ARDHI UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF EARTH SCIENCES, REAL ESTATE, BUSINESS

AND INFORMATICS (SERBI)

LM 355 PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS

GROUP ASSIGNMENT 3
COURSE INSTRUCTOR: DR. MOYO / MADAM REBECCA

Group No 15 Members:

Name Reg. No. Course

1. ASSENGA, MATRONA P 23277/T.2019 LMV
2. LAZARO, EVALINE A 23223/T.2019 LMV
3. KALINGA, ADAM S 23186/T.2019 LMV
4. KAYANDA, YOHANA D 23321/T.2019 LMV
5. MAHUNDA, DEOGRATIAS J 23203/T.2019 LMV
6. MALIMA, PAMBA J 23295/T.2019 LMV
7. MJINDO, IRENE A 23248/T.2019 LMV

QUESTIONS
a) Identify actors involved in Public Policy Process and explain their roles for
each
b) Who are the public policy implementers and what are their roles or functions
c) What are the likely problems encountered by implementer while executing
their functions
Submission date: 16th December 2021
1. Public Policy Process
The Public policy process can be thought of as a series of steps in a cyclical five-stage
model. ‘Agenda setting’ refers to the first stage in the process when a problem is initially
sensed by policy actors and a variety of solutions put forward. ‘Policy formulation’ refers
to development of policy options within government when choices are narrowed by
excluding infeasible ones and efforts are made by actors to have solution. ‘Decision
making’ refers to third stage in which formal actors in government adopt particular
course of action. In the fourth stage of ‘policy implementation,’ governments put their
decisions into effect using some combination of the tools of public administration in
order to alter distribution of goods and services in society. Finally, ‘policy evaluation’
refers to fifth stage in processes where results of policies are monitored by both state
and societal actors, leading to reconceptualization of policy problems and solutions
(Howlett, 2009)

2. Policy actors
Policy actors are any individual or group that is directly or indirectly, formally or
informally, affiliated with or affected by the policy process at any stage. They can
include governments, businesses, NGOs, civil society organizations and communities
as well as individuals. Policy actors seek to influence the outcome of a policy process
through either direct or indirect action. For example, a policy actor may directly
participate in the process of defining policy goals and evaluating possible means to
achieve them (FAO, 2002)

3. Governmental Actors involved in Public Policy Process and their roles for
each

3.1 The Legislative Bodies/ Congress

Congress is a central institution in the policy process because of its legislative authority.
power to tax, borrow money, regulate interstate commerce regulate commerce with
other nations and declare war. The influence of Legislative bodies in policymaking
process range from its initiation and formulation to its implementation, control and
review. The influence over policy emanates from the legislative function of

1
representation and expression of popular opinion, law making, control and oversight of
the executive branch and control of expenditure. The legislators represent the citizens
by initiating and formulating policy proposals in the legislature (Fenno, 1973)
3.2 The Executive/ The President
Congress, the president is mandated by the Constitution as a partner in the policy
process. The executive possesses enormous influence on the initiation, enactment,
implementation, performance and modification of public policies through its powers,
responsibilities and activities. The executive branch is clearly a major actor in the
initiation, drafting and formulation of public policies. The executive articulates and
formulates policies, then passes it to legislative bodies (Neustadt, 1980).

3.3 The Judiciary / The Courts

The influence of judges in interpreting laws has an equally significant impact on policy.
The judiciary is the body of judges and courts that interpret the constitution and laws of
the country and adjudicates conflicts and crises between the various institutions of
government, groups and individuals. The judiciary also possess the power of judicial
review through which they could examine and determine the constitutionality of
legislature, executive and bureaucratic actions and policies. Through this, the judiciary
ensures that every governmental action is in line with the prevailing laws (Glazer, 1975)

3.4 The Bureaucracy

Bureaucracy is deeply involved in proper articulation and shaping of policies, as policy
process entails agenda settings opens in new window and problems identification.
Bureaucracies inevitably become involve in policymaking process as they are
instrumental in developing experience, information, and bringing expertise on matters of
public policy. This experience is not only central to policy formulation and
implementation stage, but also final process of evaluation, review and assessment
(Whitford, 2003).

Non-Governmental Actors involved in Public Policy Process and their roles

3.5 Political Parties

2
Political parties influence public policy and policy process to an extent. These bodies
articulate needs, demands and interests of their members and supporters and mediate
compromise and aggregate them into courses of policy actions. The party formulates its
programmes on the basis of these policy activities. The party machinery researches and
considers policy issues and alternatives, and decides on courses of action (Dahl, 1961).
3.6 Interest Groups
interest group is a collection of individual, with some common characteristics, interests
and interactions. They exist principally to project, pursue and protect their common
interests. They interact with governmental and non-governmental actors in policy
process because a lot of their interests are affected and dictated by governmental
interventions and regulations. Thus, why interest groups are actors in policy process
(Madison, 1961).

3.7 Individual Citizens

The citizens or populations of a nation are also important actors in the policy process. In
fact, they could be considered as the core or base actor for several reasons. First, they
constitute the human environment of policies. The human environment’s perceptions,
values, preferences and demands constitute the major environmental influence on
public policies. Second, the citizens make the demands for public policy and constitute
the clients and targets. Thus, policies are made for the benefit of citizens (Lindblom,
1965).

3.8 Media
The media are influential to policy outcomes because they help defines social reality.
The mass media play an important role in state and local government policy processes.
he media are enormously important as a factor in state and local politics. With the
advent of worldwide television coverage due to the extensive proliferation of satellite
transmitters and receivers, as well as the rapid expansion of the world wide web and the
Internet, the transmission of information globally is virtually instantaneous and the
potential impact of this information has been enhanced greatly over what it was in the
past ( (McQuail, 1979)

3
3.9 Political Consultants
Increasingly, political expertise is purchased by those with the need and the resources.
In reviewing the rise and structure of the political consulting industry. The fragile
relationship between articulating ideas in a political marketplace and manipulating public
opinion. It is virtually impossible to win at the policy game without the marketing skills
held by consultants and strategists. Like many other policy resources, political
consultants are costly. As a consequence, those with greater economic resources enjoy
a policy advantage (Sabato, 1981).
4. The public policy implementers and their roles or functions
4.1 Public policy implementers
Public policy implementers are actors who carryout of a basic policy decision, usually
incorporated in a statute but which can also take the form of important executive orders
or court decisions. Public policy implementers are actors who executes an adopted
policy as specified by the legislation or policy action. Implementation may be carried out
by formal as well as by informal actors, including legislators, courts, bureaucracies,
pressure groups, community organizations, and even individuals (Sabatler & Mazmania,
1983)

4.2 The Role of Legislators in Policymaking

Legislators are members of parliaments, for example, the National Assembly and state
assemblies. They possess direct constitutional authority to initiate and formulate
policies. As elected law makers, they represent their people from their various
constituencies. Consequently, they are expected to collate the views, interests,
demands and problems of their constituents, harmonise them and translate them into
policy proposals for the legislature. Policy proposals are subjected to the entire
legislative processes of reading, debating and scrutiny by the committees. Policies
formulated from proposals are then forwarded for the president’s assent. Formulated
policies will set up policy programmes and required actions which executive will then
implement and evaluate (Ikelegbe, 2006).

4.3 The Role of Administrators in Policymaking

4
Administrators are classified as supplementary policy makers. They gain their authority
from primary policy makers before they act. They are potentially dependent on the
primary policy makers. Administrators work directly under the executive arm of
government as they are implementers of public policy. They are present in MDAs. As
political systems differ around the world, so also are administrative systems. The kind of
political system in place in any nation determines the kind of administrative system, in
terms of size, complexity, structure and space of autonomy. Whatever the situation, it
has been clearly established that administrators, in their implementation assignment,
can make or mar any policy. During implementation, they can engage in foot-dragging
or non-enforcement altogether. (Anderson, 1979)

4.4 The Role of the Executive

The executive comprises the president, prime minister, premier or governor, ministers,
special advisers, special assistants, top political aides and the administrators. The main
responsibility of the executive is to implement public policies and to supervise,
coordinate and manage ministries, departments and agencies are involved in the
implementation of policies. But the executive in democratic dispensations, for example,
the president plays a crucial and pivotal role in the policy-making process. He plays
dominant roles in the initiation, formulation and implementation stages of the policy
process (Omotoso, 2010)

5. Problems encountered by implementer while executing their functions

5.1 Conceptual Problems

Implementation of public policy has been hindered by conceptual problems in
understanding the il nature of contextual problems, and the kinds of policies and
procedures necessary to address these problems. These conceptual problems may be
related to policy design and policy analysis. (Hogwood & Gunn, 1984)

5.1.1 The problems in Policy Design

5
It is obvious that these preconditions are at the same time the reasons as to why, in
practice, the implementation does not take place as expected. For example, public
policy lacks an adequate policy design. The problems of policy design in this particular
policy include ambiguous and ill-defined objectives, and inappropriate measures to
achieve the stated goals. Lack of adequate political will, and sufficient social support are
other reasons. (Singh, 2003)

5.1.2 The problems in Policy Analysis

Implementation of public policies has also been hampered by conceptual weaknesses
in policy analysis. For example, some Policies were adopted without examining
alternative policy options. Most of the State Pollution Control Boards suffer from lack of
adequate professional staff, sufficient time, and data. In addition, major policies have
been adopted without due deliberation on various policy alternatives. Often, this was
due to strong adherence to secrecy within the bureaucracy. (Williams, 1971)

5.2 Political Problems

Political problems in the implementation of public policies are grave and complex.
These hamper effective implementation as discussed in the following areas of politics.

5.2.1 Centralised Policy Process

Friction between central and local government relations has affected the policy
implementation processes adversely. In the area of environmental protection, for
example, the policy process is heavily centralised. Policy decisions taken at the central
level, including goal setting and procedure, ignore the local culture. Although the central
government has been enthusiastic in adopting innovative population, health, education
and environmental policies and programmes, the local governances have been
dragging their feet when it came to effective implementation as the latter often lacked
the requisite political will (Hogwood & Gunn, 1984)

5.2.2 Unionisation of Bureaucracy

Another glaring implementation lacunae is due to the unionisation of civil services, at
the lower levels in particular. This has destroyed not only the work culture and
discipline, but it also demoralised, considerably the supervisory levels into withdrawal

6
and prompting them to take the line of least resistance. Higher and middle levels of
bureaucracy are to powerless and marginalised to give relief to citizens in cases of
corruption and unresponsiveness by lower level staff at cutting edge of administration.
(Mayntz, 1979)

5.2.3 Interest Group Politics

In many cases, it is observed that the policies are not implemented because of interest
group politics. For example, several industries have little concern about the
environmental consequences of siting decisions, retrofitting old technology buildings, or
introducing new technology. Industrialists influence the environmental policy-
implementation process either directly or through business lobbies and representatives
of the business interests concerned. Pressure by industrial associations during
consideration of Environmental Protection Act in Parliament resulted in a weakening of
the penalties for non-compliance, and also forced die government to delay enforcement
of the enacted legislation. Industrial firms, in both public and private sectors, had little
incentive to comply with the environmental regulations due to the low cost of non-
compliance. (Anderson, 1979)

5.3 Administrative Problems

One way of analysing implementation problems is to begin by thinking about the limits
of administration. Christopher Hood uses the term 'perfect administration' in comparison
to economists' use of 'perfect competition'. He defines 'perfect administration' as a
condition in which 'external' elements of resource availability and political acceptability
combine with administration' to produce perfect policy implementation (Howlett, 2009)

5.3.1 Lack of adequacy Institutional Capacity

The institutional structure and administrative capabilities for implementation of
environmental laws and policies, for example, are by no means adequate in the face of
the complexities of environmental, political, social, and economic problems. Here, the
institutional structure includes the whole system of rules and regulations by which
administrative tasks and responsibilities are clearly defined and juxtaposed with the
capabilities of the administrators concerned (Williams, 1971)

7
5.3.2 Lack of Personnel and Financial Resources
Further, it is, observed that most of the policies are not implemented because of
deficient staff, and lack of financial resources. Social policies in many developing
countries have not been implemented in full scale owing to lick of trained staff. Well
planned policies fail to attain the proper goals without competent personnel.
Implementation implies allocating personnel resources to the appropriate tasks and
activities, motivating them to do well and rewarding them for their action. Regardless of
their status, specialised knowledge, experience and qualifications, the programme
personnel need to work as a cohesive team for the purpose of achieving policy results.
(Nyaga, 2006)

5.3.3 Pressure of Time

It is observed that the pressure of time often creates the implementation gap. Normally,
while fixing the time frame, the policy formulators do not take into consideration the
prevailing conditions. They tend to be idealistic while setting the targets, and forget the
workload of the respective implementing agencies. Consequently, the Head Offices
press the agencies for speedy implementation. The implementation agencies, under
such conditions are unable to fulfil the targets allocated under the said policy, let alone
carrying out the other works on hand. (Tesch,, Kloppenborg, & Frolick, 2007)

5.3.4 Lack of Administrative Will and Motivation

Without the conscious cooperation of implementers, nothing can be done. It is found
that social policies have remained unimplemented largely for lack of administrative will
and motivation. In the present environment, officials are not likely to feel enthusiastic
about implementing policies, especially in enforcing environmental laws. Even in cases
where public officials are inclined to implement the environmental laws, their authority is
often undermined by the manoeuvres of industrial bigwigs (Procaccino et al, 2000).

5.3.5 Lack of Coordination and Cooperation

Poor coordination and missing links among the administrative agencies have also stood
in the way of adequate and appropriate policy actions. For example, at the
administrative level, different departments are concerned with the implementation of
policies relating to poverty alleviation programmes. Similarly, gaps in policy

8
implementation are found in population and family planning programmes. Lack of proper
coordination and cooperation among the multitude of administrative agencies is an
important lacuna in the whole institutional set-up (Neuman, 2006)

5.4 Lack of Public Involvement

Public involvement in policy implementation programmes, such as, education, health,
population control, pollution control, forest conservation, etc. puts tremendous pressure
on administrative staff to produce results. Demonstrations and protests, and by
launching mass movements, the public has tried to offset the power base of interest
groups and lobbies that tend to influence policy implementation in their favour (Chase,
1979)

Conclusion
All actors in the policy process need to be alive to their responsibilities of formulating
good and beneficial policies. Formulated policies should be faithfully implemented for
the good of the generality of the people in a country. Corruption, which is a cankerworm
in the implementation stage, must be confronted headlong. Most of our current policies
are good, but implementation is woefully poor because of the hydra-headed problem of
corruption. Policy evaluation is also fundamental as policies need to be reviewed and
fine-tuned periodically, so as to ensure that they remain relevant and useful in solving
the problems, as well as emerging challenges (Omotoso, 2010)

9
References
Anderson, J. E. (1979). Public Policy-Making. New York, USA: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Chase, G. (1979). "A framework for implementing human service program : how hard? Public Policy,.

Dahl, R. (1961). Who Governs. New Haven:: Yale University Press.

FAO. (2002). Chapter 5: Mechanisms For Coordination. Geneva North America.: Margaret A. Shannon.

Fenno, R. J. (1973). Congressmen in Committees. Boston: Little, Brown.

Glazer, N. (1975). “Towards an Imperial Judiciary,” Public Interest,. 41: Fall.

Hogwood, B. W., & Gunn, L. (1984). Policy Analysis for the Real World. London: Oxford University Press.

Howlett, M. (2009). Policy analytical capacity and evi-dence-based policy-making: Lessons from canada.
canada.: Canadian Public Administration, 52(2), 153-175.

Ikelegbe, A. O. (2006). Public Policy Analysis. Concepts, Issues and Cases. Lagos: Imprint Services.

Lindblom, C. E. (1965). The Intelligence of Democracy. (New York: Free Press.

Madison, J. (1961). “Federalist #10,” in Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, The Federalist
Papers . New York: New American Library.

Mayntz, R. (1979). Public bureaucracies and policy im-plementation. nternational Social Science Journal.

McQuail, D. (1979). “The Influence and Effects of Mass Media,” in Mass Communication (J. Curran, M.
Gurevitch, and J. Woolacott ed.). Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, Inc.

Neuman, L. (2006). “Mechanisms for Monitoring and Enforcing the Right to Information Around the
World,”, Access to Information: Building a Culture of Secrecy. Atlanta, GA: The Carter Center.

Neustadt, R. (1980). Presidential Power. New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc.

Nyaga, E. (2006). An investigation of critical success factors for successful implementation of Enterprise
Resource Planning (ERP) Systems in Kenya. University of Nairobi: Unpublished MBA Project.

Omotoso, F. (2010). “Public Policy Development and Analysis” in Agagu A.A. and Omotoso, Femi (eds)
Readings in Public Policy. Porto Novo, Benin Republic: SONOU d’Afrique (ESAF).

Sabatler, P. A., & Mazmania, D. A. (1983). Policy implementation In S. Nagel (Ed.). Encyclopedia of policy
studies. New York: Marcel Dekker.

Sabato, L. J. (1981). The Rise of Political Consultants: New Ways of Winning Elections. New York: Books.

Singh, J. P. (2003). "Problems of population and sustainable development in India". Indian Journal of
Public Administration, , Vol. XLIX, .

Tesch,, D., Kloppenborg, T. J., & Frolick, M. N. (2007). IT Project risk factors: The project management
professionals perspective. Journal of Computer Information Systems, Summer 2007.

10
Williams, W. (1971). Social Policy Research and Analysis. New York: Elsevier.

11