I. (1978). Public Administration: Policy-making in Government Agencies,
4th Ed. Rand Mcnaly College Publishing Company, Chicago, p. 6.
Thomas, Dye R. (1955) Understanding public policy, Englewood cliffs, N. U. prentice –
hall 2nd ed.
Young, J. and Enrique, M. (2009) Helping researchers become policy entrepreneurs,
Overseas Development Institute, London, September

1.8 Possible Answers to SAEs


Answers to SAEs 1
Models of Public Policy Analysis
Many models exist to analyze the development and implementation of public policy.
Analysts use these models to identify important aspects of policy, as well as explain and
predict policy and its consequences. Each of these models is based upon the types of
policies (Hugo, 1972).
Government (e.g. federal, provincial, municipal)
Policies adopted within public institutions (e.g. hospitals, child care centres, schools)
Workplace (e.g. policies that govern employees and employee-manager relations)
Process policy model Analysis
Policy creation is a process that typically follows a sequence of steps or stages (Hugo,
1972):
Identification of a problem (also called "problem definition") and demand for government
action. Different stakeholders may define the same issue as different problems. For
example, if homeless people are using illegal drugs such as heroin in a city park, some
stakeholders may define this as a law enforcement issue (which, in their view, could be
best solved if police presence in the park is stepped up and if the individuals using illegal

120
drugs are arrested and punished); on the other hand, other stakeholders may view this as a
poverty and public health issue (which, in their view, could be best solved if public health
nurses and government medical doctors and substance abuse counsellors were sent to the
park to do outreach with the drug-using individuals, and encourage them to voluntarily
enter "detoxification" or rehabilitation programs)
Answers to SAEs 2
Rational policy model Analysis
The rational model of decision-making is a process for making sound decisions in policy-
making in the public sector. Rationality is defined as ―a style of behaviour that is
appropriate to the achievement of given goals, within the limits imposed by given
conditions and constraints‖ (Herbert, 1976). It is important to note the model makes a
series of assumptions, such as: 'The model must be applied in a system that is stable'
Incremental policy model Analysis
An incremental policy model relies on features of incremental decision-making such as:
satisfying, organizational drift, bounded rationality, and limited cognition, among others.
Such policies are often called "muddling through" & represent 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; as such, past policies are
accepted as having some legitimacy.

Unit 2: Public Policy Analysis II


1.1 Introduction
1.2 Learning Outcomes
1.3 Group policy model analysis
1.4 Criteria of Policy Analysis
1.5 Process of Public Policy Analysis
1.6 Summary
1.7 References/Further Readings/Web Resources
1.8 Possible Answers to Self-Assessment Exercise(s) within the content

1.1 Introduction
Jenkins-Smith, (1990) Policy analysis is a set of techniques and criteria with which to
evaluate public policy options and select among them to rationalize the development and
implementation of public policy and as the means to greater efficiency and equity in
allocation of public resources.

1.2 Learning Outcomes


At the end of this unit, you should be able to:
i. Explain the Group policy model analysis
ii. Discuss the Criteria of Policy Analysis
iii. Explain the Process of Public Policy Analysis

121
1.3. Group policy model analysis
This policy is formed as a result of forces and pressures from influential groups. Pressure
groups are informally co-opted into the policy making process. Regulatory agencies are
captured by those they are supposed to regulate. No one group is dominant all the time on
all issues. The group is the bridge between the individual and the administration. The
executive is thus pressured by interest groups.
The task of the system is to:
Establish the rules of the game
Arrange compromises and balance interests
Enact compromises in policy
Enforce these compromises.
1.4 Criteria of Policy Analysis
There are a number of criteria by which public policies have been studied by various
scholars. These include efficiency, effectiveness, equity and impact analysis. Other
criteria include feasibility, adequacy, appropriateness, net benefits, compliance, equality,
public participation, freedom, predictability and procedural fairness (Deniston et al.,
1978)
Akindele and Olaopa, (2004) identified some criteria of policy analysis
Efficiency measures the relationship between the cost and benefits of a policy or
programme. The costs and benefits may be in monetary or non-monetary form.
Effectiveness on the other hand measures the extent to which a particular programme or
policyis meeting its targeted goals or objectives.
Equity however, focuses on the distributional effects of a policy in terms of ―who gains
or who loses‖ as a result of a particular programme or policy.
Adequacy involves the process of assessing a given policy rational or irrational to the
problem at stake to be solved. Feasibility deals with means of achieving the end of a
given policy. An analyst would like to evaluate his policy in terms of available human
and material resources. It is true that a given policy can be formulated and implemented
with the means of scarce resources. When such happens there is no magic or evaluation
rather to conclude instantly, that such policy is not feasible. Feasibility has to do with the
conduciveness of the implementation of such a given policy.
Ethic deals with a situation when one talks about the ethical orientation of a given society
during the course of policy implementation. It should be noted that there is a variation of
ethical values among countries. To this end, a policy that is successful in a given country
may not succeed in another society based on different ethical values.
Technological Assessment. This has to do with technological know-how of a given
country. For example, where there are computers with other sophisticated technological
equipment. Such a country can easily evaluate polices rather than a technological
bankrupt country where evaluation on technological background is highly anachronistic.

122
Self-Assessment Exercises 1
1. Explain the Group policy model analysis
2. Discuss the Criteria of Policy Analysis

1.5 Process of Public Policy Analysis


In dealing with the process of public policy analysis, one would be required to distinguish
between policy output (PO) and policy impact (PI). Policy output refers to the actual
activities that government performs by way of implementing policy plan. This leads to an
input and output model of a given policy. This can be illustrated with road construction
by a given government. For example, for rural transformation,
A government may initiate policy of road construction and tarring. Having pronounced
the policy, the next stage and the part of the government is to constitute a Tender Board
which will be responsible for the award of contract. It does not stop there and what
follows is the awarding of the contract. Although, before this stage, government must
have budgeted some amount of money for the road construction and tarring. At the end of
the award, real construction and tarring commence. Analytically, the policy output of the
road construction under illustration is the amount of road that can be physically observed
as tarred. But, with the initial high budget for the proposed 250 kilometres, if the
government end up with only 150 kilometres; the end product of 150 kilometres
physically tarred out of the proposed 250 kilometres, is the policy output. On the other
hand, policy impact would also be explained by illustration emanating from the above.
When the road under illustration has not been tarred, the drivers were driving with care
with little or no accident recorded. Conversely, when such road is now tarred, drivers are
tempted to speed with high record of accidents. Tarring of roads as recorded in
kilometres is the policy output while the recorded accidents that follow would be
classified as policy impact. Also, the reduction of damages done to the vehicles after the
construction is also an impact. To this end, there can be both positive and negative impact
of a given policy.

123
Self-Assessment Exercises 2

1. Discuss Process of Public Policy Analysis

1.6 Summary
This unit explains the Group, Criteria and Process policy model analysis
The unit explained that, Group, policy model analysis is analysed from the forces and
pressures from influential groups. Pressure groups are informally co-opted into the policy
making process. Regulatory agencies are captured by those they are supposed to regulate.
No one group is dominant all the time on all issues. The group is the bridge between the
individual and the administration
There are a number of criteria by which public policies have been studied by various
scholars. These include efficiency, effectiveness, equity and impact analysis. Other
criteria include feasibility, adequacy, appropriateness, net benefits, compliance, equality,
public participation, freedom, predictability and procedural fairness (Deniston et al.,
1978)
In dealing with the process of public policy analysis, one would be required to distinguish
between policy output (PO) and policy impact (PI). Policy output refers to the actual
activities that government performs by way of implementing policy plan. This leads to an
input and output model of a given policy. This can be illustrated with road construction
by a given government. For example, for rural transformation,
A government may initiate policy of road construction and tarring. Having pronounced
the policy, the next stage and the part of the government is to constitute a Tender Board
which will be responsible for the award of contract. It does not stop there and what
follows is the awarding of the contract

1.7 References/Further Readings/Web Resources


Akindele, S.T. and Olaopa, O.R. (2004). A Theoretical Review of Core Issues on Public
Policy and its Environment. J. Hum. Ecol., 16(3): 173-180.
Deniston, Lynn, O. et. al. (1984). Evaluation of Program EffectivenessProgramme
Efficiency in: Lyden and Miller (Eds.): Public Policy: Goals, Means and
Methods. St. Martins, NewYork

124
1.8 Possible Answers to SAEs
Answers to SAEs 1

1. Group policy model analysis


This policy is formed as a result of forces and pressures from influential groups. Pressure
groups are informally co-opted into the policy making process. Regulatory agencies are
captured by those they are supposed to regulate. No one group is dominant all the time on
all issues. The group is the bridge between the individual and the administration. The
executive is thus pressured by interest groups.
The task of the system is to:
Establish the rules of the game
Arrange compromises and balance interests
Enact compromises in policy
Enforce these compromises.
2. Criteria of Policy Analysis
There are a number of criteria by which public policies have been studied by various
scholars. These include efficiency, effectiveness, equity and impact analysis. Other
criteria include feasibility, adequacy, appropriateness, net benefits, compliance, equality,
public participation, freedom, predictability and procedural fairness (Deniston et al.,
1978)
Akindele and Olaopa, (2004) identified some criteria of policy analysis
Efficiency measures the relationship between the cost and benefits of a policy or
programme. The costs and benefits may be in monetary or non-monetary form.
Effectiveness on the other hand measures the extent to which a particular programme or
policyis meeting its targeted goals or objectives.
Equity however, focuses on the distributional effects of a policy in terms of ―who gains
or who loses‖ as a result of a particular programme or policy
Answers to SAEs 2
1. Process of Public Policy Analysis
In dealing with the process of public policy analysis, one would be required to distinguish
between policy output (PO) and policy impact (PI). Policy output refers to the actual
activities that government performs by way of implementing policy plan. This leads to an
input and output model of a given policy. This can be illustrated with road construction
by a given government. For example, for rural transformation,
A government may initiate policy of road construction and tarring. Having pronounced
the policy, the next stage and the part of the government is to constitute a Tender Board
which will be responsible for the award of contract

125
2. Process of Public Policy Analysis
In dealing with the process of public policy analysis, one would be required to distinguish
between policy output (PO) and policy impact (PI). Policy output refers to the actual
activities that government performs by way of implementing policy plan. This leads to an
input and output model of a given policy. This can be illustrated with road construction
by a given government. For example, for rural transformation,
A government may initiate policy of road construction and tarring. Having pronounced
the policy, the next stage and the part of the government is to constitute a Tender Board
which will be responsible for the award of contract. It does not stop there and what
follows is the awarding of the contract. Although, before this stage, government must
have budgeted some amount of money for the road construction and tarring. At the end of
the award, real construction and tarring commence. Analytically, the policy output of the
road construction under illustration is the amount of road that can be physically observed
as tarred. But, with the initial high budget for the proposed 250 kilometres, if the
government end up with only 150 kilometres; the end product of 150 kilometres
physically tarred out of the proposed 250 kilometres, is the policy output. On the other
hand, policy impact would also be explained by illustration emanating from the above.
When the road under illustration has not been tarred, the drivers were driving with care
with little or no accident recorded. Conversely, when such road is now tarred, drivers are
tempted to speed with high record of accidents. Tarring of roads as recorded in
kilometres is the policy output while the recorded accidents that follow would be
classified as policy impact. Also, the reduction of damages done to the vehicles after the
construction is also an impact. To this end, there can be both positive and negative impact
of a given policy.
Unit 3: Public Policy Environment
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Learning Outcomes
1.3 Public Policy Environment
1.4 Approaches to public policy analysis
1.5 Techniques used in policy analysis
1.6 Summary

126
1.7 References/Further Readings/Web Resources
1.8 Possible Answers to Self-Assessment Exercise(s) within the content

1.1 Introduction
The public policy and its formulation as discussed herein so far, are usually dictated by
the imperatives of the political setting or environment within which the policy makers
exist. This is implicit in the fact that: Policy inputs are the transmission sent from the
environment to the conversion process of the administrative system. Inputs include
demands for policy, resources; and support opposition, or apathy towards the actions of
administrators (policy makers).

1.2 Learning Outcomes


At the end of this unit, you should be able to:
i. States some essentials of public policy Environment
ii. Itemize the process through which Public Policy Environment can be explained
iii. Mention the Approaches to public policy analysis
iv. State the Techniques used in policy analysis

1.3 Public Policy Environment


Sharkansky, (1978), the stated some essentials of public policy Environment to includes.
Environment: include (1) clients, (2) costs of goods and services, and (3) members of the
public and other government officials who support or oppose agencies, administrators, or
programs.
Public Policy Environment is explained using the following:
Inputs from Environment Include
(1) Demands
(2) Resources, and
(3) Support or opposition from citizens and officials of other branches of government.
Conversion Process
With Input include:
(1) Structures,
(2) Decision procedures
(3) Administrators‘ personal experiences and predispositions and
(4) Control procedures
Outputs to Environment Include
1. expression of policy
2. performance, or goods and services actually delivered to the public and to official in
other
3. segments of government

127
Feedback:represents influence that outputs have upon the environment in a way that
shapes subsequent inputs.

There are several other major types of policy analysis, broadly group into competing
approaches:

1. Empirical versus normative policy analyses


2. Retrospective versus prospective analyses
3. Prescriptive versus descriptive analyses.

Self-Assessment Exercises 1
v. States some essentials of public policy Environment
vi. Itemize the process through which Public Policy Environment can be explained

1.4 Approaches to public policy analysis

There are several other major types of policy analysis, broadly group into competing
approaches:

1. Empirical versus normative policy analyses


2. Retrospective versus prospective analyses
3. Prescriptive versus descriptive analyses.

1.5 Techniques used in policy analysis


1. Cost–benefit analysis
2. Management by objectives (MBO)
3. Operations research
4. Decision-making based on analytics
5. Program evaluation and review technique (PERT)
6. Critical path method (CPM).
Self-Assessment Exercises 2
vii. Mention the Approaches to public policy analysis
viii. State the Techniques used in policy analysis

1.6 Summary

128
Some essentials of public policy Environment to include (1) clients, (2) costs of goods
and services, and (3) members of the public and other government officials who support
or oppose agencies, administrators, or programs.
Public Policy Environment is explained using the following:
Inputs from Environment Include
(1) Demands
(2) Resources, and
(3) Support or opposition from citizens and officials of other branches of government.
Conversion Process
With Input include:
(1) Structures,
(2) Decision procedures
(3) Administrators‘ personal experiences and predispositions and
(4) Control procedures
Outputs to Environment Include
4. expression of policy
5. performance, or goods and services actually delivered to the public and to official in
other
6. segments of government
Feedback

The types of policy analysis, broadly group into competing approaches: Empirical versus
normative policy analyses; Retrospective versus prospective analyses and Prescriptive
versus descriptive analyses.

There are several other major types of policy analysis, broadly group into competing
approaches: Empirical versus normative policy analyses; Retrospective versus
prospective analyses; Prescriptive versus descriptive analyses.

The unit explained the Techniques used in policy analysis to includes; Cost–benefit
analysis; Management by objectives (MBO); Operations research; Decision-making
based on analytics; Program evaluation and review technique (PERT)Critical path
method (CPM).

1.7 References/Further Readings/Web Resources


Sharkansky, I. (1978). Public Administration: Policy-making in Government Agencies,
4th Ed. Rand Mcnaly College Publishing Company, Chicago, p. 6.

129
1.8 Possible Answers to SAEs
Answers to SAEs 1

1. Some essentials of public policy Environment to include (1) clients, (2) costs of
goods and services, and (3) members of the public and other government officials
who support or oppose agencies, administrators, or programs.
2. Public Policy Environment is explained using the following:
Inputs from Environment Include
(1) Demands
(2) Resources, and
(3) Support or opposition from citizens and officials of other branches of government.
Conversion Process
With Input include:
(1) Structures,
(2) Decision procedures
(3) Administrators‘ personal experiences and predispositions and
(4) Control procedures
Outputs to Environment Include
7. expression of policy
8. performance, or goods and services actually delivered to the public and to official in
other
9. segments of government
Feedback
Answers to SAEs 2

1. The types of policy analysis, broadly group into competing approaches: Empirical
versus normative policy analyses; Retrospective versus prospective analyses and
Prescriptive versus descriptive analyses.
2. There are several other major types of policy analysis, broadly group into
competing approaches: Empirical versus normative policy analyses; Retrospective
versus prospective analyses; Prescriptive versus descriptive analyses.

The unit explained the Techniques used in policy analysis to includes; Cost–benefit
analysis; Management by objectives (MBO); Operations research; Decision-making
based on analytics; Program evaluation and review technique (PERT)Critical path
method (CPM).

130
Unit 4: Network Analysis
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Learning Outcomes
1.3 Concept of Network Analysis
1.3.1 Objective of Network Analysis
1.3.2 Advantage of Network Analysis
1.3.3 Disadvantage of Network Analysis
1.4 Techniques of Network Analysis
1.5 Drawing Network
1.6 Critical Path Method (CPM)
1.7 Program Evaluation Review Technique (PERT)
1.8 Summary
1.9 References/Further Readings/Web Resources
1.10 Possible Answers to Self-Assessment Exercise(s) within the content

1.1 Introduction
This unit will discussed Network analysis, it will outline the Objective of Network
Analysis, Advantage of Network Analysis and Disadvantage of Network Analysis. The
unit will also analyze the two basic network analysis: CPA and PERT
.

1.2 Learning Outcomes


At the end of this unit, you should be able to:
i. Explain the Concept of Network Analysis
ii. State the objective of Network Analysis
iii. Mention the advantage of Network Analysis
iv. Outline the Disadvantage of Network Analysis
v. Analyse the Techniques of Network Analysis
vi. Drawing Network
vii. Define and analyze the Critical Path Method (CPM)
viii. Define and analyze the Program Evaluation Review Technique (PERT)

1.3 Concept of Network Analysis


Network analysis involves a group of techniques which are used for presenting
information about the time and resources involved in the project so as to assist in the
planning, scheduling and controlling of the project. The information usually represented
by a network includes the sequences, interdependencies, interrelationships and critical
activity of various activities of the project.

131
1.3.1 Objective of Network Analysis
1) Minimize Production Delay, Interruptions and Conflicts:
This is achieved by identifying all activities involved in the project, their precedence
constraints, etc.
2) Minimization of Total Project Cost
After calculating the total cost of the project the next step is to minimise the total cost. It
is done through the calculation of cost of delay in the completion of an activity of the
project and calculating the cost of the resources which are required to complete the
project in a given time period.

3) Trade-off between Time and Cost of Project


The duration of same activity can be reduced if additional sources are employed and this
is the main idea on which the trade-off between time and cost of project is based. Due to
technical reasons, the duration can be reduced in a specific limit. Similarly, there is also a
most cost efficient duration called 'normal point' stretching the activity beyond it may
lead to a rise in direct cost.
4) Minimization of Total Project Duration:
After checking the actual performance against the plan the project duration can be
controlled and minimized. If any major difference is found then apply the necessary
reschedule process by updating and revising the uncompleted portion of the project.
5) Minimization of Idle Resources:
If there is any variation in the use of scars resources then it can disturb the entire plan and
hence it is required that efforts should be made to avoid any increase in cost due to idle
resources.
Advantage of Network Analysis
For planning, scheduling and controlling of operations in large and complicated projects
network analysis is very important and powerful tool.
For evaluating the performance level of actual performance in comparison to planned
target network analysis is a very useful tool.
With the use of network analysis technological interdependence of different activities can
be determined for proper integration and co-ordination of various operations.
Network analysis gives the proper co-ordination and communication between various
parts of the project.
Network analysis deals with the time-cost trade-off and provides the optimum schedule
of the project.
This technique is very simple and suitable for the computer users
Disadvantage of Network Analysis
Network construction of complex project is very difficult and time consuming in network
analysis.
Actual time estimation of various activities is a difficult exercise.
Analysis of the project is a very difficult work because a number of resource constraints
exist in the project.
In many situations time-cost trade off procedure is complicated.

132
Self-Assessment Exercises 1
1. Define Network analysis,
2. Outline the Objective of Network Analysis, Advantage of Network Analysis and
Disadvantage of Network Analysis

1.4 Techniques of Network Analysis


The two common techniques which are used in network analysis are shown in figure
below:

The managers are supported by two well-known network analysis techniques,


viz, Critical Path Method (CPM) and Program Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT)
in planning and controlling of large scale construction projects, research and
development, and so on.
These techniques prove to be very important in supporting the managers in handling such
products and performing their project management responsibilities.
Networking Components
1) Events :
In a network diagram events represent the project milestones. For example, start or
completion of an activity or activities, and occurrence of the events at a particular
instance of time at which some specific portion of project has been or is to be achieved.
In the network events are represented by the circles (nodes). The events can be further
classified into the following two categories :

i) Merge Event :
The joint completion of more than one activity which shows an activity is called merge
event. This is shown in figure.

133
ii) Burst Event :
An event which shows the beginning of more than one activity is known as burst event.
This is shown in figure.
The numbers are used in a network diagram for representing events. For indicating
progress of the work, each event is identified by a number which is higher than its
immediate preceding event. The numbering of events in the network diagram must start
from left (start of the project) to the right (completion of the project) and top to the
bottom. It is noted that there should not be any duplication in the numbering of events.
2) Jobs/Activity/Task :
The project operations (or tasks) are represented by activities which are conducted in a
network diagram. These activities take a certain amount of time and require resources for
completion. An activity is represented by an arrow and its head indicates the direction of
progress in the project. The numbering of starting (tail or initial) event and ending (head
or terminal) event identifies activities. For example, an arrow (i, j) between two events
shows that the tail event i represents starting of the activity and the head event j
represents the completion of the activity which is shown in figure. The activities can be
further classified into the following three categories:
i) Predecessor Activity
Predecessor activity is an activity which is completed before one or more other activities
start.
ii) Successor Activity :
Successor activity is an activity which starts immediately after one or more of other
activities are completed.
iii) Dummy Activity :
The activity which does not use any time or resource for completion is called dummy
activity.
A dummy activity is used in a network to establish the precedence relationship among
various activities of the project. It is needed when :
a) Two or more parallel activities in a project have same - the head and tail events.
b) Two or more activities have some (but not all) of their immediate predecessor
activities in common.
Dummy activity is represented by a dotted line in the network diagram as shown in figure
below.

134
Precedence Relationship
Diagramatic representation of project as a network needs the establishment of precedence
relationships between activities. For undertaking activities, precedence relationship
provides a sequence. It states that any activity cannot start until a preceding activity has
been completed.
For example :
Brochures announcing a conference for executives must first be designed by the program
committee (activity A) before they can be printed (activity B). In other words, activity A
must precede activity B. For large projects, this task is essential because incorrect or
omitted precedence relationships will result in costly delays. The precedence
relationships are represented by a network diagram.
The following two types of precedence networks are used by network models to show
precedence requirements of the activities in the project
1) Activity-on-Arc (AOA) :
In an AOA network, arrow is used for representing the activity and both the ends of the
arrow which are called nodes shows the start and end of the activity.

135
Activities are represented by an arc and events are represented by a node. An activity is
separated by a node (an outgoing arc) from each of its immediate predecessors (an
incoming arc). One or more activities can be completed at the starting point of any event
and one or more events can start from this point. Neither time nor resources are
consumed by any event.
AOA approach is an event oriented approach because it focuses on the activity
connection points. The precedence relationship explains that an event does not occur until
all preceding activities have been completed. AOA approach uses a convention that
events are numbered from left to right.
2) Activity-on-Node (AON)
The second approach in the project network is called Activity-on-Node (AON) in which
activities are shown on the nodes and precedence relationship between them is
represented by arcs. In other words, activities are represented on the nodes and
sequencing connection between two different activities is represented by the arrows.
Thus, in AOA diagram of following type :

There is no need of dummy activity because this approach is activity based. An AON
diagram is better for visual presentation because it is similar to the bar chart. Thus, visual
presentation of a project is done better with the use of an AON network diagram.
AOA and AON Approaches
Following Figure Shows AOA and AON Approaches for Several Commonly
Encountered Activity Relationship.

Activity – On – Node
Activity – On – Arc (AOA) (AON) Activity Relationship

A precedes B, which
precedes C.

136
A and B must be
completed before C can
be started.

B and C cannot begin


until A has been
completed.

C and D cannot begin


until both A and B have
been completed.

C cannot begin until both


A and B have been
completed, D cannot
begin until B has been
completed.

B and C cannot begin


until A has been
completed, D cannot
begin until both B and C
have been completed.

1.5 Drawing Network

137
The steps of network construction are as follows:
Step 1: Properly define the project and it's all important activities or tasks.
Step 2 : Develop the relationships among the activities. Decide which activities must
precede the others.
Step 3 : Connect all the activities and draw the network.
Step 4 : Time and/or cost estimates are assigned to each activity.
Step 5 : Calculate the path which has the longest time and this is called critical path.
Step 6 : Use the network for planning, scheduling, monitoring and controlling the project.
Rules for Drawing Network Diagrams
For handling events and activities of a project network there are various concepts and
rules which should be followed. It provides help in the development of a correct network
structure. Some of them are as mentioned below :
One and only one arrow is used for representing each defined activity in the network.
Hence, any activity cannot be represented more than once in a network.
All preceding activities must be completed before selecting any new activity.
The arrow which is used for showing the activity is indicative of the logical precedence
only.
The direction of the arrow indicates the general progression in time.
When a number of activities terminate at one event, it indicates that no activity emanating
from that event may start unless all activities terminating there have been completed.
Numbers are used for representing the events.
The activities are identified by the numbers of their starting and the ending events.
There should be only one initial and one terminal node in a network.
The joint completion of more than one activity which shows an activity is called merge
event, while an event which shows the beginning of more than one activity is known as
burst event.
Parallel activities between two events, without intervening events are prohibited.
In any network looping is not allowed. Therefore, if A precedes B, and B precedes C,
then cannot precede A.
In the development of a network it must be ensured that loops are not present.

Common Errors Network Construction

Following are three common errors in a network construction


1) Looping :
A case of endless loop in a network diagram, which is also known as looping, is shown in
figure, where activities A, B and C form a cycle :
Due to precedence relationships, it appears from figure 4.5 that every activity in looping
(or cycle) is a predecessor of itself. In this case, it is difficult to number three events
associated with activity A, B and C so as to satisfy rule 6 of constructing the network.

138
2) Dangling :
A case of disconnected activity before the completion of all activities, which is also
known as dangling, is shown in figure. In this case, activity C does not give any result as
per the rules of the network. The dangling may be avoided by adopting rule 5 of
constructing the network.
3) Redundant Activity
Following are the two cases in which the use of dummy activity may help in drawing the
network correctly, as per the various rules:

i) When two or more parallel activities in a project have the same head and tail events,
i.e., two events are connected with more than one arrow. In figure, activities B and C
have a common predecessor - activity A. At the same time, they have activity D as a
common successor. To derive correct network, a dummy activity for the ending event B
is required to show that D may not start before B and C, is completed. This is shown in
figure:

ii) When two chains of activities have a common event, yet are wholly or partly
independent of each other, as shown in figure. A dummy which is used in such a case, to
establish proper logical relationships, is also known as Logic Dummy Activity.
In figure, if head event of C and E do not depend on the completion of activities A and B,
then the network can be re-drawn, as shown in figure. Otherwise, the pattern of figure
must be adhered to.

139
What Is the Critical Path of a Project?
In project management, the critical path is the longest sequence of tasks that must be
completed to complete a project. The tasks on the critical path are called critical activities
because if they‘re delayed, the whole project completion will be delayed.
Finding the critical path is very important for project managers because it allows them to:
Accurately estimate the total project duration
Identify task dependencies, resource constraints and project risks
Prioritize tasks and create realistic project schedules
To find the critical path, project managers use the critical path method (CPM) algorithm
to define the least amount of time necessary to complete each task with the least amount
of slack.
Once done by hand, nowadays the critical path can be calculated automatically with
project scheduling software equipped with Gantt charts, which makes the whole CPM
method much easier.
ProjectManager can calculate the critical path for you on our award-winning Gantt
charts—learn more.
Now that we know what‘s the critical path of a project, we can learn about the critical
path method (CPM), an important project management technique that‘s based on this
concept.
1.6 What Is the Critical Path Method (CPM)?
The critical path method (CPM) is a technique that‘s used by project managers to create a
project schedule and estimate the total duration of a project.
The CPM method, also known as critical path analysis (CPA), consists in using a network
diagram to visually represent the sequences of tasks needed to complete a project. Once
these task sequences or paths are defined, their duration is calculated to identify the
critical path, which determines the total duration of the project.
CPM History
The critical path method was developed in the late 1950s by Morgan R. Walker and
James E. Kelley. The origins of the critical path method are closely related with
the Program Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT), a similar method which is
commonly used in conjunction with CPM.
Why Is CPM Important in Project Management?
Projects are made up of tasks that have to adhere to a schedule in order to meet a
timeline. It sounds simple, but without mapping the work, your project scope can quickly
get out of hand and you‘ll find your project off track.

140
Using the critical path method is important when managing a project because it identifies
all the tasks needed to complete the project, then determines the tasks that must be done
on time, those that can be delayed if needed and how much float or slack you have.
When done properly, critical path analysis can help you:
Identify task dependencies, resource constraints and project risks
Accurately estimate the duration of each task
Prioritize tasks based on their float or slack time, which helps with project scheduling and
resource allocation
Identify critical tasks that have no slack and make sure those are completed on time
Monitor your project progress and measure schedule variance
Use schedule compression techniques like crash duration or fast tracking
CPM Key Elements
Before we learn the steps to calculate the critical path, we‘ll need to understand some key
CPM concepts.
Earliest start time (ES): This is simply the earliest time that a task can be started in your
project. You cannot determine this without first knowing if there are any task
dependencies
Latest start time (LS): This is the very last minute in which you can start a task before it
threatens to delay your project schedule
Earliest finish time (EF): The earliest an activity can be completed, based on its duration
and its earliest start time
Latest finish time (LF): The latest an activity can be completed, based on its duration and
its latest start time
Float: Also known as slack, float is a term that describes how long you can delay a task
before it impacts its task sequence and the project schedule. The tasks on the critical path
have zero float, because they can‘t be delayed
Let‘s take a look at some critical path examples to better understand these critical path
analysis elements.
Critical Path Examples
Here‘s an example of a CPM diagram. Although it‘s high-level, it can help you visualize
the meaning of a critical path for a project schedule. For now, we‘ll use this critical path
diagram to explain the elements that make up the CPM method.

141
Adopted from https://www.projectmanager.com/guides/critical-path-method.
As you can see in this critical path diagram, project activities are represented by letters
and the critical path is highlighted in green. Tasks F, G and H are non-critical activities
with float or slack. We can also identify task dependencies between the critical path
activities, and also between activities (A, F and G) or (A, H and E), which are parallel
tasks.
Here‘s another critical path example from Harvard Business Review, which shows a
critical path schedule for the construction of a house. Each circle in the CPM diagram
represents a project activity, as well as it‘s duration, while the bolded arrows link the
critical path activities. As projects become more complex, you‘ll find more parallel tasks,
like in this example.

142
Source:Harvard Business Review
How to Find the Critical Path of a Project in 8 Steps
Now that you know the key concepts of the critical path method, here‘s how to calculate
the critical path in 8 steps.
1.Collect Project Activities

143
Use a work breakdown structure to collect all the project activities that lead to the final
deliverable.
2. Identify Task Dependencies
Figure out which tasks are dependent on other tasks before they can begin. Use your
judgement and your team members‘ feedback. Failing to define task dependencies
correctly makes the critical path method useless.
3. Create a Critical Path Diagram
A critical path analysis chart, or network diagram, depicts the order of activities.
4. Estimate Timeline
To use the critical path method, you‘ll need to estimate the duration of each task. Use
data from past projects and other sources of information such as subject matter experts.
5. Use the Critical Path Algorithm
The critical path algorithm has two parts; a forward pass and a backwards pass.
Forward Pass
Use the network diagram and the estimated duration of each activity to determine their
earliest start (ES) and earliest finish (EF). The ES of an activity is equal to the EF of its
predecessor, and its EF is determined by the formula EF = ES + t (t is the activity
duration). The EF of the last activity identifies the expected time required to complete the
entire project (projectmanager.com, 2022).
Backward Pass
Begins by assigning the last activity‘s earliest finish as its latest finish. Then the formula
to find the LS is LS = LF – t (t is the activity duration). For the previous activities, the LF
is the smallest of the start times for the activity that immediately follows.
6. Identify the Float or Slack of Each Activity
Use this formula to determine the float or slack of each task. Float = LS – ES
7. Identify the Critical Path
The activities with 0 float make up the critical path. All of these critical path activities are
dependent tasks except for the first task in your CPM schedule. All project tasks with
positive slack are parallel tasks to the critical path activities.
8. Revise during Execution
Continue to update the critical path network diagram as you go through the execution
phase.
These critical path analysis steps determine what tasks are critical and which can float,
meaning they can be delayed without negatively impacting the project schedule. Now
you have the information you need to plan the critical path schedule more accurately and
have more of a guarantee you‘ll meet your project deadline.
You also need to consider other changes or constraints that might change the project
schedule. The more you can account for these unexpected events or risks, the more
accurate your critical path schedule will be. If time is added to the project because of
these constraints, that is called a critical path drag, which is how much longer a project
will take because of the task and constraint (projectmanager.com, 2022).

144
1.7 What is Program Evaluation Review Technique (PERT)?
The Program Evaluation Review Technique, or PERT, is a visual tool used in project
planning. Using the technique helps project planners identify start and end dates, as well
as interim required tasks and timelines. The information is displayed as a network in
chart form.
PERT helps project planners identify:
Start and end dates
Anticipated total required completion time
All activities, referred to as events on the chart, that impact the completion time
The required sequence of events
The probability of completion by a certain date
The PERT Process
PERT has a set series of steps in mapping out a complex project, which include:
List all the tasks and milestones (a.k.a. events) required for completion of the project
Determine the required sequence of tasks
Design a chart to visually display all the steps
Estimate the time required for each task
Identify the critical path – the longest series of tasks in the project
Adjust the chart to reflect progress made once the project starts
A PERT chart uses numbered circles or rectangles to represent milestones and straight
lines with arrows at the end to represent tasks to be completed. The direction of the
arrows, and the numbers, indicate the required sequence. Typically, the numbers increase
by 10 at each milestone, so that new tasks can be added along the way without requiring
the whole chart to be redrawn and numbered.
History
PERT was developed by the U.S. Navy in the 1950s to help coordinate the thousands of
contractors it had working on myriad projects.
While PERT was originally a manual process, today there are computerized PERT
systems that enable project charts to be created quickly.
The only real weakness of the PERT process is that the time required for completion of
each task is very subjective and sometimes no better than a wild guess. Frequent progress
updates help refine the project timeline once it gets underway.

145
Self-Assessment Exercises 2
1. What Is the Critical Path of a Project?
2. What is Program Evaluation Review Technique (PERT)

1.8 Summary
This unit discussed Network analysis; it outline the Objective of Network Analysis,
Advantage of Network Analysis and Disadvantage of Network Analysis. The unit also
analyze the two basic network analysis: CPA and PERT

1.9 References/Further Readings/Web Resources

146
projectmanager.com (2022).Critical Path Method. Retrieved from
https://www.projectmanager.com/guides/critical-path-
method#:~:text=The%20critical%20path%20method%20(CPM,which%20are%20known
%20as%20paths.

1.10 Possible Answers to SAEs


Answers to SAEs 1

1. Concept of Network Analysis


Network analysis involves a group of techniques which are used for presenting
information about the time and resources involved in the project so as to assist in the
planning, scheduling and controlling of the project. The information usually represented
by a network includes the sequences, interdependencies, interrelationships and critical
activity of various activities of the project.
2. Objective of Network Analysis
1) Minimize Production Delay, Interruptions and Conflicts:
This is achieved by identifying all activities involved in the project, their precedence
constraints, etc.
2) Minimization of Total Project Cost
After calculating the total cost of the project the next step is to minimise the total cost. It
is done through the calculation of cost of delay in the completion of an activity of the
project and calculating the cost of the resources which are required to complete the
project in a given time period.

3) Trade-off between Time and Cost of Project


The duration of same activity can be reduced if additional sources are employed and this
is the main idea on which the trade-off between time and cost of project is based. Due to
technical reasons, the duration can be reduced in a specific limit. Similarly, there is also a
most cost efficient duration called 'normal point' stretching the activity beyond it may
lead to a rise in direct cost.
4) Minimization of Total Project Duration:
After checking the actual performance against the plan the project duration can be
controlled and minimized. If any major difference is found then apply the necessary
reschedule process by updating and revising the uncompleted portion of the project.
5) Minimization of Idle Resources:
If there is any variation in the use of scars resources then it can disturb the entire plan and
hence it is required that efforts should be made to avoid any increase in cost due to idle
resources.
Advantage of Network Analysis

147
For planning, scheduling and controlling of operations in large and complicated projects
network analysis is very important and powerful tool.
For evaluating the performance level of actual performance in comparison to planned
target network analysis is a very useful tool
Disadvantage of Network Analysis
Network construction of complex project is very difficult and time consuming in network
analysis.
Actual time estimation of various activities is a difficult exercise.
Analysis of the project is a very difficult work because a number of resource constraints
exist in the project.
In many situations time-cost trade off procedure is complicated.
Answers to SAEs 2
1. Critical Path of a Project
In project management, the critical path is the longest sequence of tasks that must be
completed to complete a project. The tasks on the critical path are called critical activities
because if they‘re delayed, the whole project completion will be delayed.
Finding the critical path is very important for project managers because it allows them to:
Accurately estimate the total project duration
Identify task dependencies, resource constraints and project risks
Prioritize tasks and create realistic project schedules
To find the critical path, project managers use the critical path method (CPM) algorithm
to define the least amount of time necessary to complete each task with the least amount
of slack
2. Program Evaluation Review Technique (PERT)
The Program Evaluation Review Technique, or PERT, is a visual tool used in project
planning. Using the technique helps project planners identify start and end dates, as well
as interim required tasks and timelines. The information is displayed as a network in
chart form.
PERT helps project planners identify:
Start and end dates
Anticipated total required completion time
All activities, referred to as events on the chart, that impact the completion time
The required sequence of events
The probability of completion by a certain date

Unit 5: Public Policy Evaluation


1.1 Introduction
1.2 Learning Outcomes
1.3 Public Policy Evaluation
1.4 Steps for conducting a policy evaluation
1.5 Public Policy Evaluation chart
1.6 Summary
1.7 References/Further Readings/Web Resources

148
1.8 Possible Answers to Self-Assessment Exercise(s) within the content

1.1 Introduction

To obtain compliance of the actors involved in public policy formulation and


implementation, the government can resort evaluation and enforce either negative or
sanctions, such as revocation of contract or positive sanctions such as; favorable
publicity, price supports, tax credits, grants-in-aid, direct services or benefits;
declarations; rewards; voluntary standards; mediation; education; demonstration
programs; training, contracts; subsidies; loans; general expenditures; informal
procedures, bargaining; franchises; sole-source provider awards...etc

1.2 Learning Outcomes


At the end of this unit, you should be able to:
i. Explain the Public Policy Evaluation
ii. State the Steps for conducting a policy evaluation
iii. Draw Public Policy Evaluation chart

1.3 Public Policy Evaluation

The success of a policy can be measured by changes in the behaviour of the target
population and active support from various actors and institutions involved. A public
policy is an authoritative communication prescribing an unambiguous course of action
for specified individuals or groups in certain situations. There must be an authority or
leader charged with the implementation and monitoring of the policy with a sound social
theory underlying the program and the target group. Evaluations can help estimate what
effects will be produced by program objectives/alternatives. However, claims of causality
can only be made with randomized control trials in which the policy change is applied to

149
one group and not applied to a control group and individuals are randomly assigned to
these groups (Haynes, 2012).

1.4 Steps for conducting a policy evaluation

Policy evaluation is used to examine content, implementation or impact of the policy,


which helps to understand the merit, worth and the utility of the policy. Following are
National Collaborating Centre for Healthy Public Policy's (NCCHPP) 13 steps:
(Morestin, and Castonguay, 2013).

a. Planning
b. Clarify the policy
c. Engage stakeholders
d. Assess resources and evaluability
e. Determine your evaluation questions
f. Determine methods and procedures
g. Develop evaluation plan
h. Implementation
i. Collect data
j. Process data and analyze results
k. Utilization
l. Interpret and disseminate the results
m. Apply evaluation findings

Self-Assessment Exercises 1
1. Explain the Public Policy Evaluation
2. State the steps for conducting a policy evaluation

1.5 Public Policy Evaluation chart

Public Policy Analysts


Type of Public Motivation Approach Relevant

150
Policy Policy Training
Analyst Problem
Scientist Theoretic Search for theory, Scientific Basic research
regularities, truth methods, metods, canons of
objectivity, social science
pure analytic research
Professional Design Improvement of Utilization of Strategic, cost-
policy and know-ledge , benefit analysis,
policy-making strategic queuing, simula-
tion, decision ana-
lysis
Political Value Advocacy of Rhetoric Gathering useful
maximizatio policy positions evidence, effective
n presentation
Administrativ Application Effective & Strategic, Strategic, same as
e Efficient policy Manageri for Professional
implementa-tion al
Personal Contention Concern for Mixed Use of many mo-
policy impacts on dels& techniques
life from other
approa-ches ; less
sophisticated
Source: Adapted from Birkland T A1997: Agenda Setting, Public Policy, and
Focusing E.ents. Georgetown University Press, Washington,DC
Types of Public Policy Analysis

151
Positive Analysis Normative Analysis

1. A concern with understanding how 1. Is directed toward studying what public


the policy process works policy ought to be to improve the
2. Strives to understand publc policy general welfare
as it is 2. Deals with statement involving value
3. Endeavors to explain how various judgments about what should be. For
social and political forces would example : ― The cost of health care in
change policy Indonesia is too high‖. This statement
4. Tries to pursue truth through the cannot be confirmed by referring to data.
process of tesing hypotheses by Whether the cost is too high or is
measuring them against the appropriate is based on a given criterion.
standard of real-world expe-riences Its validity depends upon one‘s values
5. Usually deals with assertions of and ethical views. Individuals may agree
cause and effect : on the facts of healthcare costs but
― If the Indonesian government raises interest disagree over their ethical judgments
rates , then consumers will borrow less ―. regarding the implications of ―the cost of
This statement may be tested by setting- health care‖.
up an experiment within a state. The
results may confirm or refute the
statement .

Source: Adapted from Birkland T A1997: Agenda Setting, Public Policy, and
Focusing E.ents. Georgetown University Press, Washington,DC

Self-Assessment Exercises 2
1. Draw a table showing Public Policy Evaluation

152
1.6 Summary

The success of a policy can be measured by changes in the behaviour of the target
population and active support from various actors and institutions involved. A public
policy is an authoritative communication prescribing an unambiguous course of action
for specified individuals or groups in certain situations. There must be an authority or
leader charged with the implementation and monitoring of the policy with a sound social
theory underlying the program and the target group. Evaluations can help estimate what
effects will be produced by program objectives/alternatives

Policy evaluation is used to examine content, implementation or impact of the policy,


which helps to understand the merit, worth and the utility of the policy. Following are
National Collaborating Centre for Healthy Public Policy's (NCCHPP) 13 steps:
(Morestin, and Castonguay, 2013).

n. Planning
o. Clarify the policy
p. Engage stakeholders
q. Assess resources and evaluability
r. Determine your evaluation questions
s. Determine methods and procedure

1.7 References/Further Readings/Web Resources


Birkland T A. (1997): Agenda Setting, Public Policy, and Focusing E.ents. Georgetown
University Press, Washington,DC

1.8 Possible Answers to SAEs


Answers to SAEs 1

153
3. Public Policy Evaluation

The success of a policy can be measured by changes in the behaviour of the target
population and active support from various actors and institutions involved. A public
policy is an authoritative communication prescribing an unambiguous course of action
for specified individuals or groups in certain situations. There must be an authority or
leader charged with the implementation and monitoring of the policy with a sound social
theory underlying the program and the target group. Evaluations can help estimate what
effects will be produced by program objectives/alternatives

4. Steps for conducting a policy evaluation

Policy evaluation is used to examine content, implementation or impact of the policy,


which helps to understand the merit, worth and the utility of the policy. Following are
National Collaborating Centre for Healthy Public Policy's (NCCHPP) 13 steps:
(Morestin, and Castonguay, 2013).

i. Planning

ii. Clarify the policy

iii. Engage stakeholders

iv. Assess resources and evaluability

v. Determine your evaluation questions

t. Determine methods and procedures

Answer to SAEs 2
Charts for Public Policy Evaluation

Public Policy Analysts

154
Type of Public Motivation Approach Relevant
Policy Policy Training
Analyst Problem
Scientist Theoretic Search for theory, Scientific Basic research
regularities, truth methods, metods, canons of
objectivity, social science
pure analytic research
Professional Design Improvement of Utilization of Strategic, cost-
policy and know-ledge , benefit analysis,
policy-making strategic queuing, simula-
tion, decision ana-
lysis
Political Value Advocacy of Rhetoric Gathering useful
maximizatio policy positions evidence, effective
n presentation
Administrativ Application Effective & Strategic, Strategic, same as
e Efficient policy Manageri for Professional
implementa-tion al
Personal Contention Concern for Mixed Use of many mo-
policy impacts on dels& techniques
life from other
approa-ches ; less
sophisticated
Source: Adapted from Birkland T A1997: Agenda Setting, Public Policy, and
Focusing E.ents. Georgetown University Press, Washington,DC
Types of Public Policy Analysis

155

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy