University of the Philippines

OPEN UNIVERSITY

PM 241
Public Policy and Program
Administration

FMA 2

Submitted By:

Indira Ibrahim Sinsuat

2012-82101
Master of Public Management

Submitted to:

Prof. Juvy Lizette M. Gervacio

Faculty In-Charge

Date Submitted: 15 February 2013

I. PUBLIC POLICY PROCESS DEFINED AND ITS VARIOUS FRAMEWORKS.

Public Policy as an output-oriented concept connotes a long series of more or

less related choices (including decisions to act or not to act) made and taken by
government to provide common good, public welfare and interest, and improve society.
As process-oriented concept, it is described as an extremely complex, analytical and
political process which has no beginning or end, and with boundaries which are
uncertain. It is a dynamic process whose various components make different
contributions to it. It decides major guidelines for action directed to the future, mainly by
government, for the interest of the public formally to achieve what is good by the best
possible means. (Introduction to Public Policy and Program Administration by Ma. Fe
Villamejor-Mendoza, 1998) Print.

Thus, public policy process or policy-making (process) connotes a (sequential)

pattern of action, involving a number of functional categories, steps or phases of
activity. It is both rational and political. It is political because it involves conflict and
struggle among individuals and groups having opposing desires on issues of public
policy. It is rational, in the sense that stages logically flow from those before them.
(Introduction to Public Policy and Program Administration by Ma. Fe Villamejor-
Mendoza, 1998)

As a result, a number of frameworks of policy process and public policy focused

on three important ones namely Anderson’s, Rushefsky’s and Mendoza’s. (Introduction
to Public Policy and Program Administration by Ma. Fe Villamejor-Mendoza, 1998)
Print.

A.) ANDERSON’S MODEL (1975, 1978, 1984)

Under this public policy model, it uses the basic steps in policy –making process.
It started with the conceptualization of the categories of action which includes policy
demand, policy decision, policy statement, policy action or output and policy outcome.
However, Anderson felt the need to supplement these categories of action with activities
or strategies to make the process more procedural. Thus in 1978, he transformed these
categories of action into policy stages that includes policy agenda setting, formulation,
adoption, implementation, monitoring & evaluation. And further in 1984, he
supplemented those stages with questions on the most important considerations. Thus,
the Anderson’s Model of public policy process reflects transformations themselves.
(Introduction to Public Policy and Program Administration by Ma. Fe Villamejor-
Mendoza, 1998) Print.

B.) RUSHEFSKY’S MODEL (1990)

           
In this model, the demand for government action to resolve a problem or take
advantage of an opportunity is made by affected groups (private, government or non-
governmental sectors) or individuals or those who have a stake in the policy issue or
concern. (Dye, 1978) Rushefsky also maintains that a societal problem will not become
a policy problem if it is articulated or identified. He contends that not all private problems
become policy problems and that only policy problems should be addressed by the
government. (Introduction to Public Policy and Program Administration by Ma. Fe
Villamejor-Mendoza, 1998) Print.

Moreover, in this model, Budgeting is part of the policy process that resources
and funds should be allotted officially to ensure a more successful policy
implementation. Rushefsky’s model also stresses the need for policy succession or
termination, particularly if the reason for policy existence has already been satisfied.
(Introduction to Public Policy and Program Administration by Ma. Fe Villamejor-
Mendoza, 1998) Print.

C.) MENDOZA’S MODEL (1994)

            
The Mendoza model is basically a reflection of the politics and rationality of
public policy making in the country. It is similar to the basic public policy process. It uses
methods and tools of policy analysis and research in developing alternative possible
solutions. The model stresses the ingredients for successful policy implementation in
order to influence a more serious concern for the possible successes and pitfalls in
implementing government policies. (Introduction to Public Policy and Program
Administration by Ma. Fe Villamejor-Mendoza, 1998) Print.

II. COMPARE AND CONTRASTTHE PUBLIC POLICY MODELS.

Under the manual of Ma. Fe Villamejor-Mendoza which is the Introduction to

Public Policy and Program Administration, the frameworks of policy process and public
policy discussed the steps on how public policies are made before making it a law.

As to the sequential flow of each framework, Anderson's, Rushefsky's and

Mendoza's models have their similarities in having the generic stages stated in
Problem-Alternatives and Solution Analysis-Solution sequence (PAS). In essence,
public policies are made to respond to problems and concerns of the State by
identifying the relevant issues which need to be addressed by finding solutions and
alternatives that will resolve conflicts.

As to the approaches used under each framework, the approach used in the
Anderson's model is in terms of action or tangible manifestations of the policy cycle
which later supplemented with activities to make it more procedural. 

While the Rushefsky's approach is in linear fashion starting from the first step to
the last which most of the time does not happen because there are complexities that
might happen at each stage that will lead to policy formulation. Some laws are just
hybrid of existing laws and others are just being amended. This model also
introduced budgeting as part of the process considering that an effective policy
constitutes smooth implementation.
 Whereas the Mendoza's approach is liberal in a sense that there is no particular
starting or ending point because the model is cyclical and dynamic. According to
Mendoza (1994), each step may be the beginning or end and the model
emphasizes problem re-definition, assuming a serious evaluation of policy performance
has been made. 

The difference of this model to others is its emphasis on problem re-definition

and assumption on serious evaluation of policy performance. This is made in order that
the policy becomes more acceptable to the policy agenda makers and setters. Also, it
adopts more on democracy for change and reform.

III. THE PUBLIC POLICY PROCESS UNDER THE PHILIPPINE SETTING.

            
The policy making process under the Philippine setting is precedent-bound,
based on law and hinges on formal structures and mechanisms in place, as provided for
by the Constitution and other laws. People participation is encouraged in the different
phases of the policy cycle. However, their participation in most formal structures is not
yet institutionalized.

Therefore, the policy-making process which fits well under the Philippine setting
is the Mendoza’s model. Filipinos are sentimental and tend to cling to the past, in which,
it means we are still affected on the issues and problems that have long been heard but
haven't fully addressed. Since the process is cyclical, it always goes back to re-
definition of the problem and so on and so forth until reaching the best possible solution.
(Introduction to Public Policy and Program Administration by Ma. Fe Villamejor-
Mendoza, 1998) Print.

In conclusion, understanding these frameworks of policy process and public

policy helps capture the flow of action in the policy process; it is open to change. Hence,
additional steps can be introduced if experience indicates they are needed. These
frameworks also yield a dynamic and developmental rather than cross-sectional or
static view of the policy process.

Under the local government units (LGUs) or government departments, it may set
public policies and usually adapt the models above mentioned. And when there is public
issue, only then can these proper parties may file a case in judicial court questioning the
legality of such policy.

Also, the policy making process in the Philippines has been the increasingly
explicit and dominant influence of western agencies on the substance and form of
domestic policies. Foreign influence on domestic policy through foreign experts and
imitation of foreign developmental model, is perhaps, well exemplified by the Philippine
government’s adherence privatization and related policies. (Ocampo, p.302-303)

Hence, the advent of globalization made us think of policy-making systems

beyond our internal policy process. Although it may be a challenge for nations to take
on, only time will tell whether our policy process will dominate or not in real global
policies and politics. (Introduction to Public Policy and Program Administration by Ma.
Fe Villamejor-Mendoza, 1998) Print.