Week 2

The policy makers and their

environment
• The official policy makers
• Nongovernment policy makers
• Policy making and politics
 The Policy Makers

The Official Policymakers:

• According to Anderson, the official policymakers are those
who possess legal authority to engage in the formulation of
public policy.
• Those involved in this category are the legislators, the
executive, the administrators and the judiciary.
• Each of them performs policy-making responsibilities in a
different way from the others.
• They are governmental actors who occupy formal public
positions and political offices and serve as the actual policy
makers.
 The Policy Makers
A. Primary policymakers
• The primary policymakers are constitutionally
empowered to engage in the formulation of
policies.
• It is their constitutional assignment and
responsibility.
• Consequently, they need not depend upon
other governmental agencies or units or
structures to perform their policy-making roles.
 The Policy Makers
B. Supplementary policymakers.
• The supplementary policymakers, expectedly,
receive their authority to act in policy making
process from the
-persons, agencies or bodies that need
authority from others in order to act as they
are dependent on, or are controlled by, others.
-They include ministries, departments and
other governmental agencies that initiate
policies and push for them.
 Policy Making and Politics

• Politics and Policymaking provides a

comprehensive understanding of the
policymaking process so that you can
formulate your approach to engage effectively
in agenda setting.
 Policy Making and Politics
Politics and Policymaking (Example in the US Congress)
• It is impossible to separate policymaking from politics.
Many groups with different interests and their own agendas
are involved in all stages of policymaking.
• A good example is the 1996 welfare reform legislation.
Passed by the Republican-controlled Congress (US), the
reform law contains provisions for cuts in direct federal aid
and new work requirements that troubled many.
• Democrats and organizations representing the poor.
President Bill Clinton signed the bill after some hesitation
and then indicated that he would seek changes in the law
during the next session of Congress.
 Policy Making and Politics
Politics in Congress
• The formulations and adoption of public policy can
be either hampered or advanced by the way things
are done in Congress.
• Bills for the construction of major public works that
benefit a particular district or state, such as bridges,
dams, and highways or the establishment of
military bases, are known as pork-barrel legislation.
• While such programs do create jobs, they may run
counter to a broader policy direction, such as the
need to cut the federal budget deficit.
 Policy Making and Politics
• Often, representatives from different states and
even different parties may agree to support
each other's legislative agendas. A New York
congressman may support a water project in
Arizona in return for his Arizona colleague's
vote on a mass transit appropriation for the
Northeast.
• This practice is known as logrolling, and it is a
way of building coalitions that may back a new
policy direction.
 Policy Making Process

The Policymaking Process.

• Public policy refers to the actions taken by
government — its decisions that are intended
to solve problems and improve the quality of
life for its citizens.
• A policy established and carried out by the
government goes through several stages from
inception to conclusion.
 Policy Making process

• Policy making process is a part of politics and

political action

• According to Gabriel Almond, political system is

a set of interaction having structure, each of
which performs its functions in order to keep like
an on-going concern

• Set of processes that routinely converts inputs

into outputs
• Policy making process has been characterized
as tending to be fluid, incremental, confused,
often disorderly and even incoherent
• And yet, the destiny of a nation, the fulfillment
of its dreams and aspirations, flow out of the
exercise of the policy-making process
• Policy making requires political wisdom,
diplomacy and prudence to bring diverse
community interests together around a shared
purpose
• Common usage of the term policy also
includes the wise and expedient conduct of
management, thereby blurring the line
between policy administration and causing
confusion in the roles of elected legislators.
 POLICY MAKING
• Since the distinction between formulation and
implementation is not always clear, open
communication between legislators and
administrators is absolutely necessary.

• The budget is considered one of the strongest policy-

making tools. It defines the spending and service
priorities for numerous other policy decisions.

• The allocation of resources to competing need is an

important exercise of setting local policy.
 POLICY MAKING
• Good policy is fair and equitable. It does not
impose disproportional impacts on interest
groups.

• Policy decisions should be based upon due

process that respects the constitutional rights of
individual.

• Policy-making is not always about what is

popular. Sometimes it means protecting the
legitimate interests of minority views, too.
 POLICY MAKING
• There is always a risk that policy decisions have
unintended consequences, or simply do not
accomplish their goals.

• During the analysis phase it is useful to think about

how a policy choice may fail.

• Good monitoring system may provide early warning

about policy failures or unintended consequences.
 Policy Making process

• A policy established and carried out by the

government goes through several stages from
inception to conclusion.
• These are agenda building, formulation,
adoption, implementation, evaluation, and
termination.
 Policy Cycle
PROBLEM
IDENTIFICATION
AND AGENDA
SETTING

POLICY CHANGE POLICY

OR FORMULATION
TERMINATION AND
LEGITIMATION

POLICY POLICY
EVALUATION IMPLEMENTATION
 Stages in the Policy Process
1. Issue identification/Agenda setting
– Publicized demands for government
action can lead to identification of policy
problems
– Attention that prompts the need for
government action
– Government begins to give serious
consideration
 Stages in the Policy Process

• Electoral cycles: issues on agenda

determined by election timing / party in
office
• Issues that fit the ‘policy mood’ or ‘policy
paradigm’ or ‘the leading policy ideas’ (eg.
competitiveness, global warming,…)
• Multiple streams and policy windows
(Kingdon)
 Agenda setting
• What is agenda setting?
– Involves getting an issue to be recognized
– About government recognizing that a problem is a
“public” problem worthy of its attention
– Process by which the demands of various groups
are translated into items that the government
considers for action.
 Agenda setting
when three streams meet
• The three streams exist and develop relatively
independent from each other
• Events (political streams) may occur for which the
policy community is unprepared (ideas, solutions) ,
and vice versa.
•“The separate streams come together at critical
times. A problem is recognized, a solution
available, the political climate make the time
right for change, and the constrains do not
prohibit action.” (Kingdon, 94)
 Agenda setting
• Stream problem recognition by actors in- and outside
government
– Indicators: volume, change (scoreboard, week-end
traffic accidents)
– Focus events:
– Policy feedback: evaluation, complaints (speeding
fines, small arms legislation)
• Conditions become problems
– Clash with norms, values, principles
– Unfavourable comparisons with other
countries/situations
 Agenda setting

• Stream Policy Community

– Administration, academics, policy advisors, think
thanks, interest groups: formulate policy proposals
• Prime policy group: multitude of ideas are debated,
combined, tested, exchanged, and evaluated
• Selection mechanism: ‘survival of the fittest’
– Technical and administrative feasibility
– Congruence with dominant values
– Anticipation of probable resistance (budget, public
opinion, political receptiveness
• Events (ex. epidemic, prison escape coalition
negotiations)
• Elections
• Governmental majorities
• Activities of interest groups
• The political climate
 Agenda setting:
policy window
• Policy window allows for full coupling
• Partial coupling is also possible:
– Problem and a solution: but is politically not
interesting
– There is a solution and a political willingness
to apply it, but no real problem
– Problem and political will to tackle it, but no
policy solutions
 Agenda setting:
Policy window
• Policy windows are the moments when the three streams
meet, and the issue can achieve high agenda priority
• Policy entrepreneurs need to act in the policy window:
– Policy entrepreneurs have solutions and are waiting
for problems and right climate to implement them
– Policy entrepreneurs have problems, are waiting for
solutions and the opportunity to settle them.
• Policy windows are opened by:
– Problems, Political stream, coincidence
The streams and windows models of public policy making
 The “Streams and Windows” Model
by: John Kingdon
Three “streams” of information

• Problem stream
– The definition of the problem to be addressed
– Involves focusing the public – policy makers
attention on a particular social problem, either
applying a new public policy to the resolution
 The “Streams and Windows” Model
by: John Kingdon
• Political stream
– List of problems / issues to be resolved is formed
– The politics affecting the solution to the issue
(national mood, public opinion, electoral politics,
interest groups)
– Participants are visible cluster administration –
high level political appointees, president’s staff,
members of congress, the media, the interest
groups, actors associated with election, political
parties, campaign and public opinion
The “Streams and Windows” Model by
John Kingdon
• Policy stream
– It is in the policy stream that the decision agenda is
formulated
– In the policy stream the major forces are not
political but intellectual and called the “hidden
cluster”.
– These includes the career public administrators,
the academe, researchers, consultants and
congressional staffers
The “Streams and Windows” Model
by John Kingdon

– The policy streams moves from the formulation of

a decision agenda to a softening – up phase in
which “trial balloons” are released to solve a
particular problem
– Consensus is developed not by a bargaining
process but by the use of rational argumentation
– Bandwagon affects occurs
The “Streams and Windows” Model
by: John Kingdon

• Meeting of 3 streams can result to public policy

• Kingdon calls this occasion WINDOWS
• Windows open because of a change of
administration, changes in congress, shift in the
national mood, or when a pressing public
problem emerges
 The “Streams and Windows” Model
by John Kingdon

• AND WHEN the WINDOWS OPEN – it results in

a restructuring of the governmental agenda, it
could be solely the result of occurrences in
either the problems stream or the political
stream
 Conceptual model of the
agenda setting process
Agenda setting as a result of three independent
streams of information which converge into a policy
window and thus permitting a policy agenda

POLICY STREAM PROBLEM STREAM

POLITICAL STREAM

POLICY WINDOW
• Conditions to be met for issues to get included in
the agenda
– It has reached crisis proportion
– It has achieved particularity (exemplifies and
dramatizes a larger issue
– It has emotive aspect (human interest angle)
– It has wide impact
– It raises questions about power and legitimacy in
society
– It is fashionable
 Stages in the Policy Process
2. Policy Formulation
- Policy formulation is the development of effective
and acceptable courses of action for addressing
what has been placed on the policy agenda.
– Policy proposals can be formulated through
political channels by policy-planning organizations,
interest groups, government bureaucracies, state
legislatures, and the president and Congress
– Development of possible solutions; consideration
of several alternatives
• Process of identification, refinement,
generation and formalization of policy options
on how to resolve issues or public problem
recognized at the agenda-setting stage
• Range of available options t this stage is
narrowed down to those that policy makers
could accept before formal deliberations of
decision-makers
 Stages in the Policy Process
• Policy Adoption/Legitimization
– Policy is legitimized as a result of the public
statements or actions of government officials,
both elected and appointed – the president,
congress, agency officials and the courts
– This includes: EOs, Budgets, laws and
appropriations, rules and regulations, and
administrative and court decisions that set policy
directions
 Policy Legitimation
• At the national level:
– Legislative process : how a bill becomes a law
– Executive process : President’s executive orders
– Judicial process : Judicial review and court
decisions
– Administrative process : administrative issuances

• At the local level:

local legislative process : policy measure
becomes a local ordinance
• Components of a policy document
– Background
– Definition of term
– Purpose statement
– Applicability and scope statement
– Policy statements
– Responsibilities section
– Incentive/penalty clause
– Effective date
 Stages in the Policy Process
• Policy Implementation
– Includes all the activities that result from the
official adoption of a policy
– Policy implementation is what happens after a law
is passed.
• Law is translated into specific guidelines down to the
level where policy is to be delivered
• Various actors working together to put into effect the
adopted policy or program objectives and goals using
approved procedures and techniques like IRR, etc.
 Stages in the Policy process

• Evaluation
– Last step in the policy process
– Learning about the consequence of public
policy
– Assessing overall effectiveness of a program
in meeting its objectives, or assessing the
relative effectiveness of two or more programs
in meeting common objectives
– if it was implemented correctly and, if so, had
the desired effect.
 Policy evaluation
• The stage of the policy process at which it is
determined how a public policy has actually
fared in action (Howlett & Ramesh) = evaluation
of means being employed and objectives being
served
• Problem no universal and fixed criteria
– Spectacular failures
– Substantive failures
– Procedural failures
 Policy evaluation
• Administrative:
– Effort evaluation: screen and monetarize inputs -
“what does it cost”
– Performance: screen outputs (graduates, publications)
- “what is it doing”
– Effectiveness: “is it doing what it is supposed to be
doing” – goals vs. outputs
– Efficiency: input evaluation / output evaluation and
seek to reduce input (lower cost)
– Process evaluation: organization methods used and
possibilities for process re-engineering
 Policy change or termination
• Policy change refers to the point at which a
policy is evaluated and redesigned so that the
entire policy process begins anew
• Policy termination means ending outdated or
inadequate policy; the end point of the policy
cycle
• Can mean agency abolition, policy redirection,
program termination, project closure or fiscal
retrenchment
 Judicial Review
• Judicial review
• Political evaluation
• Policy evaluation = increasingly perceived
as policy learning
 Why do citizens strive to get their
issues on the public agenda?

• Public policy is legitimate – government

policies are regarded as legal obligations
that citizen have a duty to uphold.
• Universality of government policies
• Government has the power to force
compliance with its policy decisions
 POLICY ANALYSIS
• Technique used in Public ad to enable public
servants and others to examine and evaluate
available options to implement the goals of law.
• It is a systematic evaluation of the technical and
political implications of alternatives proposed to
solve a public problem.
• Refers to both the process of assessing policies or
programs and the product of that analysis
 Policy analysis

• Description and explanation of the causes and

consequences of government activity
• Interdisciplinary effort aimed at helping the
decision maker to make choices intelligently,
ethically and effectively.
• Role of policy analysis:
– Techniques provide the means for assessing policy
options and recommending the preferred course
of action to achieve various organizational,
political, social and economic goals.
– It also provides a way to examine existing policies
with an eye toward recommending modifications
or improvements
• The purpose of Policy Analysis
– is to address, more in-depth, a particular problem,
to examine the arguments related to a concerned
policy, and to analyze the implementation of the
policy.
– The basic objective of public policy analysis is to
assess the degree to which the policies are meeting
their goals,
• Importance of Policy Analysis
– It involves evaluating issues of public importance
with the objective of providing facts and statistics
about the extent and impact of the various policies
of the government
Public Policy Tools.
• The major challenge for democratic
governments is to effectively influence the
behavior of citizens. ...
• Governments employ a number of tools such
as legislation, sanctions, regulations, taxes and
subsidies in order to change behavior in the
interest of the public.
Steps for successful policy analysis
1. Verify, define, and detail the problem. ...
2. Establish evaluation criteria. ...
3. Identify alternative policies. ...
4. Evaluate alternative policies. ...
5. Display and distinguish among alternative
policies. ...
6. Monitoring the implemented policy.
1. Verify, define, and detail the problem.
• The most relevant and important of them all because
many times the objectives are not clear or even
contradictory from each other.
• A successful policy analysis will have allocated and
identified clearly the problem to be resolved in the
following steps.
• This is the foundation for an efficient and effective
outcome of the whole process. The analyst must
question both the interested parties involved as well as
their agendas of the outcome.
• Locating the problem in such a way that eliminates any
ambiguity for future references.
2. Establish evaluation criteria. In order to
compare, measure and select among alternatives,
relevant evaluation criteria must be established.
• In this step it must be considered cost, net
benefit, effectiveness, efficiency, equity,
administrative ease, legality, and political
acceptability.
• Economic benefits must be considered in
evaluating the policy. How the policy will harm
or benefit a particular group or groups will
depend on the number of options.
• Political and other variables go hand in hand
with the evaluation criteria to be followed.
• Most of the time the client, or person or
group, interested in the policy analysis will
dictate the direction or evaluation criteria to
follow.
3. Identify alternative policies. In order to reach
this third step the other two must have been
successfully reached and completed.
• The policy analysis involves an incrementalist
approach; reaching one step in order to go on
to the next.
• In this third step understanding what is sought
is very important.
• In order to generate alternatives, it becomes
important to have a clear understanding of
the problem and how to go about it.
• Possible alternatives include the "do nothing
approach" (status quo), and any other that can
benefit the outcome.
• Combining alternatives generates better
solutions not thought of before.
• Relying on past experiences from other groups
or policy analysis helps to create a more
thorough analysis and understanding.
• It is important to avoid settling prematurely on
a certain number of options in this step; many
options must be considered before settling
into a reduced number of alternatives.
• Brainstorming, research, experiments, writing
scenarios, or concept mapping greatly help in
finding new alternatives that will help reach
an "optimal" solution.
4. Evaluate alternative policies.
• Packaging of alternatives into strategies is the
next step in accomplishing a thorough policy
analysis.
• It becomes necessary to evaluate how each
possible alternative benefits the criteria
previously established.
• Additional data needs to be collected in
analyzing the different levels of influence: the
economical, political and social dimensions of
the problem.
• These dimensions are analyzed through
quantitative and qualitative analysis, that is
the benefits and costs per alternative.
• Political questions in attaining the goals are
analyzed as to see whether they satisfy the
interested parties of the policy analysis.
• In doing this more concise analysis the
problem may not exist as originally identified;
the actual problem statement from the first
step may suffer a transformation, which is
explained after evaluating the alternatives in
greater detail.
• New aspects of the problem may be found to
be transient and even different from the
original problem statement.
• This modification process allows this method
of policy analysis to allow for a "recycling" of
information in all the steps.
• Several fast interactions through the policy
analysis may well be more efficient and
effective than a single detailed one.
• What this means is that the efficiency is
greatly increased when several projects are
analyzed and evaluated rather than just one in
great detail, allowing for a wider scope of
possible solutions.
• Carl V. Patton further suggests to avoid the tool
box approach: attacking options with a favorite
analysis method; its important to have a
heterogeneous approach in analyzing the
different possible alternatives.
• It becomes inefficient to view each alternative
under a single perspective; its clearly relevant
the need to evaluate each alternative following
diverse evaluating approaches singled out
according to the uniqueness of each of them.
5. Display and distinguish among alternative
policies.
• The results of the evaluation of possible
alternatives list the degree to which criteria
are met in each of them.
• Numerical results don't speak for themselves
but are of great help in reaching a satisfying
solution in the decision.
• Comparison schemes used to summarize
virtues are of great help in distinguishing
among several options; scenarios with
quantitative methods, qualitative analysis, and
complex political considerations can be
melded into general alternatives containing
many more from the original ones.
• In making the comparison and distinction of
each alternative it is necessary to play out the
economic, political, legal, and administrative
ramification of each option.
• Political analysis is a major factor of decision
of distinction among the choices; display the
positive effects and negative effects interested
in implementing the policy.
6. Monitoring the implemented policy.
• Assure continuity, determine whether they are
having impact.
• "Even after a policy has been implemented,
there may be some doubt whether the
problem was resolved appropriately and even
whether the selected policy is being
implemented properly.
• This concerns require that policies and
programs be maintained and monitored
during implementation to assure that they do
not change for unintentionally, to measure the
impact that they are having, to determine
whether they are having the impact intended,
and to decide whether they should be
continued, modified or terminated.
7.Mainly, we are talking about internal validity;
• Whether our programs makes a difference, if
there is no other alternate explanations.
• This step is very important because of the
special characteristic that program evaluation
and research design.
• References:
– Harold Lasswell
– John Anderson
– T. A. Birkland
– John Kingdon
– Howlett & Ramesh
– And other public policy Journal found in the internet