PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS

Prof.Dr.M.Irfan Islamy,MPAFaculty of Administrative Science

BRAWIJAYA UNIVERSITY2008

1

What is public policy ?

1. J.E.Anderson , 1975 :Public policy is a purposive course of action followed by govern-ment in dealing with some topic or mater of public concern

2. D.Easton , 1953 :Public policy is the authoritative allocation of values for the whole society

3. T.R.Dye , 1978 :Public policy is whatever govrnments choose to do or not to do

4. C.L.Chochran & E.F.Malone , 1995 :Public policy consists of political decisions for implementing pro-grams to achieve societal goals

2

5. William Jenkins’ ( 1978 ) Public policy -- “ as 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 specified situation where those decisions should , in

principle, be within the power of those actors to achieve “

3

Public Policy Typology

1. C.L.Chochran & E..Malone , 1995 :1.1 Patronage / Promotional Policies : as those gvernment actions that provide incentive for idividuals or corporations to undertake activities they would only reluctantly undertake without the promise of a reward. These can be classified into three types : subsidies ; contracts; and licences.1.2 Regulatory Policies : as those which allow the government to exert control over the conduct of certain activites ( ‘negative forms of control’). They include : invironmental pollution; civil & criminal penalties; consumption of tobacco, alcohol; consumer protection ; employee health and safety.1.3 Redistributive Policies : as those which control people by managing the economy as a whole. The techniques of control involve fiscal (tax) and monetary ( supply of money ) policies. They tend to beneft one group at the expense of oher groups through the reallocation of wealth.

4

To be continued .............

2. J.P.Lester & J.Stewart,Jr , 2000. ( Following T.J.Lowi & Others )

2.1. Liberal or Conservative Policies : Liberal policies are those in which the government is used extensively to bring about social change, usually in the direction ofensuring greater level of social equality. Conservative policies generally oppose the use of government to bring about social change but may approve government action to preserve the status quo or to promote favored interests. Such as : Liberals tend to favor a concentration of power in higher levels of government ; whereas Conser-vatives tend to favor decentralization of power and authority.

2.2 Substantive or Procedural Policies : Substantive policies are concerned with governmental actions to deal with substantive problems, such as highway construction; environmental protection; payment of welfare benefits. Procedural policies are those that relate to how something is going to be done or who is going to take action, such as the Administrative Procedures Act of 194 G.

5

To be continued ................

2.3 Material or Symbolic Policies : Material policies provide concrete re-sources or substantive power to their beneficiaries , or , impose real disadvantages on those adversely affected. For example , welfare pay-ments; housing subsidies; etc. Symbolic policies appeal more to cherished values than to tangibles benefits; such as national holidays that honor patriots, concerning the flag etc.

2.4 Collective or Private Goods Policies : Collective goods policies are those benefits that cannot be given to some but denied to others, such as national defense and public safety. Private goods policies are those goods that may be divided into units, and for which consumers can be charged , such as food, trash collection, home security etc.

6

Why government intervene ?

# When society desires health care and a clean environment for everyone, why does the free market not provide it ?

# Do you believe that the free market has proven a superb device for eficient-ly producing goods and services ?

# What do you say when efforts to relieve market imperfections by public policy will also be flawed ?

# Do you agree when others argue that government may be the only actor that can improve market efficiency or alter economic and social costs, risks, and income distribution in a positive way ?

D.L.Weimer & A.R.Vining , 1999 : “ .... Greater equity in the distributions of economic and political resources, should be viewed as only necessary conditions for appropriate government intervention “

7

Market and Government Failures( D.K.Gupta , Analyzng Public Policy , 2001 )

Market Failure Government Failure

1. Lack ofcompetition2. Barriers to entry and exit3. Restricted flow of information4. Externalities and social cost5. Rising service costs

1. Inability to define social welfare2. Limits to democracy and the paradox

of voting3. Inability to define the marginal

benefts and costs of public goods4. Political constraints5. Cultural constraints6. Institutional constraints7. Legal constraints8. Knowledge constraints9. Analytical constraints10. Timing of policies

8

9

What public policy analysis is ?

1. Chochran & Malone , 1995:Policy analysis describes investigations that produce accurate and useful information for decision makers

2. Dunn , 1981 : Policy analysis is an applied social science discipline which uses multiple

methods of inquiry and argument to produce and transform policy -relevant information that may be utilzed in political setting to resolve policy problems

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

10

11

CHARACTERISTICS OF PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS( H.Lasswell , 1971 )

1. MULTI-METHODS 2. MULTI-DISCIPLINARY 3. PROBLEM-FOCUSED 4. CORCERNED TO MAP THE CONTEXTUALITY OF THE POLICY PROCESS, POLICY OPTION AND POLICY OUTCOMES 5. WHOSE GOALS IS TO INTEGRATE KNOWLEDGE INTO AN OVERARCHING DISCIPLINE TO ANALYSE PUBLIC CHOICES AND DECISION MAKING AND THEREBY CONTRIBUTE TO THE DEMOCRATIZATION OF SOCIETY

12

POLICY ANALYSIS( W.PARSONS , 1997 )

1. META ANALYSIS : is concerned with understanding the idea that the analysis of public policy proceeds by employing metaphors ……. By describing something in terms of something else….. As devices to explore the ‘unknown’. ( models : ‘stagist’ ; ‘pluralist-elitist’; ‘neo –marxist’; ‘policy discourse’ )

2. MESO ANALYSIS : is a middle-range or bridging level of analysis which is focused on the linkage between the definition of problems, the setting of agendas and decision-making and implementation processes

3. DECISION ANALYSIS : analysis of decision-making process and analysis in and for decision-making : who gets what and how ? ( Elitism , Pluralism, Marxism, Corporatism, Professio-nalism, and Technocracy )

4. DELIVERY ANALYSIS : is the analysis of implementation, evaluation, change and impact

13

Two Main Concerns : Positive & Normative Analysis( C.L.Cochran & E.F.Malone , 1995 )

Positive Analysis Normative Analysis

1. A concern with understanding how the policy process works

2. Strives to understand publc policy as it is3. Endeavors to explain how various social

and political forces would change policy4. Tries to pursue truth through the process

of tesing hypotheses by measuring them against the standard of real-world expe-riences

5. Usually deals with assertions of cause and effect :

“ If the Indonesian government raises interest rates , then consumers will borrow less “. This statement may be tested by setting-up an experiment within a state. The results may confirm or refute the statement .

1. Is directed toward studying what public policy ought to be to improve the general welfare

2. Deals with statement involving value judgments about what should be. For example : “ The cost of health care in Indonesia is too high”. This statement cannot be confirmed by referring to data. Whether the cost is too high or is appropriate is based on a given criterion. Its validity depends upon one’s values and ethical views. Individuals may agree on the facts of healthcare costs but disagree over their ethical judgments regarding the implications of “the cost of health care”.

14

Approaches to Policy Analysis( J.P.Lester & J.Stewart ,Jr., 2000 )

Type of Approach Primary Objective

1. Process approach2. Substantive approach3. Logical-positivist approach

4. Econometric approach5. Phenomenological ( Postpositivist )

approach6. Participatory approach

7. Normative approach

8. Ideological approach

9. Historical approach

1. To examine a part of the policy process2. To examine a substantive area3. To examine the causes and consequen-

ces of policy using scientifc methods4. To test economic theories5. To analyze events through an intuitive

process6. To examine the role of multiple actors

in policymaking7. To prescribe policy to decisons makers

or others8. To analyze from a liberal or

conservative point of view9. To examine policy over time

15

Approaches to Policy Analysis( M.J.Dubnick & B.A.Bardes , 1983 )

Type of PolicyAnalyst

Public PolicyProblem

Motivation Approach RelevantTraining

Scientist Theoretic Search for theory, regularities, truth

Scientific methods, objectivity, pure analytic

Basic research metods, canons of social science research

Professional Design Improvement of policy and policy-making

Utilization of know-ledge , strategic

Strategic, cost-benefit analysis, queuing, simula-tion, decision ana-lysis

Political Value maximization

Advocacy of policy positions

Rhetoric Gathering useful evidence, effective presentation

Administrative Application Effective & Efficient policy implementa-tion

Strategic, Managerial

Strategic, same as for Professional

Personal Contention Concern for policy impacts on life

Mixed Use of many mo-dels & techniques from other approa-ches ; less sophisticated

16

Models of Public Policy Analysis

1. K.E.Portney , 1987 :1.1 The Policy Making Process : “ public policy not as a product of government

but as a political process “ . (1) Problem formation ;(2) Policy formulation ; (3) Policy adoption ; (4) Policy implementation ; and (5) Policy evaluation .

1.2 The Causes and Consequences of Public Policies :” the focus is on either intended or unintended impacts of governmental decisions or non-decisions “

( the results of government action or inaction ). (1) Public policy inputs ----- (2) Policy conversion process ----- (3) Public Policy outputs ----- (4) Public policy outcomes ------ (5) Public policy feedback ----- ( back to no.1 )

1.3 Public Policy Prescription : “ attempts to use a variety of economic, mathe- matical, computer science and operations research techniques to systemati- cally help us answer the question : What policy should we pursue in the fu- ture ? And often attempts to find ways of making policy a more rational process, and mostly never deals with the issue directly but to prescribe ways of improving the policymaking process.

17

4. D.J.Palumbo , 1987 :(1) Agenda seting : defining nature, size, and distribution of problem(2) Problem definition : forecasting needs, defining targets(3) Policy design : decison analysis(4) Policy legitimation : opinion polls, surveys etc.(5) Implementation ( formative evaluation )( ) Impact ( summative evaluation)(7) Termination ( political feasibility analysis )

5. J.P.Lester & J.Stewart , 2000 :(1) Agenda setting(2) Policy formulation(3) Policy implementation(4) Policy evaluation(5) Policy change and termination

18

2. B.W.Hogwood & L.A.Gun , 1984 :(1) Deciding to decide ( issu search or agenda setting )(2) Deciding how to decide ( or issue filtration )(3) Issue definition(4) Forecasting(5) Setting objectives and priorities( ) Options analysis(7) Policy implementation, monitoring and control(8) Evaluation and review(9) Policy maintenance, succession, or termination

3. J.E.Anderson , 1975 :(1) Problems and Agendas(2) Policy Formulation(3) Policy Adoption(4) Policy Implementation(5) Policy Evaluation

19

PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS

SCOPE OF ANALYSIS

20

POLICYFORMULATION

POLICYIMPLEMENTATION

POLICYEVALUATION

( IMPACT )

THE POLICY CYCLE AND THE INFORMATION CYCLE

Problem Definition

Forecasting needs,defining targets

Decision analysis

Defining naturesize, distributionsof problem

Political feasibility analysis

Summative evaluation

Formativeevaluation

Opinion polls,surveys,etc.

Policy DesignAgenda Setting

Termination

Impact

Policy Legitimation

Implementation Source : W.Persons, 1997, public policy

Agendas, Alternatives, & PublicPolicy (J. Kingdon)

“The agenda…is the list of subjects or problems to which government officials, and people outside of government closely associated with those officials,

are paying some attention at any given time.”

CPM/HSS2/2008 23

PROBLEM STREAM

Indicators, events, definitions, values,

collective action. Policy Policy entrepreneursentrepreneurs aware

of the problem.

POLICY STREAMPOLICY STREAMAlternativesAlternatives, solutions, , solutions, policy communities, policy communities, feasibilities. Hidden feasibilities. Hidden cluster of participants cluster of participants dominate.dominate.

POLITICAL STREAMPOLITICAL STREAMNational mood, public National mood, public

opinion, electoral opinion, electoral politics, consensus politics, consensus

building, Visible cluster building, Visible cluster of participants of participants

dominatedominate..

Streams Streams

are are coupledcoupled

Window of OpportunityWindow of Opportunity(predictable, unpredictable)(predictable, unpredictable)

Kingdon’s Agenda Setting Kingdon’s Agenda Setting ModelModel

Important Characteristics of Policy Problems( W.N.Dunn , 1981 )

1. Interdependent : Policy problem in one area frequently affect policy problems in other areas. In reality policy problems are not independent entities; they are parts of whole systems of problems.

2. Subjective : The external conditions that give rise to a problem are selectively defined, classified, explained and evaluated. Although there is a sense in which problems are objective , but they are typically intrepreted in markedly different ways. Policy problems are mental artifacts that come about by transforming experience through human judgment.

3. Artificial : Policy problems are possible when human beings make judgments about desirability of altering some problematic situation. Policy problems are products of subjective human judgment… and also come to be accepted as legitimate definitions of objective social conditions… and are therefore socially constructed, maintained, ans changed.

4. Dynamic : There are many different solutions for a given problem as there are definitions of that problem. Problem and solutions are in constant flux, hence problems do not stay solved.

24

25

26

AGENDA SETTING PROCESS( T.A.Birkland , 2006 )

AGENDA SETTING :- is the process by which problems and alternative solutions gain or lose

public and elite attention ; - group competition to set the agenda is fierce because no society or poli-

tical instituions have the capacity to address all possible alternatives to all possible problems that arise at any one time ;

- group must therefore fight to earn their issues places among all the other issues sharing the limited space or to prepare for the time when a crisis makes their issue more likely to occupy a more prominent on the agenda.* An agenda is a collection of problems, understandings of causes, symbols,

solutions, and other elements of public problems that come to the attention of members of the public and their governmental officials.

27

ISSUE ATTENTION CYCLES (IACs)(Anthony Downs : 1972)

2 Alarmed discovery Euphhoric enthusiasm

1 Pre - problem 3 Realizing cost of significant progress

5 Post - problem

4 Gradual decline of public interest

LEVELS OF THE AGENDA( T.A.Birkland , 2006 )

29

The expansion and control of agendas

Initiator

Triggerdevice

Issuecreation

Issues characteristics

SymbolUtilization

Massmediaemphasis

Expansionto largerpublics

Patternsaf access

Agenda of decisionmakers

Systemic agenda• All issues commonly perceived by members of a political community as meriting public attention of public authorities.• To get access to systemic agenda an issue must have : widespread attention/awarness shared concern of a sizeable portion of public shared perception that it is a matter of concern to a public authority

• Explicitly up for active and serious consideration by decision makers.• May be an old item which is up for regular review or is of periodic concern. Or it may be a ‘new’ item.

Or governmental/ formal

Institutionalagenda *

*

Source : Adapted from Cobb and Elder (1972)

THE POLICY ARENA

Administrative Process1. Competence and capacity2. Decision - Action (Values)

Political Process1. Pressure2. Supports (Values)

Policy Making ArenaNegotiating(Actors) Bargaining (Groups)Struggling

(Values)

1. Review - Investigation2. Enactments

Legislative Process

Judicial Process1. Restraint2. Performance (Values)

32

POLICY IMPLEMENTATION THEORY( T.A.Birkland, 2006 )

33

• GOVERNMENTAL MIX• SECTORAL MIX• ENFORCEMENT MIX• VALUE MIX

MARKET

HIERARCHY-BUREAUCRACY

COMMUNITY-NETWORK

MIX

DELIVERY MIX(W. Parsons. 1995. P. 492)

An Analytical Approach for Analyzing Implementation Processes( T.Bredgaard,L.Dalsgaard & F.Larsen , 2003 )

35

36

POLICY INSTRUMENTS

NO R. Lineberry G. Edwards III C. Hood

1. Organizational Units Bureaucratic Structure Organization

2. Standard Operating Procedures Disposition Authority

3. Coordination & Communication Communication Nodality

4. Allocation of Resources Resources Treasure

Direct and Indirect Impacts on Implementation

Communications

BureaucraticStructure

Resources

DispositionsImplementation

Source : G.C. Edwards III, 1980, Implementating Public Policy, pp. 148

Communications• Transmission• Clarity• Consistency

Resources• Staff• Information• Authority• Facilities

Bureaucratic Structure• Standard Operating Procedures• Fragmentation

Dispositions• Effect of Dispositions• Staffing the Bureacracy• Incentives

A Spectrum of Policy Instruments

Level of State Involvement

VoluntaryInstruments

MixedInstruments

CompulsoryInstruments

Low High

Fam

ily a

nd C

omm

unity

Vol

unta

ry O

rgan

izatio

ns P

rivat

e M

arke

ts

Info

rmat

ion

and

Exho

rtatio

n S

ubsid

ies

Auc

tion

of P

rope

rty R

ight

s T

ax a

nd U

ser C

harg

es

Reg

ulat

ion

Pub

lic E

nter

prise

s D

irect

Pro

visio

n

40

Metaphor of implementation failure

MachinemetaphorResult of poor chain ofcommand - problemswith structure and roles

DominationMetaphorResult of labour/management conflict

PsychicmetaphorResult of subconsciousforces - groupthink/ego defences/repressedsexual instincts

OrganismmetaphorResult of ‘human relations’ or the‘environment’

‘implementationfailure’

AutopoieticmetaphorResult of a ‘self-referencing’system

BrainmetaphorResult of poor Information flows-or‘learning/ problems

CulturemetaphorResult of the ‘culture’of the organization

PowermetaphorResult of power in and around the implementationprocess

42

43

CATEGORY OF POLICY EVALUATION( Howlett & Ramesh , 1995 )

ADMINISTRATIVE

JUDICIAL POLITICAL

Evaluating Managerial

Performance and Budgeting Systems

Judicial Review and

Administrative Discretion

Consultations with Policy Subsystems

andThe Public

45

46

Types of Evaluations Activities and Corresponding Evaluating Issues( Rossi, Freeman & Wright – 1979 )

Research for Program

Planning and Development Monitoring Evaluation Impact Evaluation

Cost – Benefit Cost - Effectiveness

Purpose Designing programs in conformity with intended goals

Testing implementation as corresponding to program design

Testing program effectiveness in reaching program goals

Calculating program economic efficiency

Evaluation Questions

1. Extents and distribution of target problem population

2. Research and development for program planning and implementation

1. Is it reaching targets? 2. Is it delivering services

according to design?

1. Does program cause intended changes?

2. Are changes substantively significant?

1. How much does each service unit cost?

2. How do the total cost and benefits compare

48

49

WHO ARE STAKEHOLDERS ?

A stakeholder is any person, group or institution that has an interest in a development activity, project or programme. This definition includes both intended beneficiaries and intermedi-ries, winners or losers, and those involved or excluded from decision-making process

50

Stakeholders can be devided into :

Stakeholder Definition

Primary StakeholdersThose who are ultimately affected, ie who expect to benefit from or be adversely affected by the inter-vention. Those with high power and interests.

Secondary Stakeholders Those with intermediary role. Those with high interest but low power , or high power but low interest.

51

KEY STAKEHOLDERS : are those who can significantly influence the project ; both primary and secondary stakeholders may be key stake-

holders

What is stakeholder analysis ?

# A stakeholder analysis is a technique you can use to identify and assess the importance of key people, groups of people, or institutions that may significantly influence the success of your activity , project or programme

# A methodology used to facilitate institutional and policy reform processes by accounting for and often incorporating the needs of those who have a ‘stake’ or an interest in the reforms under consideration

52

Why use stakeholder analysis ?

Stakeholder analysis aims to :1. Identify and define the characteristics of key stakeholders ; Identify people, groups, and institutions that will influence your initiative ( either

positively or negatively )

2. Assess the manner in which they might affect or be affected by the programme / project outcome ; Anticipate the kind of influence, positive or negative, yhese group will have on

your initiative

3. Understand the relations between stakeholders, including an assessment of the real or potentials conflicts of interest and expectation between stakeholders ;

4. Assess the capacity of different stakeholders to participate Develop strategies to get the most effective support possible for your initiative and

reduce any obstacles to successful implementation of your program

53

Stakeholder Analysis Matrix

STAKEHOLDER STAKEHOLDER INTERESTS IN THE

PROJECT

ASSESSMENTOF

IMPACT

POTENTIAL STRA-TEGIES FOR OBTAI-NING SUPPORT OR REDUCING OBSTA-

CLESA - Benefits - Very important - Engage closely

B - Change - Fair - Keep informed /- Keep satisfied

C - Damage / Conflits

- Not very impor- tant

- Monitor ( mini- mum effort )

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

TERIMAKASIH

70