Download public policy notes and more Thesis Public Policy in PDF only on Docsity!
Lecture 1
What is a policy?
There are several usages of the term ‘policy’.
Hogwood and Gunn (1984) provide a useful classification of the meanings of policy, eg:
• As a label for a field of activity (eg. industrial policy, economic policy).
• As an expression general purpose or desired state of affair (eg to attack the root of
poverty, to empower Zimbabweans, to create jobs).
• As a specific proposal (eg. to devalue the currency, to ban imports of basic
commodities).
• As formal authorisation (eg. Acts of parliament).
• As a process.
• As decisions of government (policy as announced by a president, minister).
♦ The term policy also denotes a position, stance, specific course of action, a rule, a guide, a plan, a
declared and consistent stance on a specific issue
♦ Individuals, companies, NGOs, churches, political parties, etc. have own policies-private policies.
The control of private policies is restricted to a few individuals or companies.
♦ Public policies are those formulated by public authorities to achieve national goals. Their source
is a governmental body. They are government policies.
♦ Public policies regulate all activities of the economy, public and private individuals and
companies. They are thus coercive or compulsory. It is a crime to break government policy.
However, the main difference between public and private policies is more on source than on impact. Some private policies impact on a wide spectrum of people: Coco cola, Multichoice, Delta, ruling parties.
Lecture 2: 30/08/
Importance of public policies
▲ Public policies help us to know what governments are doing or not doing in
a specific area.
▲ Public policies show how responsive governments are to public demands for
action or inaction.
▲ Public policies as government policies, reflect the mindset or thinking of
government. What is government thinking on improving industrial production, youth and graduate unemployment, illiquidity, shortage of drugs in hospitals, vending in the CBD?
▲ Public policies serve as instruments for promoting development, regulating
social and economic behaviour. Good policies are needed to spearhead development in all sectors of the economy: education, health, industrial, manufacturing, agriculture, export, etc. The way public policies are
formulated or adopted or implemented can either promote or stifle national welfare and economic growth.
▲ The nature of public policies has a bearing on the promotion of national
investment. National policies can scare away potential investors! Note issues of easy of doing business and investment destination!
Defining public policies
■ Contested term: various interpretations, defined differently.
■ Each definition has its own merits and demerits. The search is for workable and comprehensive definitions! What are the similarities and differences?
■ See sampled definitions below:
James Anderson
“A purposive course of action followed by an actor or set of actors in dealing with a problem or matter of concern.”
Salient features of a public policy:
• Purposeful or deliberate
• Courses of action by government
• Responses to policy demands
• What governments actually do
• Positive or negative
• Legally binding: coercive-authoritative/
compulsory
NB: Note the difference between nonaction and inaction!
• Nonaction is when the issue has not been brought to official
attention. Authorities are not aware of the problem.
• Inaction or non-decision is where officials decline to take action
on an issue that has been brought to their attention. Govt decides to do nothing. It takes a negative decision. Government adopts a laissez fair or hands off attitude. The status quo is maintained!
Thomas Dye “Whatever governments choose to do or not to do.”
Salient issues drawn from the definition:
POLICY TYPOLOGIES
▲ Classification or taxonomy or categories or types of public policies on the
basis of certain attributes, eg. impact.
▲ Help to describe and classify national policies.
▲ Several policy typologies: Theodore Lowi (1964), Gabriel Almond and
Powell (1966), Richard Rose (1976), Alexander Smith (1980), James Anderson (1984).
▲ However, commonly cited typologies include:
1. Substantive policies
▲ Outline substantive issues that will be addressed by the party once voted in
government, say in the economic, social, agricultural, health, education, industrial, transport sectors?
▲ Substantive policies outlined in political party election manifestos.
▲ In democracies, political parties win or lose elections on the basis of the
ratings of their substantive policies.
2. Procedural policies
▲ Prescribe procedures to be followed by a ministry or department in enforcing
or implementing a policy or in rule-making: eg. issue a notice or advertisement inviting tender bids, when and where to submit tender bids, reviewing process, publication of results, avenues for petition, etc.
▲ Provide the plan or framework of implementation: how, when, and who or
which institution implements the policy.
▲ Statutes or Acts governing elections, licensing, broadcasting, tendering,
procurement, registering a political party.
▲ Note that how something is done determines what is actual done: Procedural
policies have substantive effects. Procedural issues (improper procedures) may be cited to delay substantive decisions, say on land distribution or economic empowerment.
3. Distributive policies
▲ Allocate services or benefits to target groups: orphans, the elderly, university
students, vendors, the disabled, distressed companies, indigenous groups, flood victims, communities.
▲ Public funds used to assist target groups.
▲ flood control programmes, public works programmes, immunisation
programmes, water supply programmes, etc.
▲ Create only winners: no clear losers.
4. Redistributive policies
▲ Deliberate measures by governments to transfer or shift resources (wealth,
income, land, property) or power or privileges or rights from one group to another.
▲ Prone to conflict and petitions: there are clear losers and winners. USA:
Liberals support redistributive policies while conservatives are opposed.
▲ Income taxes, indigenisation and economic empowerment policies, land
reforms, gender policies, anti-poverty programs, Voting Rights Acts in the USA (enfranchised blacks!).
5. Regulatory Policies
▲ Statements such as We are Zimbabweans, We are Africans, Say No to
violence, Say no to drugs- appeal to cherished values.
▲ Examples: National Heroes or heroine conferment policy in Zimbabwe.
▲ Note that lack of enforcement, or administrative inaction, inadequate
budgetary support can render substantive policies symbolic. Policy Philosophies
Sources
- Bozeman, B. (1979) “Policy Philosophies, Public Management and the Public Interest” Public Management and Policy Analysis New York: St Martin’s Press.
- Constitution of Zimbabwe (No.20) ACT 2013, page 16 “founding values and principles”
Core questions What ideals or fundamental values should inform and guide public policy making? What best practices should inform and guide policy making in government ministries and departments?
Defining policy philosophies
▲ Value components of public policies.
▲ Fundamental values that have influenced public policy over ages.
▲ Sets of values about the most desirable means of achieving the purposes of government.
▲ Normative considerations that should inform good public policies.
Sampled policy philosophies
Public interest
• Embodies core values informing public administration
• Denotes:
• the greater good, public good, national interest.
• Something in the majority interest.
• Best ideals that should be sought in governmental action
Lecture Series 5: 6 September 2017
It follows that a public policy that is in the public interest has the following features:
▲ Proper laid down procedures are followed in making public decisions.
▲ Its processes are transparent, accountable, responsive, inclusive and
participatory. Good governance practices are evident.
▲ It maximises social equality, economic opportunities, and social welfare. It is
developmental.
▲ Citizens identify with the policy. It is viewed as legitimate.
▲ It serves the national interest. It is not captured by private, sectional, rent-
seeking interests. (Gupta saga in SA!).
Protectorism
▲ public policies should be protective. “protect people from one another and
from themselves”.
▲ Draws from Platonic and Hobbesian beliefs: “Man is a natural troublemaker.
Man must be protected from his aggressive and avaricious nature”.
▲ Mankind is naturally individualistic, greedy, acquisitive, covetous,
materialistic, selfish, and incapable of planning adequately for their future!
▲ Protective frameworks such as constitutions, legislations, regulatory bodies,
social security schemes, standard and quality controls, anti-corruption commissions, consumer protection bodies, Ombudsman (Public Protector) should be created.
Rationalism
▲ Mankind is rational: has the power of reasoning.
▲ Mankind has capacity to solve the complex problems of the world through
scientific analysis, dialogue, debate, consultations and systematic inquiry/ research.
▲ Government departments must adopt a culture of planning and long term
research and analysis of policy issues.
▲ This philosophy encourages
■ rational policy making:
■ making decisions on the basis of information
■ research, consultation, debates
■ the establishment of policy analysis and research units (PARUs in
governments.
▲ Note: Rationalist beliefs inform the writings of Hume, Locke, Taylor’s
scientific management and Max Weber ‘s ideal bureaucracy
Brokerism
POLICY CONTENT
References
1. Leslie Pal, Chapter 1: Public Policy”.
2. Howlett and Ramesh, Chapter 4: Policy Instruments.
Conceptualising Policy content
▲ internal characteristics of a public policy: problem definition, goals and instruments.
▲ Pal argues that “describing and understanding a specific public policy requires a grasp of its internal anatomy”.
▲ The three internal elements are mutually reinforcing: eg. poor definition of a policy problem may lead to inappropriate goals and policy instruments.
Conceptualising the three elements
Problem definition
▲ Statement of the problem or problem statement describing the parameters of
the problem: causes, effects, scope or magnitude, likely effects etc.
▲ Rationale or justification for policy or background contexts: explains why
government action is needed, why scarce financial resources should be directed to the solution of the problem.
▲ The “heart of every policy”, “the why of policies” (Leslie Pal, 10).
▲ Problematic: value conflicts, different interpretations, multiple actor
involvement, multi-faceted, disagreements on what is the really problem.
▲ “a problem just like beauty is in the eye of the beholder” (William Dun)
Policy Goals ▲ the intents of a policy, what the policy seeks to achieve: offer all Zimbabweans access to land.
▲ aims and direction of the policy.
▲ Determined by the way the problem is defined
▲ Difficult to formulate policy goals: vague, ambiguous, not always explicitly stated (especially political goals).
Policy Instruments ▲ also known as governance instruments.
▲ specific ways, strategies, measures, means of implementing a policy
▲ (^) the specific courses of action that are outlined in a given policy to solve the problem, eg. in national budget statement, ZIMASSET
▲ policy actions used by the state.
▲ Examples of policy instruments:
- Voluntary instruments: eg. moral suasion, exhortations, advertisements, awareness campaigns, reminders to renew licences. These instruments give target groups choice to decide. They entail no or little involvement by the government. Governments simply relies on family, communities, NGOs (voluntary organisations), market. Cost efficient, respect individual freedom.
NB: contemporary economic and social problems are too vast to be adequately addressed on the basis of voluntary efforts alone: lack of resources and time.
Lecture: 14 September 2017: Policy Instruments continued
■ Also called directive instruments (Howlett and Ramesh)
■ Direct the action of target individuals, groups or organisations.
■ Highly coercive and restrictive instruments: allow government to do whatever it chooses: leave little discretion or choice to its target.
Challenges of policy implementation continued
• lack of expertise-especially in technical projects.
• Resistance or opposition from those who stand to lose. Resistance may take the form
of petitions, demonstrations, delays, sabotage of policy implementation.
• Lack of clearly defined, supporting legislation. The authority to implement a policy
derives from its legislation!
• Policy inconsistency, policy discord, lack of common vision. Conflicting statements
among cabinet ministers sends conflicting signals to policy implementers!
POLICY EVALUATION AND MONITORING
- Finding out what happened after policy implementation.
- Investigating if state policies are being implemented or enforced as authorized and if intended objectives are being met.
- Establishing if policies are bringing about the envisaged changes and if these changes are benefiting the target group.
- Assessing, appraising, monitoring a policy.
- Note: public policies have a notoriety of benefiting those outside the target group!
- Policy evaluation is either formative or summative
- If effectively undertaken, it ensures early detection of resource wastage and deficits in policy implementation.
- Note the difference between policy impacts and policy outputs.
Challenges in Public Policy Evaluation
Policy evaluation is intractable, inherently problematic due to the following:
• Poor formulation of goals, goals may be unclear, diverse, contradictory, not achievable or
measurable, not linked to the problem.
• Causality problems: difficult to establish cause-effect relationships, the problem of
intervening variables
• Third party effects: effects tend to be diverse, too broad and long range in nature.
• Absence of accurate and relevant information and statistical data, eg actual number of
farms allocated to indigens, number of unemployed graduates, inflation statistics.
• Difficulties in accessing official information: data or records. Government officials may
be cagey with information, deny access by claiming that it is ‘classified information’ or ‘not for public consumption’.
• Low uptake of policy evaluation results: may be ignored, dismissed as too academic,
lacking empirical rigor, inconclusive, or too sensitive.
• Absence of fixed criteria to assess failure or success of policy. Success and failure are
hard to define terms-very slippery! The terms are relative-interpreted differently
Public Policy Evaluation and Monitoring Systems
• Administrative Evaluation: in-house evaluations, eg by ministry or
department responsible for the policy. Examples include process evaluation, performance evaluation, efficiency evaluation, ‘value for money’ audits (Howlett, Ramesh and Perl,2009:186)
• Legislative oversight: parliamentary committee hearings (portfolio
committees), site inspections, pre-and post-reviews of budgets, legislative investigations.
• Public Audits: Evaluations by Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General
to assess issues of accountability, wastage, value for money. Audit Reports issued.
• Commissions set up by Presidents, ministers to carry fact finding, investigate
or evaluate matters and make policy recommendations
Results of policy evaluation:
• Policy adjustments: alterations or amendments of policy or law or increase in
budget allocation.
• Policy termination.
THE AFRICAN POST-COLONIAL STATE AND PUBLIC POLICY
Possible sources
1. Rothchild Donald & Chazan Naomi (1988) The Precarious Balance: State and Society in
Africa
2. Nzongola Ntalaja “The Crisis of the State in post colonial Africa” Revolution and
Counter –Revolution in Africa Policy experiences in Zimbabwe
3. Zhou, G. 2017 and Zvoushe, H. “The Evolving Policy Discourse and Practices in
Zimbabwe” Evolving Issues in Public Administration and Governance in Zimbabwe.
4. Zhou, G. 2017. “Towards Development-focused public policy making in Zimbabwe”.
Zimbabwe: The Search for Sustainable Development Paradigms
5. Zhou, G. and Zvoushe, H. 2012. “ Public Policy making in Zimbabwe: A Three Decade
Perspective” International Journal of Humanities and Social Science.
6. Herbst, J “ Chapter One: Choice and African Politics” in State Politics in Zimbabwe
Unresolved policy questions in post-colonial Africa?
1. What is the nature of the post-colonial state?
2. What were the core national policy issues at independence?
3. What major policies were adopted to address these issues since independence?
4. How autonomous is the post-colonial State. Does it wield control over national
policies? Is it a fragile and captured State?
5. Is the post-colonial state a developmental state?
Core characteristic of a State (Crawford Young 1988:25-66)
4. Zhou, G. and Zvoushe, H. 2012. “Public Policy making in Zimbabwe: A Three Decade
Perspective” International Journal of Humanities and Social Science.
Critical policy questions in post-colonial Africa?
2.1. What were the core national policy issues at independence in Africa?
2.What major policies were adopted to address these issues since independence?
3. What is the nature of the post- colonial state? Autonomous? Fragile? Developmental
state?
Core characteristic of a modern African State (Crawford Young 1988:25-66)
1.Territoriality: has domain and defined boundaries within which it exercises ultimate policy authority- has a national map.
1. Invested with sovereignty: wields authority and power. It has control over state land,
resources, institutions, and the population. Sovereignty is the fundamental norm of statehood.
2. Possesses nationality: has moral personality, is an embodiment or personification of
society. A state reflects distinct national interests. It embodies the political, economic and social aspirations of the nation. It reflects the history and culture of the nation.
3. A participant in a global system of nations (UN, SADC, AU). It exercises power
within agreed norms/rules/protocols governing the international order. It has to protect national interests/hegemony from external threats-hence creation of armed forces. States respond to perceived threats to their security. They seek hegemony over the territory they rule.
4. The state is a set of institutions of rule and governance. It exists as government- an
institutional system of the three branches of Government (Executive, Judiciary, and Legislature). Government is thus the administrative or implementing arm of the State. Government is a component of the State!
5. Legal system: It operates/governs on the basis of public law: constitutional,
legislative and ethical provisions. These legal frameworks define permissible / impermissible behavior. It observes rule of law.
6. The State is an idea: it exists as an abstract, in the metaphysical sense: It exists in the
mindset of its citizens and officials. It is the collective memory of the nation, its history.
Policy making in Africa Lecture Series: 16 October 2017
ECOLOGY AND NATURE OF POLICY MAKING IN AFRICA
Online sources
- Makinde, T. 2005. “Problems of policy implementation in developing nations: The Nigerian Experience” Journal of Social Science 11(1): 63-69.
- ZEPARU. 2012. Strengthening the Zimbabwe National Policy Making Process.
- Gumede, V. 2008. “Public policy making in post-apartheid South Africa: A preliminary perspective” Africanus 38 (2).
- Ndah, A, B. 2010. Public policy and Policy Inappropriateness in Africa: Causes, Consequences and the way forward.
- Imurana, B.A., Haruna, R.K. and Kofi, A-B. 2014. “The Politics of Public Policy and Problems of Implementation in Africa”. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science.
- Mkandawire, T. 2014. “The Spread of economic doctrines and policymaking in postcolonial Africa”. African Studies Review , 57 (01).
Policy making in the first decades of independence: 1960s to the 1980s
▲ African independence achieved either through negotiation or liberation struggle. These backgrounds account for variations in policy approaches across Africa.
▲ African countries inherited a colonial legacy of socioeconomic inequities, inappropriate bureaucracies, policies, constitutions, and rules that were at parallel with the aspirations of the new political dispensation.
▲ Accordingly, policy making sought to promote economic growth with equity (balanced development), foster nation building, and capacitate the bureaucracy (state institutions).
▲ National policies were to serve as vehicles for ensuring a rupture with the past-addressing socio-economic inequalities by broadening access to economic and social opportunities- basic services, health, education, land, etc.
Nature or characteristics of policy making
▲ Mainly top-down, highly centralized-policies initiated by the national leadership.
- Reduce public spending by cutting the size of the civil service, removing grants and subsidies to social sectors, privatising state enterprises, introducing cost-saving initiatives, user fees.
- Reduce trade barriers, remove controls on prices, investment, trade, and marketing through liberalization and deregulation.
Assessment of impact
▲ Instilled a sense of cost-saving, efficiency, and flexibility in state institutions.
▲ Reductions in the size of civil service, public enterprises.
▲ Deteriorations in social welfare arising from retrenchments in the civil service, loss of welfare support.
▲ Loss of autonomy and control over national policy making systems by the national leadership. Policies adopted as conditionalities for accessing BOPs.
▲ Limited local participation in policy formulation. African country involvement largely restricted to implementation.
▲ Too technocratic-paid less attention to social issues!
18 October 2017
Policy making in the post-2000s: 21 st^ Century Africa
Policy environment
▲ Policy making in the context of increasing integration of the world economy (Globalization) and the adoption of ICTs in most African countries.
▲ There was a rethinking on liberal policies: growing resentment with the social impacts of economic structural adjustment policies (ESAPs); ‘one-size-fits-all’ policy implementation approaches severely criticized; shift to home-grown, pro-poor policies, welfarist and redistribution issues! Anti-poverty alleviation policies across Africa. (eg, the adoption of
Zimbabwe Programme for Economic and Social Transformation (ZIMPREST) (1996-2000) in Zimbabwe).
▲ WB and IMF placing more emphasis on building institutional capacity for policy formulation, analysis, management and governance; Policy Analysis Research Units (PARUs) established in most African government ministries; emphasis on long range policy analysis and planning; issues of governance (accountability, transparency), gender sensitivity in policy formulation and implementation.
▲ Expansion in NGO activism, shift from one-party states to multi-party democracy, culture of holding elections across Africa!
Emerging Policy Issues and policy initiatives/reforms (sampled)
What policy issues are African policy makers currently grappling with? Are these issues evident in Zimbabwe?
▲ HIV/AIDS/Ebola: HIV/AIDs prevention policies, conventions and levies adopted by most African governments. Awareness programmes
▲ Need to incorporate ICTs (e-practices) and Evidence-Based Approaches (EBAs) in national policy making processes. ICT revolution: computerization of government departments, adoption of ICT policies, creation of ICT ministries, adoption of e-practices (online learning, research, applications, purchases, banking, licensing, etc).
▲ Climate change issues: Governments under mounting pressure to adopt policies on climate change, mitigate and adapt to climate change. African governments are signatories to climate change conventions.
▲ Cyber crimes: adoption of protocols, creation of ministries (eg in Zimbabwe)
▲ Gender mainstreaming: need to mainstream gender-parity in national policies, budgets, employment, government ministries: creation of gender ministries, adoption of national
