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.

1
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.

2
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.

3
 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 “

4
 Market and Government Failures
( D.K.Gupta , Analyzng Public Policy , 2001 )

Market Failure Government Failure

1. Lack ofcompetition 1. Inability to define social welfare

2. Barriers to entry and exit 2. Limits to democracy and the paradox
3. Restricted flow of information of voting
4. Externalities and social cost 3. Inability to define the marginal
5. Rising service costs benefts and costs of public goods
4. Political constraints
5. Cultural constraints
6. Institutional constraints
7. Legal constraints
8. Knowledge constraints
9. Analytical constraints
10. Timing of policies

5
6
 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

7
8
 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

9
 Two Main Concerns : Positive & Normative Analysis
( C.L.Cochran & E.F.Malone , 1995 )

Positive Analysis Normative Analysis

1. A concern with understanding how the 1. Is directed toward studying what public
policy process works policy ought to be to improve the general
2. Strives to understand publc policy as it is welfare
3. Endeavors to explain how various social 2. Deals with statement involving value
and political forces would change policy judgments about what should be. For
4. Tries to pursue truth through the process example : “ The cost of health care in
of tesing hypotheses by measuring them Indonesia is too high”. This statement
against the standard of real-world expe- cannot be confirmed by referring to data.
riences Whether the cost is too high or is
5. Usually deals with assertions of cause and appropriate is based on a given criterion.
effect : Its validity depends upon one’s values and
“ If the Indonesian government raises ethical views. Individuals may agree on
interest rates , then consumers will borrow the facts of healthcare costs but disagree
less “. This statement may be tested by over their ethical judgments regarding the
setting-up an experiment within a state. implications of “the cost of health care”.
The results may confirm or refute the
statement .

10
 Approaches to Policy Analysis
( J.P.Lester & J.Stewart ,Jr., 2000 )
Type of Approach Primary Objective

1. Process approach 1. To examine a part of the policy process

2. Substantive approach
3. Logical-positivist approach
4. Econometric approach
5. Phenomenological ( Postpositivist )
approach
6. Participatory approach
7. Normative approach
8. Ideological approach
9. Historical approach
2. To examine a substantive area
3. To examine the causes and consequen-
ces of policy using scientifc methods
4. To test economic theories
5. To analyze events through an intuitive
process
6. To examine the role of multiple actors
in policymaking
7. To prescribe policy to decisons makers
or others
8. To analyze from a liberal or
conservative point of view
9. To examine policy over time

11
 Approaches to Policy Analysis
( M.J.Dubnick & B.A.Bardes , 1983 )

Type of Policy Public Policy Motivation Approach Relevant

Analyst Problem Training
Scientist Theoretic Search for theory, Scientific methods, Basic research
regularities, truth objectivity, pure metods, canons of
analytic social science
research

Professional Design Improvement of Utilization of know- Strategic, cost-

policy and policy- ledge , strategic benefit analysis,
making queuing, simula-
tion, decision ana-
lysis

Political Value Advocacy of policy Rhetoric Gathering useful

maximization positions evidence, effective
presentation

Administrative Application Effective & Efficient Strategic, Strategic, same as

policy implementa- Managerial for Professional
tion

Personal Contention Concern for policy Mixed Use of many mo-

impacts on life dels & techniques
from other approa-
ches ; less
sophisticated
12
 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.

13
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

14
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

15
 PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS

SCOPE OF ANALYSIS

POLICY
POLICY POLICY EVALUATION
FORMULATION IMPLEMENTATION ( IMPACT )

16
 THE POLICY CYCLE AND THE INFORMATION CYCLE
Problem Definition
Forecasting needs,
defining targets
Policy Design
Agenda
Defining nature
Setting size, distributions Decision
of problem analysis

Political
Opinion polls,
feasibility analysis
surveys,
Termination
etc. Policy
Summative
Formative Legitimation
evaluation
evaluation

Impact Implementation
Source : W.Persons, 1997, public policy
 Agendas, Alternatives, & Public
Policy (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.”
 POLICY STREAM
Alternatives, solutions, POLITICAL STREAM
policy communities, National mood, public
feasibilities. Hidden opinion, electoral
PROBLEM cluster of participants politics, consensus
STREAM dominate. building, Visible cluster
Indicators, events, of participants
definitions, values, dominate.
collective action. Policy
entrepreneurs aware
of the problem.

Streams
are
coupled Kingdon’s Agenda Setting
Model

Window of Opportunity
(predictable, unpredictable)
CPM/HSS2/2008 19
 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.

20
21
22
 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.

23
 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 )

25
 The expansion and control of agendas
Initiator Issues
characteristics
Issue Mass Expansion Agenda
creation Patterns
media to larger af access of decision
emphasis publics makers
Trigger Symbol
device Utilization

Systemic agenda Institutional

agenda *
• All issues commonly • Explicitly up for active and
perceived by members of serious consideration by
a political community as meriting decision makers.
public attention of public • May be an old item which is
authorities. up for regular review or is
• To get access to systemic agenda of periodic concern. Or it may
an issue must have : be a ‘new’ item.
widespread attention/awarness
shared concern of a sizeable portion
of public
* Or governmental/ formal
shared perception that it is a matter
of concern to a public authority
Source : Adapted from Cobb and Elder (1972)
THE POLICY ARENA

Administrative Process
1. Competence and
capacity
2. Decision - Action

(Values)

Political Process Judicial Process

1. Pressure 1. Restraint
2. Supports 2. Performance

Policy Making Arena

(Values) Negotiating (Values)

(Actors) Bargaining (Groups)

Struggling

(Values)

1. Review -
Investigation
2. Enactments
Legislative Process
28
POLICY IMPLEMENTATION THEORY
( T.A.Birkland, 2006 )

29
DELIVERY MIX
(W. Parsons. 1995. P. 492)
MARKET

MIX

HIERARCHY- COMMUNITY-
BUREAUCRACY NETWORK

• GOVERNMENTAL MIX
• SECTORAL MIX
• ENFORCEMENT MIX
• VALUE MIX
An Analytical Approach for Analyzing Implementation Processes
( T.Bredgaard,L.Dalsgaard & F.Larsen , 2003 )

31
32
 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

Resources

Implementation

Dispositions

Bureaucratic
Structure
Source : G.C. Edwards III, 1980, Implementating Public Policy, pp. 148
Communications Bureaucratic Structure
• Transmission • Standard Operating Procedures
• Clarity • Fragmentation
• Consistency

Resources Dispositions
• Staff • Effect of Dispositions
• Information • Staffing the Bureacracy
• Authority • Incentives
• Facilities
 Low
Family and Community
Voluntary Organizations
Private Markets

Voluntary
Instruments
Information and Exhortation

Mixed
Subsidies
Auction of Property Rights
Tax and User Charges

Instruments
Level of State Involvement

Regulation
Public Enterprises
Direct Provision
A Spectrum of Policy Instruments

Compulsory
Instruments
High
36
 Metaphor of implementation failure

Machine Organism Brain

metaphor metaphor metaphor
Result of poor chain of Result of ‘human Result of poor
command - problems relations’ or the Information flows-or
with structure and roles ‘environment’ ‘learning/ problems

Domination Culture
Metaphor ‘implementation metaphor
Result of labour/ failure’ Result of the ‘culture’
management conflict of the organization

Psychic Autopoietic Power

metaphor metaphor metaphor
Result of subconscious Result of a Result of power in and
forces - groupthink/ ‘self-referencing’ around the implementation
ego defences/repressed system process
sexual instincts
38
39
 CATEGORY OF POLICY EVALUATION
( Howlett & Ramesh , 1995 )

ADMINISTRA JUDICIAL POLITICAL

TIVE

Evaluating Judicial Review Consultations with

Managerial and Policy Subsystems
Performance and and
Administrative
Budgeting Systems
Discretion The Public
41
42
Types of Evaluations Activities and
Corresponding Evaluating Issues
( Rossi, Freeman & Wright – 1979 )

Research for Program Impact Cost – Benefit

Monitoring Evaluation
Planning and Development Evaluation Cost - Effectiveness

Purpose Designing programs in Testing implementation as Testing program Calculating program

conformity with intended corresponding to program effectiveness in reaching economic efficiency
goals design program goals

Evaluation 1. Extents and distribution 1. Is it reaching targets? 1. Does program cause 1. How much does
Questions of target problem 2. Is it delivering services intended changes? each service
population according to design? 2. Are changes unit cost?
2. Research and substantively 2. How do the
development for significant? total cost and
program planning and benefits
implementation compare
44
45
 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

46
 Stakeholders can be devided into :

Stakeholder Definition
Those who are ultimately affected, ie who expect to
Primary Stakeholders 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.

KEY STAKEHOLDERS : are those who can significantly influence the

project ; both primary and secondary stakeholders may be key stake-
holders

47
 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

48
 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

49
 Stakeholder Analysis Matrix

STAKEHOLDER STAKEHOLDER ASSESSMENT POTENTIAL STRA-

INTERESTS IN THE OF TEGIES FOR OBTAI-
PROJECT IMPACT NING SUPPORT OR
REDUCING OBSTA-
CLES
A - Benefits - Very important - Engage closely
B - Change - Fair - Keep informed /
- Keep satisfied
C - Damage / - Not very impor- - Monitor ( mini-
Conflits tant mum effort )

50