PS 103: Philippine Public Administration

Module Learning Objectives:

At the end of the module, the students are expected to:
a. Understand and describe policies and their applications;
b. Explain policy initiation and implementation; and
c. Pinpoint the necessities of creating policies.

Nature and Thrust of Public Policy

What are POLICIES, POLITICS, and ADMINISTRATION?
Policies

- These are guidelines that affect everybody that are commonly associated as
the general statements for rational thought that guide thinking in
decision-making.

According to Frank Goodnow, “Politics concerns with policies or expressions

of state will. Administration concerns with the implementation of these
policies.”

Public policy

- It creates an orderly structures and standards, and a sense of direction; whereas,

the term is used to denote what is actually done even though it is unplanned. and
sometimes attends to political questions and even personal issue/controversy of
a political leader.

- A course of action which a government adopts to tackle specific public concern

or issue in the form of regulations, laws, programs, or desired decisions.

One manifestation is the PUBLIC PROGRAM which consists of all activities that
are carefully formulated.

3 Components of Public Policy making:

(a) A PROBLEM is a particular apprehension that often requires specific

resolution;

(b) The PLAYERS refer to the actors or group of actors that design specific
formula to tackle the issue at hand.

ex. Government, implementers, media, civil society, or the authorized

agencies
(c) POLICY/PROGRAM itself which is the furnished course of action ready for
implementation.

- Executions are usually carried out by the government, cultural institutions,

religions, groups or any authorized sectors.

How do the policy players BUILD PUBLIC POLICY?

Discovery of the problem

Citizens/interest groups

Congress/Legislative Department

SOUND PUBLIC POLICY

(The product of public participation
in the formulation process such as
public opinion. survey studies,
lobby groups, and media exposure.

Factors on policymaking process:

(a) Agenda or Policy setting

- Government agencies and officials usually meet to discuss the component

problem and then formulate specific but responsible course of actions.

(b) Policy Evaluation

- Determinant factor if the policy is a success or failure.

(c) Policy Implementers

- The success of policy implementation is largely dependent on the

implementers.

Policy Initiation/Agenda Setting

"Where does policy come from? How do policy agenda emerge?"

Initiation

- is defined as the primary stage of policy agenda that resulted from an issue
regarded to come out as a problem if not attended to appropriately

- the making of decisions in a certain aspect where political agenda is determined

by manner of identifying emerging problems (issues of relevance), and
determining the government's response to those significant matters

Agenda setting

- is the process by which ideas or issues emerge through the various political
channels to wind up for consideration by a political institution such as a legislator
or court

- often makes use of the mass media, as well as means of publicity, to expand the
numbers of people who care about a specific issue so that an institution is forced
to take action.

QUESTION:

Why did the Philippines take public ownership of most companies in the
1970s and then sell them out to the private sector in the early 1990s?

The question revolves around the decision to control state ownership and later on
privatize them.

The problem with policy initiation is that a policy may originate from any part of
the political system.

Policy initiation can be influenced from:

 Top leaders, state bureaucrats or lawmakers (from above)

- aims to stir support from the omnipotent vision of a leader or from a
ruling party's ideological perspective
- also called "transformational" leaders because of their outside
capability to carry out a major structural change in the society
Example: Former President Marcos for his New Society campaign
during the 1970s
 Interest groups, political parties, the mass media, and so forth (from
below)
- actors involved can, to a great extent, influence the policy direction of
a state.

As stated by Heywood (2002) in Lazo:

 Public opinion clearly plays a significant role in the process as regular

and competitive elections force aspiring leaders to an extent, forming
policy proposals that consider concerns and aspirations.
  The opposition does not merely criticize government policy; they also
develop alternative policies in an attempt to appear to be viable parties
of government
 Interest groups highlight a broad array of grievances and concerns,
promote causes and ideals, and give expression to the interests of
diverse groups of society
 In the case of think tanks, interest groups have been formed specifically
to develop policy proposals and to campaign for their acceptance
amongst key players in the policy process.

Other forces that influence policy initiation:

 Media
 Science
 Technology
Key Insights
 Policy initiation focuses on the issue as to which the government pays
attention to, and the decisions they can take.
 The media can influence policy initiation among press releases either in
print or in broadcast, with the capability to cause public panic, outcry or
agitate a situation.
 Science is also influential, with the current concern on environmental issues
resting primarily on scientific assessments of their future implications
policy as means to advocate for the protection of the planet and its people.
 Technological innovations in management can persuade better
governance of public administration like the adoption of an e-government
system around the world.

How do leaders manage these policy initiations?

 Political leaders propagate the ideological or leadership thrusts to the

public, mostly coming from the advices of their political think tanks or from
various theories and philosophies of practical politics.

Role: To advance core values that can be

translated into actual specific policy
proposals

Examples:

 Edmund Burke's idea of

conservatism
 John Stuart Mill's philosophy of
liberal democracy
 Karl Marx's principle of
socialism
Anthony Downs
- The cycle is premised on the notion that the public attention rarely remains
focused on any one issue.

Downs in Shafritz (2009)

- provides the cycle as follows:

1. The pre-problem stage (an undesirable social condition exists but has not
captured public attention)

2. Alarmed discovery and euphoric enthusiasm (a dramatic event catalyzes the

public attention, accompanied by an enthusiasm to solve the problem).

3. Recognition of the costs of change (the public gradually realized the difficulty
of implementing meaningful change)

4. Decline of public interest (people became discouraged or bored or a new in-

sue claims attention)

5. The post-problem stage (although the issue has not been solved, it has been
dropped from the nation's agenda).

An issue is identified by
citizens, groups or a
public policy

High publicity like press Because of the noise created

releases, violence and the by its supporters, formal
media, the issue is then decision-makers are forced
expanded to larger to consider the issue
audience

The Agenda Setting Process

 Policy Formulation

“How do we formulate policies?”

Policy Formulation

- is the job for government officials, politicians, consulted groups and key
advisers

- entails the definition of issues, framing of objectives, and setting of priorities

- reviews and analyzes the differing policy choices resulting in the adoption of a
unanimous option.

- the conceptualization stage of policy process where the detailed development

of a policy is framed into concrete proposals

- not limited to the translation of broad proposals into specific recommendations,

but also the filtering out of proposals and perhaps even the fundamental
recasting of the issue under consideration

Once an issue is determined to exist, a more careful and planned

collaboration takes place, this time a systematic policy proposal

Political electoral culture and consensus of the people > traditional

administrative goals (efficiency, effectiveness and economy)

According to Heywoods (2002):

- The final decision which brings the formulation process to an end, may be little
more, than a formality

- Discussion, arguments, and debate summits thus often ratify or "rubber stamp"
decisions that have effectively been made elsewhere

- Public opinion, interest and cause-oriented groups, the media and the like that
aim to modify given objectives, should always consider that the priorities
identified in the policy by original formulators have no guarantees to be executed
in the like substance and manner intended by the implementers

- Policymakers react to the complicated decisions they take, with a minor

difference in the style or approach to the decision they made which can be
incremental or radical

In analyzing policy formulation, analysts have developed two models, the

incremental model (Lindblom's, 1979) and rational model (Simon's, 1983) as
indicated:
 Rational Model
Goals are set before means are
considered
A good policy is the most
appropriate for the desired ends.
Analysis is comprehensive, all
effects of all options are addressed.
Theory is heavily used.
Incremental Model
Goals and means are considered
together.
A good policy is one in which all
main actors can agree.
Analysis is selected. The object is
good policy, not the best policy.
Comparison with similar is heavily
used.

Source: Modified from Lindblom (1959:81) and Parsons (1995:285) in Hague’s Policy
Process cited Lazo, 2009.

Incrementalism suggests the theory that decisions are made not in the light of
clear-cut objectives, but through small adjustments dictated by changing
circumstances.

Charles Lindblom

 He is the leading representative of the incrementalist paradigm.

 He was the one who coined the term disjointed incrementalism as a
description of the policy making process.

Henry

 The incrementalist paradigm is innately conservative, new public policies

are seen as variations on the past.
 The policymaker is perceived as a person who does not have the brains,
time, and money to fashion truly different policies; he or She accepts the
policies of the past as “satisficing” and legitimate.
 Incremental policies are nearly always more politically expedient than are
policies that necessitate redistributions of social values.

Shively

 A decision maker who operates more incrementally will make only a small
change in policy at any one time, wait to see what the results of that change
are, then make another small change and so on.
 A person who is worries about all the uncertainty in devising policies and
about the possibility of making big, costly mistakes will tend to be
incrementalistic.

The Rationalism (Lasswell’s) as a way of formulating decisions or policies is

posited on the following rational decision-making approach:
 1. The intelligence phase (involves an influx of information)
2. The promoting or recommending phase (contains activities designed to
influence the outcome)
3. The prescribing phase (depicts the articulation of norms)
4. The invoking phase (establishes correspondence between prescriptions
and concrete circumstances)
5. The application phase (execution of prescriptions)
6. The appraisal phase (assessment of intent in relation to effect)
7. The terminating phase (correctly treating expectations established while
the prescription was in force)

“No matter how rational we are there seems to be no way anyone could
gather all the facts and take into account every consideration”

Heywoods (2002)

 A rational model views policy as emerging from a systematic search for the
most efficient means of achieving goals.

Shively (1997)

 A rational decision-maker is more concerned about lost opportunities than

the possibility of error.
 A radical is likely to feel that while incrementalism is creeping upon a
decision, a chance for decisive breakthrough may be lost.

Policy Implementation

“What are the approaches used to bring out the success of an

implementation?”

Policy Implementation

 It is the process of putting the government policy into effect.

 It is the total process of translating legal mandate (Executive order or an
enacted statute).
 It is also called as “policy execution”, which means putting out the policy
into action.
 It is considered as the most problematic area of the whole policy process.

Policy analysts suggest that in order to achieve a great deal of the desired
implementation of a policy, a certain degree of flexibility should be adopted to
respond to changing circumstances or times, but flexibility too breeds potential
drawbacks.
Top-down approach conceives the task of the policy implementation as ensuring
that policy execution delivers the outputs as specified by the policymakers.

Bottom-up approach considers that the role of those execute policy in reshaping
broad objectives to fit local and changing circumstances should be both
recognized and welcomed.

There are some conditions to be required in order to achieve “perfect

implementation” in the sense of ensuring that policy is delivered exactly as
intended:

A. A unitary administrative system with a single line of authority to ensure

central control
B. Uniform norms and rules that operate through the system
C. Perfect obedience or perfect control
D. Perfect information, perfect communication and perfect coordination
E. Sufficient time for administrative resources to be modified.

Hence, perfect implementation is not possible or desirable; most of the concerns

about policy implementation have focused on the dangers of flexibility.

Policy Evaluation

“How does a policy affect the lives of the purported stake holders or
beneficiaries?”

Policy Evaluation

- Police evaluation is the appraisal or review of a policy being implemented as

to its success or failure. the task of the policy analyst here is to review whether
policy has achieved its objectives.

It has been said and overly stated that without the mechanism of policy evaluation,
the government will almost always fail to learn from its experience.

The concept of efficiency and effectiveness:

- Ethos of public administration

- Standard criteria for evaluating a policy our government program according to

its level of performance and accomplishments.

According to Shafritz (2009): Program evaluation is the systematic examination of

activities undertaken by the government to make a determination about their
effects, both for the short-term and the long-term.

According to Hague (2001): Just as policy implementation in accordance with the

top-down model is an unrealistic goal, so judging policy effectiveness against
precise objectives is an implausibly scientific approach to evaluation

Evaluation should simply gather in the opinions of all stakeholders affected

by the policy. Evaluation has to be predicted with wide and full collaboration of
all program stakeholders. Agents (funders and implementers); beneficiaries
(target groups, potential adopters); and those who are excluded (victims)
(Parson 1995).

For the policy process to work effectively in translating inputs into appropriate
outputs, it must be open at all times the scrutiny and criticism. All too
frequently, a culture of secrecy merely conceals incompetence and provides
scope for arbitrary and self-serving behavior.

Distributive, Preventive, and Regulatory Policies

• Preventive policies are those courses of action intended to curb or derail

any significant impact of an issue our perceived problem to arise by
preventing the appearance of a shock.
• Distributive policies are programs which by nature aim to provide goods
and services among members of the society.
- The costs good or services are accruing also from the contributions
of revenues collected from the members
• Regulatory policies do impose certain performance operations, standards
of service delivery and other rules and mandates are rigid policies to
ensure continuity, consistency and accessibility of these provisions to the
general public.