Chapter 1: THE CONCEPT OF PUBLIC PUBLIC POLICY AS AN OUTPUT:
POLICY
Cunningham - public policy is like an elephant.
One readily recognizes it when he or she sees it.
However, one cannot easily define it.
Office policy- rules on tardiness, union
organizing or promotions and incentives.
Constitution - mother of all laws in the country.
-other examples of these policies are specific
acts of the Congress approved by the President.
Examples of public policies:
1. Medium-Term Philippine Development Plan
known as Philippines 2000
2. Privatization of Philippine Airlines, PETRON,
Manila Hotel
3. Water Crisis Act
4. Deregulation of the airline, oil,
telecommunications and retail industries
5. The liberalization of trade
6. Announcement of public holidays, etc.
Policies - actions, guides to actions, or the rules
of the game, taken by individuals or group(s) of
persons, purposively for a particular objective or
goal. These are also outputs of authorities.
Private Policies - those of individuals and
private sector
e.g.: reporting on time, a son who is not yet
independent from his parents, obeys the latter,
for his own good.
Public Policies - those which citizens generally
refer to as what governments do or not do.
- Tangible manifestations of government’s
actions and decisions.
1. Public policies are courses of action,
sometimes inaction, rules and
guidance for action.
- They are modern government’s quintessential
response to the environment (Pal, 1992).
- They connote a plan, a coherent vision, a
direction and a resolve to take on the job.
- Also include intentional withdrawal of
governmental action, or government willfully
refraining from doing, waiting, or leaving things
as they are. These are inactions where
government does other more strategic things
than actively doing particular functions.
Inactions- government is withdrawing from
actively doing some of the functions which it has
been doing in the past.
e.g.: 1) providing womb to tomb services, 2)
letting other sectors (civil society and private
sector) who can do them better, 3) government’s
privatization thrusts, 4) decentralization or the
Local Government Code of 1991 authored by
Aquilino Pimentel Jr., 5) the build-operate
transfer, and policy and diplomacy on war.
Power of LGU’s:
1) Power of eminent domain
2) Power of taxation
3) Police power
2.) Public policies are taken and adopted by
government or its instrumentality.
- Public policy are defined, assessed,
formulated, adopted, implemented, and
sometimes monitored and evaluated.
Authorities
- elders, paramount chiefs, executives,
legislators, judges, administrators, councilors,
and monarchs
- persons or institutions who engage in the daily
affairs of a political system.
- have the mandate to formulate, implement and
interpret policies for the welfare and interest of
the people.
Non-authorities or unofficial stakeholders have a
role in policy making as well
3) Public policies are made presumably to
address a given problem or set of
interrelated problems in the society (Dunn,
1991) theories that if there is no problem,
there is no policy solution.
4) Public policies are ideally intended for the
common good and welfare of the people.
- Policies can never be completely unintentional
- They are ideally supposed to achieve a certain
purpose or goal beneficial to the public.
- They are intended to improve society.
Take note that:
1) Public policy is not restricted to its outputs,
nor to its stated objectives or formal strategies to
pursue government activities.
2) The concept of public policy includes impacts
which result either from a government’s action or
lack of the same. (Continual choice between
preserving or altering status quo)
Read Table 2. Public Policy as Defined by
Various Authors page 11
THE VARIOUS MEANINGS AND USES OF
THE CONCEPT
1) A label for a field of government activity-
public policy may consist of economic policies,
social policies, policies on international relations,
policies on defense, and peace and order.
2) Expression of general purpose- achieving
policy objective
3) Aspirations of, for the society- may include
government pronouncements such as war
against poverty, NIC-hood by the year 200,
health for all, global competitiveness, etc.
-They also seem to hold people together and
maintain an orderly state.
4) Specific proposals or means for achieving
larger ends
5) Decisions of government
6) Formal organizations
7) Program of government
8) An output or what government actually
delivers
9) A theory or model of cause and effect- may
include assuming that privatization improves
industry efficiency, promotes competition,
encourages private entrepreneurial behavior,
broadens the ownership base, and raises capital
of government corporations (E.O. 237 s. 1995).
10) A process
CHARACTERISTICS OF PUBLIC POLICIES
Dual Character of Public Policy:
1) Command
2) Agreement
Two Forms of Public Policy:
1) Normative form- its form could be a set of
rules arranged hierarchically or logically
2) Empirical Form- not as unified or
harmoniously as pictured
Nakamura (1981) - vagueness may be a
characteristic of policy formulation stage.
Aucoin’s Three Principal Characteristics of
Public Policies:
1) Coercive - entails capacity of government to
bring on citizens the full force of political
authority, including imposition of sanctions
2) Distributive - directly or indirectly to allocate
goods and services, rights and privileges in
socio-economic affairs and of equal importance
to arrange the offices or positions of authority in
the political system
3) Systematic - exercise of political authority
across the total range of public affairs
Dye (1978) - public policy has legitimacy,
universality, and coercive characteristics.
1) Legitimacy - public policies are legal and
command the loyalty of citizens.
2) Universality - only government policies
extend to cover all people in the society.
3) Coercion - only government monopolizes
coercion on society and legitimately imprisons
violators of its policies.
SOME EXAMPLES OF PUBLIC POLICIES IN
THE PHILIPPINES:
1) The Philippine Constitution of 1987
2) Free Public Secondary Education Act of 1988
or R.A. 6655
3) The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law
(CARL) or R.A. 6657
4) The Generics Drug Act or R.A. 6675
5) The Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards
for Public Officials and Employees or R.A. 6713
6) R.A. 6735 or and Act Providing for a System
of Citizen’s Initiative and Referendum
7) R.A. 7042 or the Foreign Investments Act of
1991
8) The Anti-Plunder Act or R.A. 7080
9) The Foreign Service Act of 1991
10) The Local Government Code of 1991 or R.A
7160
GUIDES IN DEFINING PUBLIC POLICY
(HOGWOOD AND GUNN, 1994)
1) Public policy is larger than decisions
2) It involves behavior as well as intentions
3) It involves action as well as inactions
4) It is a purposive course of action, but
purposes may be defined retrospectively
Ex post facto - after the fact (creation of
GOCC’s)
Ex ante - before anything else (deregulation of
telecommunication industry)
5) It has outcomes which may or may not have
been foreseen
6) It is subjectively defined- the final structure of
a public policy becomes a political resultant, a
hydraulic press that slants or tilts in favor of
those whose interests, power and resources
predominate.
7) It involves intra and inter-organizational
relationships and a key, but not exclusive role
for public agencies
8) It arises from a process over time
THE ‘PUBLIC-NESS’ OF PUBLIC POLICIES
A policy is public:
- if it is authoritatively determined, implemented
and enforced by governmental institutions
- if it is legitimate, universal and coercive in
effect
- if it commands obedience as well as
agreement
-if it has a key role of government and also the
participation of other institutions/sectors
-if it is fore the achievement of societal
improvement, or ideally for the common good of
the public

Towards a Working Definition of Public

Policy:

1) Form – is a guide / rule / course of action

2) Character – manifestation or clarification of

specific goals

3) Theory of Cause and Effect – is both an

output, a process, an outcome and effect

4) Ultimate Objective – for stability /

consistency / uniformity, and continuity

5) Public – made by government who has

legitimacy, authority

6) Hierarchy – choice of priorities through plans

to decision rules
CHAPTER 2: THE PUBLIC POLICY PROCESS
What is public policy?
1) An official pronouncement or aspiration
2) A constitutional provision
3) A government programs
4) A government projects
Policy making process may be studied by
adopting one of at least two schools of thought,
namely:
1.) That the process is rationally done; policy
making is assumed to be essentially based
on the classic problem
- solving steps from problem formulation and
evaluation of alternatives through
implementation.
- problem is seen as technical, climate is
consensual, process as controlled
2.) That it is politically negotiated-
perceptions and interests of individual
actors enter at all stages.
-policy is seen as bargained outcome
Public Policy is Process Defined
-concept of process; refers to a regularized cycle
of behavior that policy actors to some extent
have to work through or around
- as a public process; it is a sequential flow of
interactions between government and non-
government participants who discuss, argue
about and find some common grounds for
agreeing upon the scope and types of policies
appropriate in dealing with a particular society
problem.
• Policy cycle may not always be linear and its
stages are not always clear cut
• Public policy making is extremely complex. It is
analytical and political. It is an ongoing cycle
which has no beginning or end.
• It is dynamic and gets contributions from
various institutions, groups or individuals who
have a say in governance.
• It is a big pot which many stirs.
• The policy process is a course of
transformation which turns political inputs into
political outputs.
• It also translates vague and often abstract
societal commitments into specific commitments
to one or more specific courses of action.
• The policy process decides major guidelines
for action directed at the future, mainly by
government organ.
FIVE STAGES OF THE POLICY CYCLE AND
THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO APPLIED
PROBLEM-SOLVING (HOWLETT AND
RAMESH, 1995)
Phases of Applied Problem-Solving
1) Problem Recognition
2) Proposal of Solution
3) Choice of Solution
4) Putting Solution into Effect
5) Monitoring Results
Stages in Policy Cycle
1) Agenda Setting
2) Policy Formulation
3) Decision making
4) Policy Implementation
5) Policy Evaluation
• The policy process is an activity of finding
problems that can be solved. It is a learning
process of error detection and correction.
Hopefully, to modify societal conditions.
• The policy process includes a core activity
following a Problem Alternatives and Solution
Analysis Solution sequence (PAS)
It includes the following activities:
P 1) Seeking information to define and re-
structure the societal problem
A 2) Developing alternatives to solve the
problem
S 3) Reaching and adopting an agreement on
which alternative will best solve the problem
S 4) implementing the solution
P 5) Evaluating the outcomes
The case of the power shortage in the country in
the late 80’s to early 90’s:
1) Seeking information to define and re-
structure the societal problem
-stage referred to as problem identification and
redefinition
-involves a process in which the problem is
shaped or confined to more practical limits from
the point of view of the policy makers and
advisers.
Problem was because:
1) Most of power plants were decades old and
were ever well-maintained
2) Most plants were dependent on imported oil
3) Alternative sources of energy such as coal,
hydro, geothermal, nuclear, etc., were not
extensively harnessed
4) Other reasons; inefficiency of National Power
Corporation
2) Agenda setting
-if the problem is valued as legitimate concern of
government, it may be set in the agenda of the
government as a whole, or of an agency of the
government in particular.
An ATOM (August Twenty-One Movement) led
group even sought audience with the general
manager of
NAPOCOR to articulate the inconvenience
wrought by the series of electric interruptions to
the country, economy, and society.
The President and her cabinet knew too well
that the situation had become crucial to the very
survival of the economy and the society. They
were in fact, not spared the inconvenience and
discomfort brought about by blackouts. They
knew they had to do something fast to nip the
problem in the bud.
3) Search and analysis of alternatives or of
ways to solve the problem
-in this policy formulation stage, all major
alternatives are assessed as to their potential
costs and benefits, and their likely efficiency and
effectiveness.
-at this stage, the bureaucratic influence
especially the executive) is strongest.
Suggestions to solve the problem:
a) streamlining the loan processing facility
b) using emergency power to speed up
processing of fund release
c) consistent with the privatization thrust of the
government, assessing the possibility of private
ventures for power and infrastructure plants,
using the build-operate-transfer scheme
d) using power barges
e) regular rehabilitation and repair of existing
power plants
f) scheduling / rationing electricity
4) Deciding on the best choice
-assuming that the best choice among
alternatives is reached, it may need
legitimization and official adoption by the
government in power.
Choices enacted into law or declared as state
policies on energy and electricity:
1) servicing areas with power barges
2) fast-tracking release of development funds for
the construction, repair or rehabilitation of power
plants
3) enactment of the build-operate-transfer policy
4) enactment of the power and energy crisis act
of 1991
5) re-creation of the Department of Energy, etc.
5) Policy Implementation
-intent is to produce results in a reliable,
predictable way to meet the ideas and objectives
sought by a policy solution. Implementation
occurs over time and is usually the longest and
most permanent stage in the policy cycle.
6) Policy monitoring and evaluation
- necessary to see if the objectives have been
met. It may also lead to the termination, reform
and change of existing policies.
MODELS OF PUBLIC POLICY PROCESS:
COMPONENTS, CONTRIBUTIONS AND
LIMITATIONS
Anderson’s Model
- developed in 1975 and modified in 1978
and again in 1984, is appealing in that it
reflects transformations themselves.
Anderson in 1975:
1) Policy Demand - claims made upon public
officials by other actors, private or official, in the
political system for action or inaction of some
perceived problem.
2) Policy Decision - decision by public officials
that authorizes or gives direction and content to
public policy actions.
3) Policy Statements - formal expressions or
articulations of public policy e.g., Administrative
Order, Executive Order, or Republic Act
Policy Issue - when an actual or potential
course of action by government involves conflict
among segments of the society.
4) Policy Outputs - pertains to tangible
manifestations of public policies; they are the
things actually done by government in
pursuance of policy decisions and statements;
they are simply what the government actually
does.
5) Policy Outcomes
- these are the consequences for society,
intended or unintended, that flow from the action
or inaction by government
The Rushefsky’s Model (1990)
- works in a linear fashion. He recognizes
that this pattern may not always be true
in reality, and that complexities occur at
every step of the process.
Rushefsky’s Model stages:
1) Problem Identification
- the demand for government action to resolve a
problem or take advantage of an opportunity is
verbalized by affected groups or individuals or
those who have a stake in the policy issue or
concern.
- attempts to get government to see that a policy
problem or opportunity exists are ventured into
by affected or interested parties at this stage.
Notable distinctions of problems according
to Rushefsky:
1) Private problem - limited in effect to one or
few persons directly involved
2) Public problem - has broad effects, including
consequences for persons not directly involved
3) Policy problem - situation that produces
needs or dissatisfactions on the part of the
people for which public relief or redress is being
sought
2) Agenda Building
- items are built into the agenda of government,
so that policy makers are expected to discuss
and seriously consider them, later.
Policy Agenda- demands that policy makers
make choose or feel compelled to act upon, they
consist of the sum of all issues judged to require
public intervention.
Agenda Formation Process - course wherein
private problems are transformed into public
problem, which in turn become a policy issue,
and later built into the agenda of government,
either systematically or institutionally.
Policy Issue - arises when a public problem
seeks or demands government action and when
there is a public disagreement over the best
solution to the problem.
Systemic Agenda - consists of all issues
commonly perceived by members of the political
community as meriting public attention and
involving matters within the legitimate jurisdiction
of existing governmental activity.
- also known as the discussion agenda
Institutional Agenda - consists of those
problems which public officials feel obliged to
give serious attention to.
- also known as the decision agenda
Other ways for an issue to become part of
the policy agenda:
1) pressures by interest groups
2) desires of important people or group in the
community
3) attention given by agenda
4) triggering events
5) personal interest of legislators
6) pressures of public opinion or public outcry
7) statistics and indicators
3) Policy Formulation
- stage where a policy, plan, program or project
to remedy the problem is developed; the stage
for real and conceptual problem solving.
4) Policy Adoption
- acceptance by some person or group that has
power or authority to make decisions or referred
to her/him/them.
5) Budgeting
- multifaceted process of providing funds to an
adopted preferred solution to a problem.
6) Implementation
- carrying out a policy, program, project or
activity intended to address a particular set of
problems.
7) Evaluation
- assessment on how well a policy has worked.
8) Policy Succession
-phase when reflection on whether a policy is to
be changed, amended or terminated is done.
• Rushefsky insists that budgeting is part of the
policy process. He asserts that resources should
be allotted officially to ensure a more successful
policy implementation.
• Rushefsky also stresses the need for policy
succession or termination, particularly if the
reason for a policy’s existence has already been
satisfied.
The Mendoza’s Model
- the Mendoza model is basically a reflection of
the politics and rationality of public policy making
in the country.
- the process is cyclical and dynamic.
- each phase is replete with objectivity,
subjectivity, balance and tilt, rationality and
politics.
- it is different from other models in that it
emphasizes problem re-definition, assuming a
serious evaluation of policy performance has
been made.
- it also espouses more participation by citizens
and other institutions of democracy, as well as
their advocacy role for change and reform in the
society.
THE PHILIPPINE POLICY MAKING PROCESS
Institutions involved in policy making
process:
1) Bicameral legislative body
2) Senate and the House of Representatives
3) The Executive branch
4) The Judiciary
Various mechanisms in place for public
policy making:
1) The Cabinet
2) The NEDA Board
3) Special Consultative Bodies such as LEDAC
4) The committees and the procedures for
enacting laws
• By levels of government, LGU’s pattern their
system of decision and policy making with that
of national government. However, other LGU’s
may differ from the latter’s system minimally or
substantively.
• At the LGU level, the executive branch is
represented by the local executive (governor or
mayor) and his offices. The legislative is in the
Saggunians or local councils headed by the vice
governor or vice-mayor. The judiciary is
represented by the barangay or (municipal or
regional) trial courts.
1) The executive branch - supposed to be
involved in almost all phases of the policy cycle
from policy reformulation and re-definition to
implementation and evaluation.
2) The legislative branch - mainly involved in
the policy formulation and legitimization stages.
3) The judiciary branch - more in arbitration of
constitutional concerns, its involvement is more
on policy legitimization but can also immerse in
policy adoption and review.
The Cabinet - composed of all the heads of
departments and those occupying the rank of
secretary, in the executive branch. Headed by
the President, who is the prime initiator and
implementor of policies and programs in the
country.
The NEDA Board - like the mini-cabinet or the
midicluster. Its chair is also the President of the
Republic. The vice-chair is the Director-General
of the NEDA Secretariat.
The LEDAC (Legislative-Executive
Development Advisory Council) - a special
consultative body, which aims to provide
advisory and consultative mechanism to ensure
consistency in coordinating executive
development planning and congressional
budgeting.
- also aims to provide a mechanism for
consensus building and serve as a
consultative and advisory body to the
President.
How a Bill Becomes a Law:
1) Labeled H or S and assigned a number
2) First Reading
- Reading of title/author
- Committee studies and recommends, if action
is favorable, the report is submitted through the
Committee on Rules. If unfavorable, the bill is
laid on the table and the author/s are informed

-Committee on Rules Calendars

-Bill for floor discussion

3) Second Reading

-Floor discussion/debates

-Period of amendments

-Voting

4) Third reading

- Distribution of bill in final form

- Roll call vote

In case of conflicting provisions, an Ad Hoc

conference committee is constituted to reconcile
differences

- Floor deliberation on the Conference

Committee Report

-Voting

5) Presidential Action

-Failure to act within 30 days after receipt, bill

will lapse into law

If vetoed:

- Return to originating house with explanation

- Legislative accepts or overrides by 2/3 vote in

both houses
 Chapter 3: THE EVOLUTION OF THE
DISCIPLINE OF PUBLIC POLICY
The Evolution
Garson’s account of the evolution of the field
starts with Lasswell’s grand dream of a “policy
science”.
Charles Merriam - a secretary of a state
planning body in the USA and also a faculty
member of the Yale University.
- view of planning as an interdisciplinary
policy science and not just economic
analysis, agricultural planning and other
specialized perspective.
Screw-driver syndrome - being blinded by
one’s expertise and background without much
regard to the contribution of other disciplines.
Harold Lasswell - modern day father of policy
science in America.
Lasswell’s grand vision:
- a theoretically oriented multi-discipline
- concerned with the fundamental problems of
man
- is global in perspective
- emphasizes historical context of policy
- stresses the study of change (diffusion,
invention, and revolution)
- he thought of it as a policy science of
democracy serving democratic values, academic
theory building, and governmental needs.
Lasswell defined policy sciences as the
disciplines concerned with explaining policy
making and policy executing processes, and
with locating data and providing interpretations
which are relevant to policy problems of a given
period.
- to him, the policy frame of reference
makes it necessary to take into account
the entire context of significant events in
which scientist is living.
Knowledge of decision - processes implies
systematic, empirical studies of how policies are
made and put into effect.
Policy science must strive for three principal
attributes:
1) Contextuality - decisions are part of a larger
social process
2) Problem orientation - policy scientists are at
home with the intellectual activities involved in
clarifying goals, trends, conditions, projections,
and alternatives.
3) Diversity - the methods employed are not
limited to a narrow range of quantitative
methods
The Plant and Its Branches
1) Synoptic Tradition - considers system
analysis as metatheory; statistical empiricism as
methodology; optimization of values and
efficiency as a deciding criterion; and policy as a
science.
- associated with the orientation of looking at the
forest in its entirety.
- generalist in orientation.
- details are glossed over.
2) Anti-synoptic Tradition - advocates
pluralism as metatheory, contextual and case
analysis as methodology, social rationality as a
deciding factor, and policy as an art and craft.
- views particular specie of flora and fauna in the
forest.
- is more specialist.
- particular concern is on specific areas were
problems exist.
3) Neo-Pluralist Reaction - the goal of policy
science.
- the goal is not vaguely toward developing a
policy science of democracy.
- geared towards preparing a cadre of
professional experts with sophisticated
quantitative methodological and analytical skills,
who can provide supportive researches to policy
makers.
- to serve policy maker’s information needs.
4) Handmaiden Approach - policy analysis,
similar to handmaids during reign of royalties
exists to help policy makers arrive at a mere
enlightened decision.
- the job of policy researchers is to act as
translator between the two worlds they live in:
the world of their discipline, and the world of
action outside their discipline.
5) Design Science (Miller, 1944) - goal is to
improve public sector performance.
- policy inquiry focuses on performance of
humans and entities they create, rather than
merely observe.
- aims to increase the number of reforms options
open to decision makers and enhance the
probability of attaining their specified goals.
- design science will remove apparent conflicts
between getting things done and being
scientists.
- enable quantification of diversity as well as
equilibrium, disorder as well as order, human
laws as well as natural laws.
6) Naturalistic Inquiry - focuses on natural than
experimental setting to comprehend a reality
that is constructed, multiple, holistic, and
sometimes existing essentially only in the minds
of the individual.
- using humans rather than survey instruments
- using intuitive, felt tacit knowledge
- using qualitative rather than quantitative
methodologies
- conducting inductive rather than deductive data
analyses
- reporting in case study modes than in scientific
or technical reports
- criteria based on credibility, transferability,
dependability, and confirmability
WHAT IS POLICY SCIENCE?
Policy science is public policy
- interrelationships between substantive
issues and the political process.
- public policy considers how problems
come to the attention of government,
how the governmental agenda
develops, the actors who shape policy
proposals, the interaction of legislative-
executive bargaining, administrative
implementation and program evaluation.
Policy Science is Policy Science
- vast field concerned with the causes and
consequences of public policy.
- inquires how policies are formulated and
legitimized.
- a field committed to broadening, rather than
narrowing the theories, issues, processes
examined in government and society.
- it is problem oriented, contextual, eclectic, and
process sensitive.
Policy Science is Policy Analysis
- involves the description, analysis and
explanation of the causes and consequences of
government activity.
- it is concerned with how to make public
decisions rigorously and analytically on the basis
of systematic quantitative evidence.
- finding out what governments do, why they do
it, and what difference does it makes.
Tripartite divisions between types of inquiry
inaugurated by Aristotle:
1) Theoretical - meant to provide knowledge for
its own sake
2) Technical - supplied knowledge needed for
making or artifacts
3) Practical - reserved for insights garnered
through life experiences and through practical
conduct preferably in public affairs
Ocampo (1978)- Policy science as policy
studies
- a call for the active orientation of social
sciences, psychology and other
disciplines to the solution of policy
issues and problems.
- refers to the teaching, research and
academic and professional activities
directed at gaining applying knowledge
for the improvement of government
policies.
Nagel (1987)- Public policy studies
- study of nature, causes and effects of
governmental decisions in dealing with
social problems
Henry (1989) likened public policy to a field
in a twilight zone with ambivalent evolution
in both the disciplines of political science
(descriptive) and public administration
(prescriptive).
- policy science is having a sort of identity
crisis, it being in the twilight zone.
Political Science - deals with content, politics,
intellectualized understanding of public issues.
Public Administration - deals with the political
economy, organizational theory, implementation,
and evaluation of public policies.
Engelbert (1997) believes that no other field
has done more in propagating policy studies
than public administration.
- political science are paying more
attention to substantive issues, public
administration gives greater attention to
program management and control and
the more specialized public policy
programs to quantitative and non-
quantitative methods and analyses.
WHAT ROLES DO SCIENTISTS PLAY?
Weiner and Vinning (1934) views on the role
of policy scientists or analysts:
1) Objective Technicians or neutral
researcher
- hold analytical integrity as their fundamental
value
- let analysis speak for itself
- provides objective advice about the
consequences of proposed policies
- they realize they do specific research under
severe time constraints and data limitations
- view their clients as necessary evils
-they give their clients the most accurate
predictions possible
-maintain a safe distance from their clients and
place only second priority to the latter’s political
fortunes
-they prefer institutional clients
-the analysts contribute to the good society by
consistently providing unbiased advice even if it
does not
lead to the selection of personally favored
policies
2) Client’s Advocate
- emphasis on his or her responsibility to the
client
- analysts derive their legitimacy as participants
in the formation of public policy from their clients
- vigorously promote their client’s interest
- may be likened to yes-men or handmaids
3) Issue Advocate
- believe that analysis should be an instrument
for making progress toward their conception of
the good society
- focus on values inherent in policy outcomes
rather than on the values, like analytical integrity
and responsibility to the client, associated with
the actual conduct of analysis
- they see themselves as intrinsically legitimate
players in the policy process
- select clients opportunistically
- clients unable or unwilling to promote the
advocates personal policy agenda should be
abandoned for clients who can and who will
- loyalty to one’s conception of the good society
should take priority over loyalty to a particular
client
CONTROVERSIAL COMMENTS ON THE
FIELD
1) A temporary fad or stale material
2) Too practical or too theoretical
3) Too multi-disciplinary or too narrowly focused
on political science
4) Too quantitative or too subjective
5) Underutilized or over utilized
6) Too liberal or too conservative
SOME AGREEMENTS
Policy Science is being hailed as:
- a new perspective on political and social
phenomena
- an interdisciplinary perspective across all fields
of knowledge
- a combination of diverse ideas that enable
fields to deal better with systematic evaluation of
alternative public policies
- scientific field concerned with normative
questions as to the good society, ultimate values
and good policy
Policy Studies (descriptive) - deals with
knowledge of the policy and the policy process
Policy Analysis (prescriptive) - deals with
knowledge in the policy process
Evaluation studies - assess the extent specific
policies have achieved their objectives and
outcomes
Analysis of information for policy making -
examines data to aid policy decision or advise
on the implications of policy alternatives
Process advocacy - understanding and
changing the policy making process to make it
more participative, accessible and fair.
-prescribes what government ought to do and
why.
POLICY SCIENCE IN THE PHILIPPINES
- public policy started in the late 70’s
- came about alongside a compelling respect for
science and a felt need for sustained interest,
inquiry and advocacy for reforms in the society
Technocrats- the leaders of technological
politics as policy makers
- tend to hold advanced academic
degrees and come from or have
connections with recognized academic
institutions
- many of them were willing or lured to
work with government by tasks or
reform, structural adjustments and
political renewal
• Public policy in the country did not experience
the same intensity of debates and
transformation as the field did in the West. It was
adopted as a technology of policy studies.
• It was never in a twilight zone as Henry (1989)
outlines the field. Here, it is a sub-field of public
administration, not political science.
• It draws from the expertise and contributions of
numerous other disciplines.
2) more graduates and researchers with the
needed commitment and resolve to help the
nation develop can be produced
3) if more policy makers and administrators
would recognize the potential of policy analysis
in helping them to formulate and implement
better policies for the good of the greater
Filipinos

As an Academic Discipline

- Public policy started with the creation of

a Policy Studies Program (PSP) in the
College of Public Administration,
University of the Philippines in 1978.
- The PSP was funded by the Ford
Foundation

FUTURE AND PROSPECTS: TOWARD

INSTITUTIONALIZING PUBLIC POLICY IN
THE PHILIPPINES

Public policy in the country is a relatively

new technology of policy studies. Its reach
or impact is still limited. This is basically
because of the following factors:

• The limited reach of its academic offerings

• The long gestation period to produce a cadre

of policy professionals

• The newness of many policy research

institutions

• The disjointed incrementalism and

individualism of most institutions doing policy
research, education and advocacy

• Its low recognition as a tool to improve policy

making

• Dismally poor the utilization of its outputs

Nevertheless, the field of policy science can

still blossom into a full-blown
multidisciplinary science in the country if:

1) more funding can be made available for policy

education, research and advocacy