Public Administration Review ( Approaches to Policy Formulation)

Course:

DA 820-Public Policy

Course Director: Prof. Sombat ThamrongthanyaqongCourse Director: Prof. Sombat Thamrongthanyaqong

Presented By:

Joseph Ato ForsonJoseph Ato Forson

(5510131001(5510131001))

18th September,2012.

NIDA

GRADUATE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATIONGRADUATE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

Presentation Outlook

Case study: Inflation

Option 1List allall related values in order of priorityInquire into values held by members of the societySystematic comparison of multitude of alternativesMake choice that maximizes values

Option 1List allall related values in order of priorityInquire into values held by members of the societySystematic comparison of multitude of alternativesMake choice that maximizes values

Option 2Set principal objectives explicitlyOutline relatively fewfew policy alternativesCompare limited alternatives e.g. past policies etcRely on a body of past record to predict the futureConsider the risks with each policy alternatives. Selection: choice value +

?

Rational comprehensive method (root)

Successive limited comparison (branch)

method

Which is more appropriate for complex problems?

?-Starting from the fundamentals anew each time-Building on the past only as experience is embodied in a theory-Always prepared to start completely from the ground up.

- Emanating from current situation, step-by-step and by small degrees.

Characteristics of the 2 approaches in ComparisonCharacteristics of the 2 approaches in Comparison

a. Clarification of values/objectives distinct, usually a prerequisitea. Clarification of values/objectives distinct, usually a prerequisite

a) Selection of values/goals intertwined

a) Selection of values/goals intertwined

b. Means-ends approach: Ends are isolated means identified

b. Means & ends not distinct so means/ends analysis limited

c. Goodness test = most appropriate means to end

c. Goodness test = consensus

d. Analysis is comprehensive d. Analysis ltd: neglects important outcomes/ alternatives/values

d. Analysis ltd: neglects important outcomes/ alternatives/values

e. Heavy reliance on theory e. Comparison reduces reliance on theory

e. Comparison reduces reliance on theory

Rational comprehensive method

(root)

Successive limited comparison (branch)

method

Hallmarks•Clarity of objectives•Explicitness of evaluation•Very comprehensive•Quantification of values•Best utilized for more simple problems due to:

•Necessitation of massive intellectual capacities•Necessitation of massive

sources of information

WeaknessoUnable to address large-scale problemoMay not be best for policy analysis because of natural restrictions on:

oTimeoMoney

Advantages•Knowledge about

probable consequence from past experience•No need for big jumps to

goals•Ability to test previous

predictions•Ability to remedy past

error fairly quickly

Major WeaknessAbsence past policies hinders effective policy analysis

Merits and Demerits

Intertwining evaluation & analysis ( 1b)Intertwining evaluation & analysis ( 1b)

Participants disagree on weight of critical values and even on sub-objectivesIndividuals may be unable to rank their own values when the are conflictingSocial objectives may have different value weights in different circumstances One chooses among values and policies simultaneouslyAdministrators focus on incremental objectives

Non-comprehensive analysis (4b)

Impossible to take all factors into consideration in any non-simple decision

Available information and human capacity are limited

Complex problems/decisions must be simplified

Simplification is achieved in 2 ways; I. limitation of policy comparisons and alternatives to those differing

from the status quo

II. ignoring important consequences of possible policies as well as the values attached to neglected consequences

Succession of Comparisons

“ Policy is not made once and for all; it is made and remade endlessly.”

Successive approximation to a desired objectives where the desired objective itself changes and evolves

“Making policy is at best a rough process.” Policies will only achieve part of what you hope for while creating unintended consequences you would prefer to avoid.

By proceeding through a succession of changes a policy maker avoids serious and lasting mistakes

In western democracies policy analysts tend to limit their analysis to marginal differences in policies that are chosen to differ incrementally.

Democracies tend to change policies incrementally.

By simplifying the policy by limiting the focus to slight deviations, the most value is made of available information.

Non-incremental policy proposals are therefore typically not only politically irrelevant, but unpredictable.

Relevance as Well as RealismRelevance as Well as Realism

Lindblom’s argument attempts to legitimize the decision-making processes that were already frequently in use (1959).

He points out a gap between the theory advocated by policy academics and the real-world problems faced by decision-makers.

He explains how and why the current work-around is legitimate and worthy of acceptance.

By defining the Branch method and its attributes, Lindblom opens the door for academia to begin theorizing on this method, as well.

ConclusionConclusion

DROR: EXCERPTS FROM LINDBLOMDROR: EXCERPTS FROM LINDBLOM

Doesn’t the Evaluation of “ incremental change” and “Muddling through” constitute

a dangerous overreaction?

“ Muddling through”, that is through incremental change…- aims at arriving at agreed-upon policies which are closely based on past experience.

Critical Elements Critical Elements

Basically, “the science of muddling through” examines;1. Incremental nature of desired changes in policy

2. Agreement on policy as the criterion of its quality.

Basic strategy of incremental change- To maximize security in making change

All knowledge based on the past; - Continue in the same direction to avoid risk

- Limiting consideration of policy alternatives to those that differ

Only plausible if certain conditions pertains

Inherent Validity of Lindblom’s Article (Critique)Inherent Validity of Lindblom’s Article (Critique)

Unless 3 interrelated conditions are concurrently met;1. Present policy result must be satisfactory to policy makers/social strata

so that marginal changes are enough for achieving acceptable rate of improvements in policy results.

2. High degree of continuity in the nature of the problems

3. high degree of continuity in the available means to deal with problems.

Incremental change is impossible if there are no past policies in respect to a discrete policy-issue.

Conditions likely to prevail in high degree of social stability;- Routine is often the best policy- Change is at a slow rate, incremental policy change is at optimal

Contd…Contd…

Important problems of today are tied up with high speed changes;

- levels of aspirations,

- available means of action

The science of muddling maybe valid for a larger number of policy areas in a relatively stable society e.g. USA

Even in the USA, many of the most critical policy problems involve factors changing at a high rate of speed.

The impact of muddling through on actual policyThe impact of muddling through on actual policy

Strategy cannot but serve as an ideological reinforcement of the pro-inertia and anti-innovation forces in all human organization, etc.

- It reduces social scientist functions as an innovating social factor

Actual tendency is to; - Limit the search for alternatives

Doesn’t stimulate administrators to get outside their regular routine

A choice between these 2 models is difficult but reliance on a third model

Dror’s proposalDror’s proposal

Normative Optimum Model …. Is a reprocessing of both the “ comprehensive rationality” and the

“successive limited comparison” models for policy making.

Basic Assumptions1. Increase rationality content, more explication of goals, extensive search for

new alternatives2. Extra rational processes play a significant in optimal policy making on

complex issues.3. Extra rational policy making can be improved by various means4. Modern policy making follows precedents, most contemporary policy

making practices lag behind and should be improved.

Dror’s proposal contDror’s proposal cont….

Characteristics of Normative optimum modelI. Some clarification of values, obj., and decision criteria.

II. Identification of alternatives, through a conscious effort to consider new alternatives.

III. Estimation of expected pay-off of various alternatives and decision

IV. Cut-off for considering possible results of alternative policies and expected results

V. The “test” of this model is based on agreement by various analyst after discussion

VI. A conscious effort is made to decide if problem is important to make analysis comprehensive

VII.All theories and experience are relied upon

VIII.improve quality of decision by systematic learning, stimulation of initiative and creativity, staff development etc.

ConclusionConclusionTo state the problem of policy making as a choice b/n the “root” and “branch” methods of problem solving is misleading and dangerous

There is the need for a model that fits reality while being worked on to improve it.

The normative optimum policy model is just one of the many models.

Policy administrators enjoined to enter into inquiry using Lindblom's theses as a launch-pad to provide alternative models.

Lindblom’s Reaction:Lindblom’s Reaction:“Still Muddling, Not yet Through”“Still Muddling, Not yet Through”

Draws the distinction on the concept of Incrementalism: Incremental Politics Incremental Analysis;

1. simple incremental Analysis ( one of the elements in disjointed incremental) 2. Disjointed Incrementalism ( several forms of strategic Analysis) 3. Strategic Analysis

To some critics, doing well means to shun Incrementalism.

Incrementalists: Approach ideal for complex problems. - Practicing it skillfully - Turning away from it only rarely.

Lindblom’s reaction contd….Lindblom’s reaction contd….

Analysis limited to any calculated or thoughtfully chosen sets of stratagems to simplify complex problems, that is to short-cut the conventionally comprehensive “scientific” analysis”- Strategic AnalysisStrategic Analysis

Analysis marked by mutually supporting set of simplifying and focusing stratagems- Disjointed Incremental AnalysisDisjointed Incremental Analysis

criticized on grounds of failing to consider distant alternatives

Analysis that is limited to consideration of alternative policies all of which are only incrementally different from the status quo- Simple incremental AnalysisSimple incremental Analysis

ContdContd…

Incremental PoliticsIncremental Politics: a fast moving sequence of small changes that can more speedily accomplish a drastic alteration of the status quo than can an only infrequent major policy change. capable in authoritarian systems incapable in democratic dispensation.

Benefits of incremental politics;I. Offers the best chance of introducing changes and those change producing intermediate

changesII. A way of smuggling changes into the political system

Argues that Partisan Mutual Adjustment isn’t quite the same as incremental Politics; PMA: Takes the form of fragmented or greatly decentralized political decision

making in which the various somewhat autonomous participants mutually affect one another, with the result that policy making displays certain interesting characteristics

However, the two are closely linked in all national systems.

Characteristics of PMACharacteristics of PMA

Policies are resultants of the mutual adjustment; better described as happening than as decided

Policies are influenced by a broad range of participants and interests

The connection between a policy and good reason for it is obscure, since many participants will act for diverse reasons.

Despite the absence of central coordination of the participants, their mutual adjustments of many kinds will to some degree coordinate them as decision makers.

Criticism : PMA 1. Expressed ordinarily as an objection to pluralism, thus less

representation of interests and values of the population.

2. Naivety on the assumption that the inequalities of PMA are so great as more central decision making can be seen as important.

3. Though participant are forbidden to initiate on their own a change, many can veto it.

Comments, Contributions and Questions Comments, Contributions and Questions