Public Policy Analysis and Implementation

CHAPTER ONE
1. THE MEANING AND IMPLEMENTATION OF PBLIC POLICY

1.1.
Public Policy is the chief instrument of a politically organized community. The entire process
concerning public policy needs to be distinguished primarily from two dominant angles. From the
input side, the articulation of needs and interests, and the factors determining the ‘choice’ of
activity have to be identified. From the output side, a distributive analysis has to be undertaken,
in that the impact of the policy has to be assessed. This brings out two major dimensions to public
policy-making.

In the first dimension, public policy is seen as an instrument of effective control over the
environment, in that it harbors the potential to create “fundamental social transformation” or
that could significantly influence the environment. The second dimension is that it “derives the
normative values on which it is based from the environment.” Public policy, thus, both acquires
and imparts values from/to the environment. It is the chief means by which the input-
throughput and output of government activity is performed.

Public policy has been defined differently, which is a reflection of its multi-faceted nature, yet
all draw elements of public decisions, choices, positions and statements of intents. Policy can be
broadly defined as a proposed course of action of an individual, a group, an institution or a
government to realize a specific objective or purpose within a given environment. Policy
formulation is one of the vital tasks of any government.

Marshall Dimnock defines it as “the consciously acknowledged rules of conduct that guide
administrative decisions.” Public policies are those, which are developed by governmental bodies
and officials, though non-governmental actors and agencies may also exert direct or indirect
pressure or influence in the policymaking process. The special characteristics of public policies as
differentiated from other policies emanate from the fact that they are formulated by what David
Easton (1953) has termed the “authorities” in a political system namely, “elders, paramount
chiefs, executives,legislators, judiciaries, administrators, councilors, monarchs, and the like.”

The concept of public policy comprises certain general features, like:

1. Purposive or result oriented action rather than random behaviour is the hallmark of public
policy. Public policies in modern political systems are not chance happenings.
2. Public policy refers to the action or decisional pattern by public administrators on a
particular issue over a period rather than their separate discrete decisions onthat matter
in an ad hoc fashion.
3. Policy is what governments actually do and what subsequently happens, rather than what
they intend to do or say they are going to do.
4. Public policy may be either positive or negative in form. Positively, it may involve some
form of government action regarding any issue or problem; negatively, it may involve
a decision by government officials not to take action on a matter onwhich governmental
opinion, attitude or action is asked for.
5. Public policy, at least in its positive form, is based on law and is authoritative. Ithas a
legal sanction behind it, which is potentially coercive in nature and is binding on all
Prepared by: Wubishet Chane, Department of PADM, HIC 1|Page
 Public Policy Analysis and Implementation
citizens. This is the main point of difference between public policy and policies of private
organizations.

Some writers, like Dye (1995), discourage an attempt to make an elaborate academic discussion
of the definitions of public policy as it creates deception and confusion. Forsuch people public
policy is simply whatever governments choose to do or not to do. Books, essays, and discussions
of a “proper” definition of public policy have proven futile, and they often divert attention from
the study of public policy itself. Moreover,even the most elaborate definitions of public policy, when
closely examined; seem to boil down to the same thing. For example, from the field of political
science, early writers such as David Easton (1953), define public policy as “the authoritative
allocation of values for the whole society”. But the definition when critically analyzed turns out
thatonly the government can “authoritatively” act on the “whole” society, and everything the
government chooses to do or not to do results in the “allocation of values”.

Some others define policy as “a projected program of goals, values, and practices”. Thisdefinition
implies a difference between specific government actions and an overall program of action
toward a given goal. However, the problem raised in insisting that government actions must have
goals in order to be labeled that “policy” is what we cannever be sure whether or not a particular
action has a goal, or if it does, what that goal is. Some people may assume that if a government chooses
to do something there must be a goal, objective or purpose. But what we can really observe is what
governments choose to do or not to do, rather than the goals of their choices. Realistically, the
notion of public policy must include all actions of government, and not what governments or
officials say they are going to do. We may wish that governments act in a “purposeful, goal-
oriented” fashion, although we know that they do not in most instances.

Standing from such problems and divergences in the definitions of public policies, we may prefer to
safely stick with the simple definition that says, “public policy is simply whatever governments
choose to do or not do”. Here, we are focusing not only on government action, but also on
government inaction (what the government chooses not to do), and we may contend that government
inaction can just create as great an impact on society as government action. Governments do many
things, for example:
 They regulate conflict within society and/or prohibit people from doing something
wrong;
 Organize society to carry on conflict with other societies;
 Distribute a great variety of symbolic rewards and material services to members of the
society; and
 Extract money from society in different forms.

Policy formulation is necessary prior to every action in every form of organization, private, or
public. It is a prerequisite for all management at different levels. Policy laysdown the framework
within which organizational goals are set to be accomplished. Theobjectives of an organization,
which are often vague and general, are concretized in the policy goals, which set the
administrative wheels in motion.

According to Rumki Basu (1994:270), policy can be broadly defined as a " proposed course of action
of an individual, a group, an institution or government, to realize a specific objective or purpose
within a given environment". Policy is a set of interrelated decisions taken by a political actor or
group of actors concerning the selection of goals and the means of achieving them within a
Prepared by: Wubishet Chane, Department of PADM, HIC 2|Page
 Public Policy Analysis and Implementation
specified situation.

Policy has been defined as "a matter of either the desire for change or the desire to protect
something from change" (Barber, 1983). Barber further added, "Policymaking occurs in the
determination of major objectives, in the selection of methods of achieving these objectives, and in
the continuous adaptation of existing policies to the problems that face the government." Public policy
can be comprehensively defined as a "purposive and consistent course of action produces as a
response to a perceived problem of constituency, formulated by a specific political process;
adopted, implemented and enforced by a public agency."

Public Policy lays down the framework within which organizational goals are set to be
accomplished. The objectives of an organization, which are often vague and general, are concretized
in the policy goals that set the administrative wheels in motion. Policy formulation is one of the
vital tasks of any form of government. As Basu (1994:270) puts it, "the essence of public
administration is policymaking". Dimock defines policy formulation as "the consciously
acknowledged rules of conduct that guide administrative decisions".

Public policies are those, which are developed by governmental bodies and officials. The special
characteristics of public policies as differentiated from other policies emanate from the fact that they
are made by "authorities" in a political system namely, "elders, chiefs, executives, legislatures,
judges, administrators, councilors, monarchs, and thelike".

Definitions of policy, specifically public policy, may vary in their scope and level depending on
the perspectives of different writers. The following are examples of such definitions to the subject
matter, as a concept or as a practice:
 Public policy is what the public administrators execute. (Nicholas Henry)
 Public policy is the consciously acknowledged rules of conduct that guide
administrative action and decision (Marshall Dimock)
 Policymaking occurs in the determination of major objectives, in the selection of methods
of achieving these and in the continuous adaptation of existing policiesto the problems
that face a government (N. Johnson)
 Public policy is a purposive course of action followed by an actor or set of actors in
dealing with a problem or matter of concern. It is a purposive course of actionfollowed
by an actor or set of actors in dealing with a problem or matter of concern (James
Anderson, 1984)
 Public policy is a very complex, dynamic process whose various components make
different contributions to it. It decides major guidelines for action directed at the future.
These guidelines (policies) formally aim at achieving what is in thepublic interest by the
best possible means (Yehezkel Dror, 1973)
 Public policy is a conscious, goal-selecting process undertaken by actors in the
decision-making system and it includes the identification of the means ofachieving
such goals (O. Saasa)

Public policy is used in senses of what the government is doing and how it is doing. Studies of
public policy examine how the content of the policy programme is administered. Policy is a
verbal, written or implied direction of action. It gives the overall guide by setting up
boundaries/limits and directions within which administrative action will take place. Policies have
Prepared by: Wubishet Chane, Department of PADM, HIC 3|Page
 Public Policy Analysis and Implementation
the following features:
A. Policies are made to confirm the objectives
B. Policies are broad guides to action
C. Policies are guiding principles, which govern action and thinking
D. Policies tell members of organizations how to deal with particular situations but in broad
terms
E. Policies are long lasting and comprehensive
F. Policies are realistic, definite, positive and clear
G. All public policies are consistent with each other; in harmony with each other

Equally important to bringing the various definitions with the purpose of understanding the concept
from different perspectives and angles is to draw the distinctions and divulge similarities between
policy and decision, and between policy and politics.

1.2.
The following points will make clear the implications of the concept of public policy:
A. Public policy is goal oriented. It is purposive or result oriented action, rather than random
behaviour or chance happenings, to accomplish goals and produce results. Goal-orientedness and
attainment of result is the hallmark (characteristic) of public policy. Public policy is formulated and
implemented in order to achieve objectives for the ultimate benefit of the masses in general.
Example:
❖ Goal: to increase farm income
❖ Policy: provides subsidizes and utilizes production controls
❖ Result: incomes of many farmers have increased
B. Public Policy is the outcome of the government’s collective actions. Public policy refers to the
action or decisional pattern taken by public administrators or government officials in a collective
sense on a particular issue over a period rather than their separate discrete decisions on that matter
in an ad hoc fashion. Example: Industrial health and safety policy is based not only on
OccupationalHealth and Safety Act, but also by a pattern of administrative and judicial decisions
interpreting, elaborating and applying (or not applying) the Act to particular situations.

C. Policy is what governments actually decide or choose to do, and what subsequently happens,
rather than what they intend to do or say they are going to do. It can take a variety of forms like
law, ordinance, court decisions, executive orders, etc. Example: If legislature enacts law for the
payment of minimum wages by the employer and then nothing is done to enforce the law, it is not-
regulation of wages.

D. Public policies emerge in response to policy demands on some public issue made by other actors
such as private citizens, group representatives, other public officials upon government officials
and agencies. Examples:
 A municipal government do something about in order to solve traffic congestion
 National government to prohibit the stealing of pet dogs or cats for sale to medical and
scientific research organizations
E. Public policy may be either positive or negative in form. Positively, it depicts the concern of
government and involves some form of government actions regarding any issue or problem. Public
Prepared by: Wubishet Chane, Department of PADM, HIC 4|Page
 Public Policy Analysis and Implementation
policy in its positive form is based on law and is authoritative; it has a legal sanction behind it,
which is potentially coercive in nature and is binding on all citizens. Negatively, it may involve
a decision by government officials not to take action on a matter on which governmental opinion,
attitude, or action is asked for.

In practice, policy formulation overlaps with policy decision in the policymaking process. Policy
formulation aims at getting a preferred policy alternative approved. Policy decision on the other
hand involves action by some official person or body to approve, modify, or reject a preferred
policy alternative. Policy decision when approving a preferred policy alternative takes such forms
as the enactment of legislation or the issuance of an executive order. Therefore, what is typically
involved in the policy decision stage is not selection from among a number of policy alternatives,
but action on the preferred policy alternative.

Policies could also have different connotations and could be understood in different perspectives,
which may imply or include the following:
 As a label for a field of activity: For example, broad statements about a government's
economic policy, industrial policy, or law and order policy,
 As an expression of general purpose or desired state of affairs: For example, to generate
as many jobs as possible, to promote democratization through decentralization, to attack
the roots of poverty,
 As specific proposals: For example, to limit agricultural landholdings to 10 hectares, to
devalue the currency by 10 percent, to provide free education
 As decisions of government: For example, policy decisions as announced in the national
assembly or by president,
 As formal authorization: For example, acts of parliament or other statutory instruments
or provision,
 As a program: For example, as a defined and relatively specific sphere of government
activity such as land reform program or a women's health program,
 As output: For example, what is actually delivered such as the amount of land
redistributed in a reform program and the number of tenants affected, taxes collected,
roads built, foreign aid projects undertaken, welfare benefits paid,
 As outcome: For example, what is actually achieved such as the effect on farmer income
and 'living standards, and of agricultural output of a land reform program,
 As theory or model: For example, if you do ‘x’ then ‘y’ will happen; if we increase
incentives to manufacturers then, industrial output will grow; if more opportunities are
provided in rural areas, then migration to cities will slow down,
 As process: As a long-term matter starting with issues and moving through objective-
setting, decision making, implementation and evaluation (labour, welfare, defense, traffic
control etc),

1.3.
A. Objective and Policy
The following are some of the nature and key characteristics of objective:
▪ Multiple in nature
▪ Realistic and operational
▪ Responsive to environment changes
Prepared by: Wubishet Chane, Department of PADM, HIC 5|Page
 Public Policy Analysis and Implementation

▪ Long range, medium and short ranges

Differences between Policy and Objective

POLICY OBJECTIVE
1. Guideline to achieve predetermined 1. An end towards which activities are
objectives directed
2. Determines how the work is to be done 2. Determines what is to be done
3. General expression of broad purpose and 3. Specific measures of achievement
philosophy 4. Determined by the top management
4. Formulated at every top, middle and low only
level of management

B. Goals and Policy

It is not easy to differentiate goals from objectives as they are commonly used to denote the same
meaning in many literatures. But those who try to view goals differently from objectives are highly
interested to make a distinction between goal and policy. Goal canbe understood in a variety of
perspectives; it can be thought of as abstract values that asociety would like to acquire, or it can
be specific and concrete. Public policy is, however, concerned with the specific goals than the
abstract ones. In order to become a policy, goal has to be translated into action.

Differences between Policy and Goal

POLICY GOAL
1. Policy spells out the way of achievinggoals 1. Goal is what policy aims to achieve.
2. Policy is essentially an instrument toachieve a 2. Goal is a desired state of affairs that a
goal. society or an organization attempts to
realize.

C. Strategies and Policy

Various authors have been using the terms "Policy" and "strategy" to denote closely similar
meanings. For example, policy and strategy both refer to broad characterizations of long-range
organizational aims.
Differences between Policy and Strategy
POLICY STRATEGY
1. Policy establishes broad purpose and 1. Strategy develops alternative ways and means
direction for the total organization, that will be consistent with, and optimizes on,
sector or nation. the organization's or nation's policy.
2. Policy answers the "where" or "what", 2. Strategy answers the "how", how the
the government or top management of government or the organization intends to get
the organization wants to go or to be where it wants to go or what it wants tobe.
some years after from now.

Prepared by: Wubishet Chane, Department of PADM, HIC 6|Page

 Public Policy Analysis and Implementation

Despite technical differences as indicated in the table above, strategy and policy are
interdependent parts of effective decision-making. Depending on the context, meanings can overlap
with distinctions increasingly difficult to draw. Strategy depends on identifying the correct
alternatives to pursue.

D. Rules and Policy

Rules are specific regulations, which must be followed by all people in the organization or
department. Rules spell out specific required action or non-actions, i.e., actions that must be or
must not be taken, allowing no discretion in a given situation (example “no smoking”, or
“cheating is prohibited”). They specifically tell what to do or what not to do, they are enforced
rigidly, and involve penalty for violation. The only choice rule leave is whether or not to apply
them to a particular set of circumstances. The purpose of policy is to guide decision making by
marking off areas in which managers can use their discretion. Although rules may also serve as
guides, they allow no discretion in their application. Rules are the most explicit of standing plans
and are not guides for thinking or decision making.

Differences between Policies and Rules

POLICY RULE
1. General statement of a decision 1. Specific and tells what to do or not to do
2. Flexible and allows exceptions 2. Rigid and does not permit exceptions
3. Allows discretions in decision making or 3. Does not allow discretion in decision
implementation making or implementation
4. Allows implicit understanding and 4. Is explicit and direct, doesn't give room
interpretation, serves as a guide for for thinking and implied interpretation
thinking or decision making

E. Procedures and Policy

Procedures are statements that specify the exact manner in which certain activities must be
accomplished. They put the precise order of activities to be carried out to do a task and thus,
procedures are chronological sequences of required actions. They provide detailed step-by-step
instructions as to what should be done. Procedure is a systematic way of handling regular events; it
is a series of steps to do a particular job; a sequence ofactions directed towards a goal; a guide of
action without specifying a time sequence. The following are the nature of procedure:
Involves steps of doing jobs
Concerns with many departments
Required for all departments
Facilitates decision – making
Helps in policy implementation

Prepared by: Wubishet Chane, Department of PADM, HIC 7|Page

 Public Policy Analysis and Implementation
Differences between Policies and Procedures
POLICIES PROCEDURES
1. Planned expressions of Department's 1. Prescribe the exact sequence of
attitude towards issues specific tasks
2. Guides to decision making 2. Guides to action
3. Allow rethinking 3. Rigid and no discretion
4. Framed by top level management 4. Laid down at middle level

When we compare policy with the last two related concepts; i.e. rules and procedures, we can
understand that all are alike in the sense that they are directives to guide people’s behavior to the
desired ends and they are standing plans, which are to be followed in the future. Conversely, rules
and procedures are different from policy in that the former are guides to actions while the latter is
a guide to thinking. So, procedures and rules renderno freedom and hence should be used when
we want to discourage initiative or repressthinking. But, policies must permit freedom within
limits and hence are used when people’s involvement, participation or initiative is desired.

Policy is also closely understood with other related concepts in addition to those discussed above.
Such related concepts include: method, decision making, plan, program, and project. A method is a
manual or mechanical way by which each operation is performed the best way of doing a
particular work. Method is limited in nature compared to a procedure, as the latter consists of
various methods to do a work.

Sometimes policymaking is confused with decision making. Although they are closely related,
they are not the same functions. Policymaking involves decision making, but every decision is
not a policy. Generally, administrators take decisions in their day-to-day work, within the existing
framework of policy. Policy decisions thus, provide a sense of direction to the course of administrative
action. Policy formulation sets the framework for decision making. Policy has wider implications
and a longer time frame.

Policy itself is part of the overall process of planning. Planning has strategic implications and is more
a technical function than policy formation. A policy has more the nature ofa ‘tactic’. Programmes
are a schedule of activities to be taken up by various institutions or individual functionaries. A project
is an investment for a particular purpose. Program and project are both consequences of a policy.

Prepared by: Wubishet Chane, Department of PADM, HIC 8|Page

 Public Policy Analysis and Implementation

CHAPTER TWO
2. ORIGINS, PROGRESSION AND SOURCES OF PUBLIC POLICY

2.1
Historically speaking, the origins of public policy and public advice as a political decision
are very old and have been used since the birth of civilization. From the beginning of
human thought, public policymaking has been a central subject for study and discussion
by social philosophers and practical politicians alike. Their writings include many
moving exhortations (impulses), profound insights, fascinating descriptions, and
stimulating ideas that not only are of much theoretical significance, but also have been of
great practical introduction in shaping contemporary policymaking.

The history of public policy goes back to the 18th century B.C. The Code of Hammurabi,
which was originated around this period, was the earliest recorded example of policy
analysis. The Code that consisted of 282 laws was intended to establish a unified and just
order over many aspects of public life. However, a systematic public advice emerged
from the relationship between the church and the state in the 15th century (Sapru, 2005).
The value labeled, for example by Sapru and Dunn, as “systematic” for the contributions of
early writings was not plausibly admitted by other writers like Dror, though still they trace
back to the 15th century works as the beginning of public policy.

It is enough to mention Plato, Aristotal, Machiavelli, Burke, Bentham, the Cameralists,

and the Federalists to illustrate what such discursive or public topic writings have
contributed to the study and practice of policymaking; or to mention Babour, Richelieu,
Frederick the Great, Metternich, Bismarck, and Churchill to illustrate how important the
autobiographies and writings of practical politicians have been as a source of data and
impressionistic generalizations about policymaking. The writings of Machiavelli (1469-
1527) and Francis Bacon (1561-1626) have contributed a lot the development of policy
advice.

In Machiavelli’s view, policy was an activity of sustaining power, and the policy adviser
was there to help him to lie, cheat and murder effectively. For Bacon, on the other hand,
policy was an activity of sustaining balance and authority, and he envisaged a role for
advisers, which was far more elevated and powerful. For this reason, many
contemporary writers considered Bacon as the one representing the genesis of the
modern idea of policy as the production of rational thought and science. English
philosophers, like Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) and James Mill (1773-1836), are also
regarded as the partial precursors of the policy sciences that developed in pure forms
after more than one century of their times. They placed the utilitarian argument on
public policy as to the promotion of greater social welfare and individual freedom.
These being the indications for the existence of policy in earlier times, it is contended

Prepared by: Wubishet Chane, Department of PADM, HIC 9|Page

 Public Policy Analysis and Implementation

that policy advice offered to the government was realistically made on personalized basis
and in the form of sycophancy or pleasing of individuals in power. With regard to the
systematic basis, public advice remained a very ‘particularistic and ad hoc exercise’.
Further in the 19th century, while new policies were initiated to lessen acute social
problems, they certainly were not made by analytical examination of the conditions and
trends.

Although many fully recognize what such writings have contributed to an understanding of
policymaking, it must be pointed out that almost all pre-modern thinking and writing on
social affairs lacked any systematic empiric underpinning, without which they could not
provide a reliable basis for descriptive generalizations, or prescriptive suggestions. In
short, it may be emphasized that by the beginning of the 20th century there was no
analytic examination of public policy issues. Adoption of the intellectual or systematic
analysis of the situation to serve as realistic basis of public policy is relatively a recent
phenomenon.

2.2
Although the origin of public policies can be linked to the beginning of civilization itself,
the present policy sciences have a twentieth century colour. Moreover, although there
were intellectual refinements as a relatively recent practice or phenomenon, during the
1930s, most were directed internally toward methodological improvements rather than
externally toward community problems. The concept of “policy sciences” as a social
science discipline and practice was born or formulated in 1951 with the publication of
Harold Lasswell’s essay in title “The Policy Orientation”. Policy science is a systematic
and scientific study of public policy. Lasswell is regarded as the modern founder of the
policy sciences, described policy sciences as the culmination of efforts to define a
discipline for producing and applying “societally relevant knowledge”.

A policy science is characterized by a series of paradigms different in many respects from

contemporary “normal” sciences. The place of policy sciences is related to the question
and importance of the state and its public policy concerns. It is concerned with the social
consequences and implications of public policies, with the understanding and
improvement of public policymaking processes and systems. According to Dror (1971),the
policy sciences include:
A. Policy Analysis, which provides methods for identification of preferable policy
alternatives,
B. Alternative innovation, which deals with the invention of new designs and
possibilities to be considered in policymaking,
C. Master policies or mega policies, which provide postures, assumptions, strategies,
and main guidelines to be followed by specific policies,
D. Evaluation and feedback, including social indicators, social experimentation and
organizational learning, and,

Prepared by: Wubishet Chane, Department of PADM, HIC 10 | P a g e

 Public Policy Analysis and Implementation

E. Improvement of meta policies, that is, “policy on policymaking” through redesign

of public policymaking systems, its organizational components, selection and
training of its personnel, and reconstruction of its communication and
information network,

Policy science is essentially an attempt to develop a theoretical base for the discipline.
The theoretical insights are very important as they provide both explanations and
directions. Theoretical explanations enable to avoid the occurrence of same mistakes
again and again. It is believed that in the absence of conceptualization and theoretical
developments, the social experiences can neither be meaningfully discussed nor
communicated to others. This is the reason why one should discus not only the
operational dimensions of a phenomenon but also its reflections in the theory.

Lasswell’s vision of policy sciences was multidisciplinary, contextual, problem-oriented, and

explicitly normative; each of which representing different emphasis with an explicit impact
on the evolution and acceptance of the policy sciences. As policy sciences are
interdisciplinary in nature, there must be a dynamic relationship amongst them in order to
benefit from each other. Policy sciences must integrate knowledge from a variety of
branches of knowledge into a supra-discipline. Policy sciences are also problem-oriented
and multi-method as they involve operations research, programme budgeting, cost-
benefit analysis, forecasting, computer simulation, gaming, sensitivity training,
brainstorming, social accounting, etc. It also adopts contextual approaches emphasizing
knowledge of the policy process and utilizing such knowledge in the process. Policy
sciences were explained by Lasswell as normative in their concern with human values.
Policy formulation and implementation is governed by certain inherent principles, which
may determine policy choices and outcomes. Policy sciences attempt to discuss these
principles in a systematic way. The historical progression of policy sciences has
depended on the complex interaction of social scientists and socio-political events.

One of the main tasks faced by the modern behavioral sciences is to engage in an empiric
study of policymaking, and to integrate the findings of such a study with insights and
abstract thoughts to form a comprehensive, systematic, and reliable theory of public
policymaking. This task has hardly begun. At best, the empiric study of policymaking is
just now emerging. A significant and increasing amount of work is being done on minor
decisions and secondary policies, but most of it suffers from lack of comprehensive,
theoretical frameworks. Very little empiric work is being done on the macro-system of
public policymaking. At present, even suitable research methods for such jobs are not
available or nearly absent.

Because of such limitations, in the 1990’s there has been a growing skepticism and
criticism questioning the credibility of policy sciences to provide ‘objective, empirical,
and normative truths’. Scientific rationality, which was once its emphasis, is being
replaced by a ‘broader theory of reason to society’. Hence, to understand the present
state of the study of public policymaking, one must consider the following points.

Prepared by: Wubishet Chane, Department of PADM, HIC 11 | P a g e

 Public Policy Analysis and Implementation

• Considerable empiric research and theorizing is being done on the basic

components of public policymaking, namely; individual and small-group decision
making. Some is also being done on decision making in other basic social units,
such as the family.
• Some work is being done on organizational decision making, but as yet few
generalized findings have emerged, most of this empiric work is in the form of
case studies. Only in one instance has a series of cases been collected within a
systematic framework and in order to reach generalizations about organizational
decision making.
• An increasing number of studies deal with community decisions, and with single
cases of public policymaking on the national level. Most of these studies are
monographic (detailed), and use theoretical frameworks that do not bring out the
"decision" aspects of policymaking.
• Some studies of specific facets of public policymaking are available, including
studies of the characteristics of some policymakers, of behaviour patterns in
policymaking units, and of the structuring of policymaking units.
• With a few exceptions, most of the studies on public policymaking do not have a
rigorous theoretical framework, and are not significantly related to current work in
decision making theory. Tentative conceptual frameworks for systematic
empiric study of public policymaking have been developed only recently. As yet,
again with a few exceptions, these conceptual frameworks have not been
systematically applied to the study of real policymaking.
• Much interesting and significant material that is relevant to the study of public
policymaking continues to appear in biographies, memoirs, journalistic
descriptions, and similar literary sources. This material, which could offer very
important insights and understanding, is neglected by nearly all the behavioural
science students of policymaking.
• Almost no work is being done on analyzing and re-analyzing historical material
in terms of decision-making concepts. This is a great pity, because both the
theories of decision making and policymaking and the study of history might
benefit greatly from the attempt to apply decision making-oriented analytical
frameworks to the study of history.
• Almost all empiric studies of public policymaking explicitly reject an orientation
toward reform, since they aspire to be "value-free" and "factual-behavioural."
• Reflecting the general situation in the behavioural sciences, most of the available
studies deal with modern countries. Only a few of them focus on policymaking in
the developing countries, or include material directly relevant to the study of
policymaking in them.
• Few studies have been done on high-level public policymaking processes.
Decision making at the cabinet level is almost always surrounded by secrecy, and
no access to it is granted for research purposes. The most important sources of
information on these critical policymaking activities are books written by insiders
and occasional public hearings.

Prepared by: Wubishet Chane, Department of PADM, HIC 12 | P a g e

 Public Policy Analysis and Implementation

• Research methods suited to studying complex phenomena, including public

policymaking, are very underdeveloped. The more sophisticated tools, such as
multivariable analysis, facet design, and non-metric measurement, fit complex
systems in theory, but most of these tools require detailed information that will
not be available in the foreseeable future. The most promising ideas for analyzing
complex systems are today being developed mostly outside the main stream of the
behavioral sciences, by the new inter-disciplines of management science,
operations research, and systems analysis. These ideas have not yet been
assimilated and put to use by the behavioral sciences.
• Integrated treatises or essays on public policymaking as a decision making
process, which could be based on what little data are available, have not been
published. Only a very few attempts have been made to develop a comprehensive
theory of the public policymaking system as a decision-producing system.

2.3
The study of public policy is very important for the intimate and organic relationships
between public policy and its context. Most governments of developing countries have been
engaged in the momentous tasks of promoting national resurgence through socio-
economic development following the end of the Second World War. They seek to
improve the relevant policies, and the changing nature of public policies calls for the
extensive study of these policies. Therefore, the studies of approaches, strategies, and
concepts which will contribute towards this end are essential for many reasons. Firstly, the
study of the policy formulation processes may help to gain greater knowledge and
understanding of the complexities of the interacting social, economic and political
processes and their implications for society. Policy may be viewed either as a dependent or
an independent variable. When it is viewed as a dependent variable, the question will be
on identifying factors that would shape public policy. The attention in this case is
placed on the political and environmental factors that help to determine the content of
policy.

Secondly, factual knowledge about the policymaking process and its outcomes is a
prerequisite or prescribing on and dealing with societal problems normatively. Many
political scientists believe that the study of public policy should be directed towards
ensuring that governments adopt appropriate policies to attain certain desirable social
goals. They reject the notion that policy analysts should strive to be value free
contending that political science should not and cannot remain politically neutral or
silent on vital contemporary social, economic or political problems. They want to
improve the quality of public policy in ways they deem desirable, notwithstanding the
fact that substantial disagreement may exist in society over what constitutes “desirable” or
the “appropriate” goals of policy. Today many scholars and professionals have shifted their
focus to public policy- to the description and explanation about the process by which
public policy is determined as well as the causes and consequences of government
activities. This focus involves a description of the content of public policy; an analysis of

Prepared by: Wubishet Chane, Department of PADM, HIC 13 | P a g e

 Public Policy Analysis and Implementation

the impact of social, economic, and political forces on the content of public policy; an
enquiry into the effect of various institutional arrangements and political processes on
public policy; an evaluation of the consequences of public policies on societies, both
expected and unexpected consequences.

This shift of emphasis and focus of attention towards explaining and analyzing the
causes, requirements and consequences of public policy certainly require relevant
knowledge. As, on the other hand, there is an obvious gap between the ways policies are
made and the required knowledge possessed by policymakers, it has become imperative
in the fields of political science and public administration to study public policy. The
question here is that, “why do we study public policy?” There are both academic and
political reasons for studying public policy or engaging in policy analysis. Among a
number of specific reasons for why we devote greater attention to the study of public
policy, the following deserve worth mentioning:
A. Scientific Reasoning and Understanding: First, public policy can be studied for purely
scientific reasons: understanding the causes and consequences of policy decisions
improves the knowledge of society. The study of public policy formulation processes
may help to gain greater knowledge and understanding of the complexities of the
interacting social, economic and political processes and their implications for society.
Public policy can be viewed as a dependent variable, and we can ask what socio-
economic conditions and political system characteristics operate to shape the content
of policy. In this case, then attention is placed on the political and environmental
factors that help to determine the content of policy.
Alternatively, public policy can be viewed as an independent variable, and the focus
shifts to the impact of policy on the political system and the environment. In this
case, we can ask what impact public policy has on society and its political system. By
asking such questions we can improve our understanding of the linkages among
socio-economic forces, political processes, and public policy. An understanding of
these linkages contributes to the breadth, significance, reliability, and theoretical
development of social science.

B. Professional Reasons and Problem Solving: Public policy can also be studied for
professional reasons: understanding the causes and consequences of public policy
permits us to apply social science knowledge to the solution of practical problems.
Factual knowledge about the policymaking process and its outcomes is a prerequisite
for prescribing the ills of society or dealing with social problems normatively. If
certain ends are desired, the question of what policies would best implement them is
a factual question requiring scientific study. In other words, policy studies can
produce professional advice, in terms of “if…then…” statements, about how to
achieve desired goals. The study of public policy should be directed towards ensuring
that governments adopt appropriate policies to attain certain desirable social goals. It
is not to deny, however, that substantial disagreements may exist in society over
what constitutes "desirable" or the "appropriate" goals of policy.

Prepared by: Wubishet Chane, Department of PADM, HIC 14 | P a g e

 Public Policy Analysis and Implementation

C. Political Reasons and Policy Recommendations: Finally, public policy can be studied
for political purposes: to ensure that the nation adopts the “right” policies to achieve the
“right” goals. It is frequently argued that political science should not besilent or
impotent in the face of great social and political crises, and that, political scientists
have a moral obligation to advance specific public policies. An exclusive focus on
institutions, processes, or behaviours is frequently looked on as “dry”, “irrelevant”,
and “amoral” because it does not direct attention to the really important policy
questions facing societies. Policy studies can be undertaken not only for scientific
and professional purposes but also to inform political discussion, advance the level of
political awareness, and improve the quality of public policy. Of course,these are
very subjective purposes-citizens do not always agree on what constitutesthe “right”
policies or the “right” goals-but it is assumed that knowledge is preferable to ignorance,
even in politics.

The most important and immediate question that follows after reasoning out why we
study public policy should be, “what can we learn about public policy?” To address this
generic question, we can provide at least three major justifications: we can describe
public policy, we can inquire about the causes of public policy, and we can find out the
consequences of public policy actions.

2.4
As it is explained in Chapter One earlier, public policy is a broad statement that reflects
the intent of government’s choices of actions that are aimed to serve the public purposes,
with the intended results for which administrators are responsible. Public policies give
authority to government agencies or public officials and provide direction to spend
money, supply personal services, restrict business practices, and carry on all
governmental activities, but emanates from different sources and grounds. Public policy
takes several forms. Its most fundamental principles are expressed in national and state
constitutions, which also govern the procedures by which policies are adopted. The most
familiar policy form is statutory law, enacted by congress or parliament, state
legislatures, and local boards and councils. Court decisions interpreting statues and
constitutions also become policy and are binding on legislators and executives.
Notwithstanding the differences among concepts discussed in Chapter one, the rules and
orders issued by executive and administrative agencies are also policy, for they extend and
apply the statutory law in greater detail. Budgets of all state governments are policies,
for they set the levels and objectives of spending as well as the amounts and sources of
revenue.

Another key source of public policy is international relations. Some policies cross
national boundaries, taking the form of treaties and less formal working agreements
between and among governments. Such policies require negotiations with governments
and such international agencies as the World Bank and the World Health Organization.

Prepared by: Wubishet Chane, Department of PADM, HIC 15 | P a g e

 Public Policy Analysis and Implementation

To implement this requires a complex of new internal policies and incentives for the
chemical industry. "New" ideas can come from governments other than the one
deciding. Often a state or city adopts an idea that others have found successful.
Innovations in low-income housing, corrections reform, and environmental regulation
have spread among policymakers open to new solutions. European Countries, and
recently Japan, have also been the source of policy ideas in health care, education, waste
management, and housing, although policy transfer across national and cultural
boundaries is not always feasible.

Administrators play a crucial role in the making of public policy because of their
specialized knowledge and their experience in implementing current policies. In general,
the higher that administrators stand in the hierarchy of a government, the greater will be
their influence over the substance of its policy. On the other hand, many high-level
administrators lack expertise in their given policy area and may not remain in their posts
long enough to sustain their influence. Every action of an agency potentially contributes to
subsequent policies, and nearly all policymaking is, for that reason, remaking of
existing policy. The ultimate success or failure of a policy is difficult to define, but such
judgments constantly float through policy debates and incline decisions in one direction or
another. Many of those judgments flow from the agencies that would like to label their
works as successful or as inadequate for reasons that they would like the legislators to
remedy.

The ethical values of a society can be considered as the sources of public policy. Ethical
values, such as the obligation to preserve life, are quite compelling legislators. Legal and
professional standards interpret and expand these values and lay specific obligations on
responsible persons, particularly in government. Since ethical values are often stated in
absolute terms, they highlight our inevitable shortcomings as well as stimulate
improvement. Society's available resources are also can be the source of public policy. A
country, which is rich enough to put a man on the moon, can initiate a policy for
undertaking more incredible scientific research since doing so is affordable regardlessof
the likelihood to succeed with it. No matter what its achievements are, an affluent
technological society always feels obligated to set its goals beyond them.

Though often drawn upon ethical values and availability of resources, citizens' demands
could be another source of public policy. Those who see or experience the deficiencies
most directly also advocate public policies that provide the most advantages for them.
Many people may believe and want that the state can pay for all medical expenses as
well as cover other safety needs. This may push the government to set policy in account
of such public demands and its capacity to respond fully or in partial treatment.

Policy must be based on accurate factual information, which is largely supplied by

administration. There are four ways in which or sources from which administration
collects the necessary data and information:
• From its own internal reports, records and statistics,

Prepared by: Wubishet Chane, Department of PADM, HIC 16 | P a g e

 Public Policy Analysis and Implementation

• From non-official organizations/ sources,

• From special investigations conducted by commissions or committees of inquiry,
• From research and study.

Every department receives periodic reports, returns, statements, accounts and statistics
from its various sub-agencies about their activities. These are consolidated together and
recorded by the departments and are available for use as data for the formulation of
policy. With the modern emphasis on planning, statistics have become a very important
tool of administration and many departments make special arrangements and establish
special machinery for the collection of statistics. Statistics internally available with one
department may be supplemented by related data available from other departments. The
data obtained from the various sources have to be suitably organized and aggregated to
reveal their true import for purposes of policy formulation. As an antidote to defects and
deficiencies of official reporting, administration establishes contacts with non-official or
private fact-finding groups such as farmers’ organizations and other various professional
associations. The information and data supplied by these non-official bodies is helpful in
correcting the vagaries of official reports and statistics and in arriving at a balanced view.

Prepared by: Wubishet Chane, Department of PADM, HIC 17 | P a g e