Public Policy Formation and Analysis - Assignment Example

 Policy formulation and analysis Paper 1: Lindblom’s Incrementalism (500 word maximum) According to Lindblom in 1959 defined incrementalism as a model that states that policy-makers often start the decision-making process not with some ideal goal in mind as they presume to, but from current policies that are already in existence. In this kind of policy making, only a limited number of policy options is reviewed, with changes being made at the margin. Thus decisions are made on the basis of minute adjustments here and there to an already existing situation. Thus this strategy as argued by Lindblom is a primary strategy employed by Governments especially as it concerns Budgetary.(79-88) According to Lindblom in 1959 stated that there are certain identifiable barriers to significant Policy Change. For purposes of clarity and professionalism, I will both paraphrase and project these barriers in way that will benefit a lay man. The barriers are due to the fact that the process of making/formulating policies is tough. Neither social scientist, politicians nor even public administrators know everything about the social world we inhabit, so much as to avoid making mistakes/errors in predicting the accuracy or consequences of policy moves. This is the major barrier.(79-88) Thus, the only wisdom that is inherent in policy making, therefore involves achieving in small parts so as to avoid huge mistakes. Because mistakes in policy decisions are another barrier. So by utilizing the incremental method especially in the areas of Budgeting, the administrator can always adjust/review those policies knowing that the solution lies in gradual steps. Another barrier to policy change is the fact that successful policy changes could only be achieved in steps. If one step fails, the entire process is taken back and the policy is rejected by the public and society, but the successful completion and execution of the first step, will quickly lead to a second step. This is usually practiced in democratic Nations like the USA. (86) Successful comparison as a system also posses as a major barrier to significant policy changes due to the fact that it si a major barrier to communication among administrators Thus for significant policy change to occur, a few aspects of the process must be considered and sorted out i.e there must be a level of comprehensiveness in the policy so as to accommodate various agencies, policy change must have a degree of relevance and realism as is practised in Democratic states and there must be continuous comparisons which is typical of the branch method. Also a line of compromise must be attained between the theorist and practitioners. Paper 2: Kingdon’s Streams Model (500 word maximum) Multiple Streams according to Zahariadis is a lens or approach that explains how policies are made. This theory was propounded by Kingdon in 1995 and has become a widely speculated formulation policy framework worthy of discussion. This framework deals with agenda setting and alternative speculation Kingdon broadly divided this framework into three streams that he claims are the key considerations for policy formulation, most especially in the areas of agenda setting and alternative speculation. These three streams are: problems, i.e. why do policy makers pay attention to certain problems and not to others? The second stream is Policy; they constitute wide sorts and varieties of ideas floating around what Kingdon refers to as the “Policy soup” in other words, ideas have to be developed and generated in policy communities which bare made up of core specialist i.e. academics, bureaucrats, congress and politicians who share certain common ideas. The third stream is according to Kingdon, is Politics. Here he divided the political stream into three elements which are: The National Mood, Pressure groups campaigns and administrative or legislative turnover According to Zahariadis 1996 in his work said strongly that there are several barriers to this Kingdon which includes 1- The Level of independence the streams contain: argues that problems crept constantly into the Governments agenda regardless of if they are solvable or not, participants drift constantly in and out of decisions and this leads them to make some choices more than they are prone to make others, and in as much as the streams are independent of each other, people only make policies that suit their lifestyles or values. Critics like Muccarioni in 1992 disagree with this so called independence as he claims that they are interdependent thus changes in one can re-enforce massive changes in the other. This is a barrier to policy change. 2- The role of policy windows in coupling: a policy window is defined as a temporal stimulus for choice according to Kingdon in 1995,once a window opens, it does not stay open for long. He states that windows are of two main types: political windows and problem windows. (169) Risk, fear, greater partisan conflict, more symbolic action, over confidence on the part of policy makers in addressing issues, lack of adequate policy action generated at the right time, in availability of alternatives etc all form barriers to solving coupling policy issue during times of the identified window openings. These factors affect policy change. 3- Entrepreneur strategy barrier: According to Kingdon in 1995 Policy involves the matching of problems and solutions by policy entrepreneurs with receptive audiences (180-181) but Zahariadis in 1996 makes it clear that this is a barrier because only the involvement of entrepreneurs who spend lots of time, money and energy can make their proposals acceptable to policy makers. The absence of this is a disaster. And such entrepreneurs are few. Plus they have to employ lots of manipulations, coercion and strategies to make this a reality which in most cases, backfires. 4- Lack of Incremental Evolution in the Policy process: pays no attention to the trends of policy making and results 5- The lens serves only as a Heuristic device: This implies that the two aims of description and prediction in policy making, aught to be symbiotic but they are not. In concluding this Discuss, Kingdon emphasizes that choice, rationality, clarity,conditions of ambiguity, privatisation and Government reforms, anchoring the framework under specific institutionalised context etc. all has to be taken into strong considerations for a significant policy change to occur. Paper 3: Baumgartner and Jones’ Punctuated Equilibrium (500 word maximum) According to Baumgartner and Jones 1993 The Punctuated Equilibrium Is the unique method of understanding change in complex social systems. The theory seeks to un-study the interesting and somewhat complex evolution of policy change. The theory among other things, ascertains that changes in society are as a result of certain radical change and this sometimes leads to the policy of conflicts and how to address societal issues.(1) The policy further insinuates that policy changes incrementally because of several factors, i. institutional cultures, biased rationality of decision makers and vested interest. These decision alongside Governmental partisanship i.e. the interference of party members in the helm of affairs of incumbent Governments and the constant insatiable change tendencies of public opinions, constantly dictate and punctuates shifts in the equilibrium of policy formation. The barriers to significant policy change to this system are numerous but we will outline just a few in this discuss. A major barrier to this matrix is the politics played by decision makers when it comes to implementing the right policy that befits the peculiar situation. Decision makers always tend to display high levels of bias by attempting to shift the equilibrium towards personal values, interest and benefits. Another barrier is the lack of resources to back up stipulated policies, while another is the continuous disagreeability among specialist in administrative circles of decision making. What needs to be done to curb this situation and ensure significant policy change according to Baumgartner and Jones in 1993, is to position problems according to hierarchical order and create policies to solve those problems that top such Government list. Also, the various pressure groups and dissenting parties should be carried along in the indices so as to avert over politicking by unscrupulous decision makers. The Punctuated Equilibrium theory remains a theory that is highly controversial and yet has proved to be effective still leaving lots of room for improvement. Though this system has been around for sometime, it is a bit unpopular unlike its counter parts, that is the Kingdon streams model, the Lindlom Incrementalism model and the Advocacy Coalition Framework. But we must note that many Government and specialist researchers and policy makers, most especially Administrators trained to formulate policy, view this system as a highly strategic system especially for Budgetary. Paper 4: Sabatier and Jenkins-Smith’s Advocacy Coalition Framework (500 word maximum) The advocacy coalition framework according to Smith and Sabatier, is a belief system that guides coalition members concerning problems which ought to receive the highest priority, taking into consideration, the casual factors that need to be examined most closely and the Governmental institution that is most likely to favour/embrace the coalitions point of view. In other words, the coalition seeks to overturn the behaviour of Governmental institutions as a means to achieving its policy goals and objectives. One of the barriers to the ACF is that it is to broad and this many a times become a major barrier to the coalition. Also, members frequently disagree on core values and casual assumptions, Exogenous events constitute another major barrier, loss of political resources halts the actualizing of core goals within the coalition, the activities of opponents always stands as a barrier to the coalition collective barriers and goals, proponents are usually forced by a variety of other factors to revise their belief systems, while every effort will be made to restrict and or limit change to the secondary aspects and thus keep ones core beliefs intact, this is usually an unachievable target. Also the challenge to the validity of the data concerning the seriousness of the problem and the challenge to the casual assumptions concerning the problem to be solved by the disagreeing parties becomes a stumbling block to the agenda of the coalition. Thus for any significant policy change to occur in the Advocacy Coalition Framework, the members of the coalition must first and foremost share a common core beliefs, their differences are largely limited to secondary aspects of their mutual belief system. There must be a moderate level of conflict among/between members of the coalition, issues that are are analytical tractable for instance, issues that are widely accepted in terms of theories and quantitative indicators which are viewed as such by the various units who make up the coalition must be present, there must be a strong presence of a professional forum in which experts from the various competing coalitions must get together in an attempt to justify their claims before their peers; it is only forums like this can both protect the unity of the coalition and trash out causes of discontent which has the potentials to upturning the entire coalition and rendering the framework worthless. If the above conditions are not met, according to Smith and Sabatier quarrels and mistrust are likely to creep in thus creating barricades around existing beliefs and destroying the the very essence of the ACF. REFERENCES . Jones, B and Baumgartner, F. “Agendas and Instability in American Politics” American Politics and Political Economy Series. University Of Chicago Press; 1 edition, P9. 1993, Web 23 December 2010 Lindblom, E. C. “The Science of "Muddling Through” Public Administration Review, Vol. 19, No. 2, Spring, 1959, pp. 79-88. Blackwell Publishing (Web) Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/973677 : Accessed December 31, 2010 Robinsin, S.E. “Punctuated Equilibruim Theory”, pg na, (Web) www.unc.edu/~fbaum/teaching/POLI891_Sp10/.../Robinson_Handbook.pdf , Accessed 31 December,2010 Smith J.C and Sabatier, P.A “ Dynamics of Policy-Oriented Learning) Publisher, Na. Zahariadis, N, Ambiguity, (Time and Multiple streams) Publisher, Na. Read More