PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS Prof Dr M Irfan Islamy

PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS Prof. Dr. M. Irfan Islamy, MPA Faculty of Administrative Science BRAWIJAYA UNIVERSITY 2008 1

What is public policy ? 1. J. E. Anderson , 1975 : Public policy is a purposive course of action followed by government in dealing with some topic or mater of public concern 2. D. Easton , 1953 : Public policy is the authoritative allocation of values for the whole society 3. T. R. Dye , 1978 : Public policy is whatever govrnments choose to do or not to do 4. C. L. Chochran & E. F. Malone , 1995 : Public policy consists of political decisions for implementing programs to achieve societal goals 2

5. William Jenkins’ ( 1978 ) Public policy -- “ as a set of interrelated decisions taken by a political actor or group of actors concerning the selection of goals and the means of achieving them within a specified situation where those decisions should , in principle, be within the power of those actors to achieve “ 3

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. 4

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 Conservatives 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. 5

To be continued. . . . 2. 3 Material or Symbolic Policies : Material policies provide concrete resources or substantive power to their beneficiaries , or , impose real disadvantages on those adversely affected. For example , welfare payments; 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. 6

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 “ 7

Market and Government Failures ( D. K. Gupta , Analyzng Public Policy , 2001 ) Market Failure 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Lack ofcompetition Barriers to entry and exit Restricted flow of information Externalities and social cost Rising service costs Government Failure 1. Inability to define social welfare 2. Limits to democracy and the paradox of voting 3. Inability to define the marginal 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 8

9

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 10

11

CHARACTERISTICS OF PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS ( H. Lasswell , 1971 ) 1. 2. 3. 4. MULTI-METHODS MULTI-DISCIPLINARY PROBLEM-FOCUSED CORCERNED TO MAP THE CONTEXTUALITY OF THE POLICY PROCESS, POLICY OPTION AND POLICY OUTCOMES 5. WHOSE GOALS IS TO INTEGRATE KNOWLEDGE INTO AN OVERARCHING DISCIPLINE TO ANALYSE PUBLIC CHOICES AND DECISION MAKING AND THEREBY CONTRIBUTE TO THE DEMOCRATIZATION OF SOCIETY 12

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’ ; ‘pluralistelitist’; ‘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 decisionmaking : who gets what and how ? ( Elitism , Pluralism, Marxism, Corporatism, Professionalism, and Technocracy ) 4. DELIVERY ANALYSIS : is the analysis of implementation, evaluation, change and impact 13

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 expecannot 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. 14

Approaches to Policy Analysis ( J. P. Lester & J. Stewart , Jr. , 2000 ) Type of Approach 1. Process approach 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 Primary Objective 1. To examine a part of the policy process 2. To examine a substantive area 3. To examine the causes and consequences 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 15

Approaches to Policy Analysis ( M. J. Dubnick & B. A. Bardes , 1983 ) Type of Policy Analyst Public Policy Problem Motivation Approach Relevant Training Scientist Theoretic Search for theory, regularities, truth Scientific methods, objectivity, pure analytic Basic research metods, canons of social science research Professional Design Improvement of policy and policymaking Utilization of knowledge , strategic Strategic, costbenefit analysis, queuing, simulation, decision analysis Political Value maximization Advocacy of policy positions Rhetoric Gathering useful evidence, effective presentation Administrative Application Effective & Efficient policy implementation Strategic, Managerial Strategic, same as for Professional Personal Contention Concern for policy impacts on life Mixed Use of many models & techniques from other approaches ; less sophisticated 16

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, mathematical, computer science and operations research techniques to systematically help us answer the question : What policy should we pursue in the future ? 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. 17

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 18

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 19

PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS SCOPE OF ANALYSIS POLICY FORMULATION POLICY IMPLEMENTATION POLICY EVALUATION ( IMPACT ) 20

THE POLICY CYCLE AND THE INFORMATION CYCLE Problem Definition Forecasting needs, defining targets Agenda Setting Termination Policy Design Defining nature size, distributions of problem Decision analysis Political feasibility analysis Summative evaluation Impact Source : W. Persons, 1997, public policy Opinion polls, surveys, etc. Policy Formative evaluation Legitimation Implementation

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. ”

PROBLEM STREAM POLICY STREAM Alternatives, solutions, policy communities, feasibilities. Hidden cluster of participants dominate. Indicators, events, definitions, values, collective action. Policy entrepreneurs aware of the problem. s Stream are coupled POLITICAL STREAM National mood, public opinion, electoral politics, consensus building, Visible cluster of participants dominate. Kingdon’s Agenda Setting Model Window of Opportunity (predictable, unpredictable) CPM/HSS 2/2008 23

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. 24

25

26

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 political 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. 27

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 ) 29

The expansion and control of agendas Issues characteristics Initiator Issue creation Trigger device Symbol Utilization Mass media emphasis Systemic agenda • All issues commonly perceived by members of a political community as meriting public attention of public authorities. • To get access to systemic agenda an issue must have : widespread attention/awarness shared concern of a sizeable portion of public shared perception that it is a matter of concern to a public authority Source : Adapted from Cobb and Elder (1972) Expansion to larger publics Agenda of decision makers Patterns af access Institutional agenda * • Explicitly up for active and serious consideration by decision makers. • May be an old item which is up for regular review or is of periodic concern. Or it may be a ‘new’ item. * Or governmental/ formal

THE POLICY ARENA Administrative Process 1. Competence and capacity 2. Decision - Action (Values) Political Process 1. Pressure 2. Supports (Values) Judicial Process 1. Restraint 2. Performance Policy Making Arena Negotiating (Actors) Bargaining (Groups) Struggling (Values) 1. Review Investigation 2. Enactments Legislative Process (Values)

32

POLICY IMPLEMENTATION THEORY ( T. A. Birkland, 2006 ) 33

DELIVERY MIX (W. Parsons. 1995. P. 492) MARKET MIX HIERARCHYBUREAUCRACY • • GOVERNMENTAL MIX SECTORAL MIX ENFORCEMENT MIX VALUE MIX COMMUNITYNETWORK

An Analytical Approach for Analyzing Implementation Processes ( T. Bredgaard, L. Dalsgaard & F. Larsen , 2003 ) 35

36

POLICY INSTRUMENTS

Direct and Indirect Impacts on Implementation Communications Resources Implementation Dispositions Bureaucratic Structure Source : G. C. Edwards III, 1980, Implementating Public Policy, pp. 148 Communications • Transmission • Clarity • Consistency Resources • Staff • Information • Authority • Facilities Bureaucratic Structure • Standard Operating Procedures • Fragmentation Dispositions • Effect of Dispositions • Staffing the Bureacracy • Incentives

4 Family and Community 4 Voluntary Organizations 4 Private Markets Voluntary Instruments Level of State Involvement Mixed Instruments 4 Regulation 4 Public Enterprises 4 Direct Provision 4 Information and Exhortation 4 Subsidies 4 Auction of Property Rights 4 Tax and User Charges A Spectrum of Policy Instruments Low High Compulsory Instruments

40

Metaphor of implementation failure Machine metaphor Result of poor chain of command - problems with structure and roles Domination Metaphor Result of labour/ management conflict Psychic metaphor Result of subconscious forces - groupthink/ ego defences/repressed sexual instincts Organism metaphor Result of ‘human relations’ or the ‘environment’ ‘implementation failure’ Autopoietic metaphor Result of a ‘self-referencing’ system Brain metaphor Result of poor Information flows-or ‘learning/ problems Culture metaphor Result of the ‘culture’ of the organization Power metaphor Result of power in and around the implementation process

42

43

CATEGORY OF POLICY EVALUATION ( Howlett & Ramesh , 1995 ) ADMINISTRA TIVE JUDICIAL POLITICAL Evaluating Managerial Performance and Budgeting Systems Judicial Review and Administrative Discretion Consultations with Policy Subsystems and The Public

45

46

Types of Evaluations Activities and Corresponding Evaluating Issues ( Rossi, Freeman & Wright – 1979 )

48

49

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 intermediries, winners or losers, and those involved or excluded from decision-making process 50

Stakeholders can be devided into : Stakeholder Primary Stakeholders Secondary Stakeholders Definition Those who are ultimately affected, ie who expect to benefit from or be adversely affected by the intervention. Those with high power and interests. 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 stakeholders 51

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 52

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 53

Stakeholder Analysis Matrix STAKEHOLDER INTERESTS IN THE PROJECT ASSESSMENT OF IMPACT POTENTIAL STRATEGIES FOR OBTAINING SUPPORT OR REDUCING OBSTACLES A - Benefits - Very important - Engage closely B - Change - Fair - Keep informed / - Keep satisfied C - Damage / Conflits - Not very important - Monitor ( minimum effort ) 54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

TERIMAKASIH 70