Chapter 2 Public Policy Processes ctives Learning Oe «To understand what is public policy process 1 Te aucidate the significance of public policy process + To be familiar with public policy formulation 2 Teknow the policy implementation process ion process | + To examine the policy evaluat there is some sort ofa system that translates policy @ tid and have positive effects. The study of how pol that occur within the politi The term, ‘policy process’ suggests that hat are implement into actual policies t ‘nade generally considers a series of activities oF processes aaa rhe implication of this process model is that policy-making occurs in identifit Prvamined separately. However, policy-making is set stages and that each stage can D aaa eat as the process model. Nonetheless, it is often useful for analytical purposes to bre policy-making into component units in order to understand better how policies are Phis chapter deals with the functional dimensions of public policy, namely formulatit implementation and evaluation process. The aim of this chapters to examine the intricacies of the policy-making process. As We kno aansaiy an environment within which the policy-making process occurs. The chapter ttith this policy-making environment and the ways in which the environment can ¢ to enhance or retard the possibility of policy change. The purpose is to know what facta tusually influence the policy behaviour. Public policy has a sequential pattern of actions 3s process system. In order to simplify our discussion, we have classified the policy-mali rescee in ihuse broad categories: policy formulation, policy implementation and ae The process of policy formulation attempts to respond to the demands pressed pie Tis eto be to explore the events, actors and political institutions # at part in the policy-making process. Here, the purpose fs to see who participates in Mp rain poss a in what ways as well a What factors usualy nh icy behavidl | on, which follows policy formulation, i: y influence Poitated polit | fo proctice: I repeesmrits the conscious n, is the task of putting formulated conversion of policy plans into reality. The final 4 "Thomas R. Dye, Understanding P "s Public Policy (New Delhi: Pearson Education, 2004), Third edition, 32-3 46Chapter 2 Public Policy Processes the potiey process is evaluation, which assesses the effectiveness of a public policy in terms its perceived! intentions and results, The final section of this chapter deals with the policy- king process in India, It examines the stages of public policy process, actors involved and limitations in policy-making in a democratic country, like India, Overall, the discussion follows now in this chapter shall be useful in understanding the theoretical as well as ‘tical agpects of the policy-making process he Policy Environment Micy-making cannot be understood adequately in isolation from the environment in which takes place. The political process relates to its environment as much as a plant or animal and it is both influenced by and influences its environment. Demands for policy actions generated in the environment and are transmitted to the political system; at the same «the environment places limits and constraints upon what can be done by policy-makers. cs t. Anderson identifies two environmental factors, namely political culture and socio. momic variables and their influence on policy-makers. Political culture means widely held ues, beliefs and attitudes concerning governmental policies and actions. ifterences in public policy and policy-making in various countries can be explained, at least tly, in terms of political cultural variations. Sociologist Robin W. Williams has identified a ber of ‘major-value orientations’ in American society. These include individual freedom, jwality, Progress, efficiency and practicality. Values, such as democracy and individualism viding art of economic development will impose limits on what government can do in roviding public goods and services to the community. The scarcities of . economic n , of Course, be more li ri hewodiitins ation for the upliftment of these classes, TI oscd such demands, with the consequence ssed to desire acceptable policy soluticns Bean ie fay drawn from this discussion that we must co inderstand as to how policy decisions a ther than others, By tes factors suenca 47Public Policy 19 solve a problem ang, Public Policy Process asizes af IM ions. Scholars have identig, se emphasis Mtocations Netping to structure Dy on sitive ste of a€t10T) 1 and DUGBE’ os, thereby ‘Te advantage projects AP cy process een of action: may take the form of programmes °F the pour) tern process. Thos ray Take erfaces to nap the SABES Ty isa sequent Pate the policy PF Mas i iblic pe w of acti 7 analysis, In this framework, PU the flo 7 this framework is that it helps on public policy proces Dye presents the following interfaces Of itiative t Policy connotes a po roblems, publicizing the Problems, veing societal P! tion: Identifying natives to be addresseq jon. J a problems and their alte \d_ ameliora resolve issues an : roposals to political support for it, ang 1. Problem Identifical expressing demands for g0ve" 2 Agenda Setting: Deciding issue by the government. 3. Policy Formulation: Developing policy P roblems. ae 4. Policy Legitimation: Selecting a proposal, develop! enacting it into law. seca potey ; Policy Implementation: To a i 6. Policy Evaluation: Reporting outputs of Ca impacts of policies on target grOUPS and proposing umbet of advantages. In actuality, poliey-makng e eg chronologically follow the sequence of acti ities listed above. It s sites ture of action in the policy process. However, In order to simplify our jiscussion, lassify policy-making process in three broad categories. These are: This framework has a ni 1. Policy formulation, 2. Policy implementation and 3. Policy evaluation. Public Policy Formulation Public policy formulation is a dynamic process. It attempts to respond to the demands pressed by the people. A number of events, actors and political institutions take part in this process. ‘That means, prior to the exercise of formal authority by a legislative body—executive or court— several phases or types of activities by public and private individuals shape the emergence and development of policy decisions. James E. Anderson describes f ages ali formulation process. These are: our stages Inithe poled Identifying public problems, Putting public problems on policy agenda, Formulating policy proposals to deal with th Making policy decisions. eta e an sere Public policies spring from issues that trouble a segm aoe era cocaine. erauble a Segment or segments of society to the point a bl Problems in the course of daily life. Howevet, * Dye, Understanding Public Policy, 32-33.Chapter 2 Public Policy Processes difficulties that sow the seeds of public policy decisions fall into a unique category. The viduals or groups who suffer rely on government action to change their unfavourable ition into an acceptable situation. A public problem requiring government response is yre pervasive than a personal difficulty, and the concern of large number of individuals with same problem may transform that question into a public policy issue tification of ‘public problems’ is the starting point for public policy questions, Larry Gerston tifies four triggering factors which play a vital role in identifying and clarifying emerging es for public policy, namely scope, intensity, time and resources. The first step of a public icy question centres on the scope of the issue, which refers to the number of individuals 10 are connected with the topic. It tells us much about the universality of a problem; it isa antitative variable. If a large percentage of the potentially affected population is influenced a dilemma or matter of concern, then the problem has widespread scope. More often than t, people in decision-making positions are very sensitive to scope. Without this critical mass, issue remains a private ‘problem’ for a few concerned individuals. The second triggering ponent centres on intensity or the extent to which people feel psychologically affected by issue. Sometimes, an issue may attract strong reactions from people. In a world where all \ds of problems arise every day, intensity helps to separate public policy issues from non- es. If sizable numbers are not engaged or worked up about a particular situation, then the Jihood is that the concern will not emerge as a policy issue. third element, duration, centres on the length of time that an issue has bothered people. longer an issue attracts the interest of an affected population, the more likely the sizable bers of that group will demand change from policy-makers. If an issue becomes a long- ding part of the public agenda, policy-makers feel growing pressure to deal with it. licy-makers pay attention to matters that stay on the public agenda for long periods of time. an issue comes and goes, then it fails to capture enough momentum to resonate as part of e public agenda. The fourth triggering mechanism is resource, which centres on what and yw much is at stake with the emergence of a potential public policy issue. For example, as. may be expensive to build a public transportation system, citizens and policy-makers may metimes conclude that the benefits will outweigh the costs, on other occasions, they may ‘ide that the costs exceed the benefits.* e second stage in the policy formulation process is setting a policy agenda. Of the thousands demands made upon government, only a small portion will receive serious attention from blic policy-makers. Those demands that policy-makers either do choose or feel compelled act upon constitute the policy agenda. Some matters are seen as public problems requiring ion. One possibility of this is suggested by political scientist David Truman in his book, 1¢ Government Process (1952). Truman says that groups seek to maintain themselves in a state reasonable equilibrium, and if anything threatens this condition, they react accordingly. litical leadership may be an important factor in agenda setting. Political leaders, whether jotivated by considerations of political advantage, concern for the public interest or both, ‘ay seize upon particular problems, publicize them and propose solutions. Protest activity, \cluding violence, is another means by which problems may be brought to the attention of licy-makers and put on the policy agenda. Recently, the Government of Rajasthan (India) d to respond positively to the demands of the ‘Gujjar’ community due to their long protest. ley were given 5% reservation in the state services. \e media also has a long-standing reputation for placing issues on the public agenda. News rts raise the awareness of both policy-makers and their constituents. By transforming a ty N. Gerston, Public Policy Making: Process and Principles, ed. M.E. Sharpe (New York: Armonk, 1974), Second tion, 37. 49nd the size of the ts expa — public a a ppc S906 mei ' My \ te question Inte Petey aking P nda, the next ma Of its jour, i. once pre dynamics he P public Byes the development of erin! ene involv je problems. The governing ap rt of ation comes 4 Pa icy fort with p posal’. Many policy Propet it oblem bee js. Pol jonation wr rae ns fo ve oe robe or advisory commissions att gee ot a Spee policy tila vat Woklig| Ino ont joped DY ve i se os aso Seige ae ane formation efi and represen, Legare pays an Montacts with v0 pas Sys and activity, legislators receive Sy re an vest nthe Das te sed COU ee stare with spe FOU chy for action on problems and orm sets goin Ove officials for the ena mae ei pole Ty legislative cations to suit their interest. Cones for legislation. OF, th one officially pt sals for dealing with 2 ith Finall policy, perhaps W! me from these sources. Finally, what is given problem 2) use of action based on these propos aivemnent of both public of on in most of the political syst proposals are the basic characteristics of policy formulation in ™” a a am y-maki cess is policy formulation. Po licy formulation is, i, vo fla ny ec este policy proces. Formulate «tice : es pe earns procs towards winning approval ofa preferred policy alternative; an affirmative decisions the pay-off of the entire process. A policy decision involves action by some official person body to approve, modify or reject a prel i native. In positive fashion, it takes such aaeene The enactment of legislation or the issuance of an executive order. Although privae individuals and organizations also participate in ‘making policy decisions, the formal authority administrators and judges. In democraci, rests with public officials—legislators, executive, seek of making policy decisions is most closely identified with the legislature, which Sesigned to represent the interests of the populace. Policy decisions made by the legislatue are usualy accepted as legitimate, as being made in the proper way and hence binding onal concerned. The policy formulation procedure is completed only after the appropriate authority has adopted the policy. Role of Different Actors in Policy Formulation The followi i = eee eee siscuss some of the official and unofficial participants who p! policy formation process. Here, the purpose is to give some notice Cf who participates in the policy-ma cual Rauch policy-making process and in what ways, as well a of what facto Official Policy-makers by laws or the consti ' lic policy b These Include vopettion and they, therefore, hee ae mee responsibilities are oe ie . ves, a wer to make and enforce P0 tasks at least somewh: administrators at different from the others "4 /dses. Each performs policy” SOChapter 2 Public Policy Processes Jatures are concerned with the central political tasks of policy formation and law making a political system. In the course of approving, the legislature performs other important ions like deliberating, scrutinizing, criticizing and publicizing government policies their consequences for the public on the floor of the house. Usually, it lays down the \d objectives which the administration is to pursue, and in more important cases, also the fhinery and the procedure through which they are to be pursued. From the public policy jpective, the legislative branch is an important centre of policy-making. Itis the institution most often study when trying to assess what issues are gaining and losing prominence which alternative policies are being weighed. In India, for example, parliament, state Jative assemblies and local bodies provide an ideal political platform for raising the issues, +h are of importance to the people. While parliament is the highest law-making body in country, the legislatures are empowered to make laws for the states and the local bodies the authority to make laws for the areas that fall under their jurisdiction. wulation and execution. In the parliamentary form of government, all policies must the approval of the cabinet and the ministers of the government introduce the bill in house. In the developing countries, the executive probably has even more influence in icy-making than in developed countries. It is due to the lack of strong bureaucratic base little influence of the pressure groups which facilitate greater concentration of power in mental hands. In the Indian political system, the office holders who are immediate icy-makers are the members of the cabinet. The cabinet is a relatively small body consisting ly of the cabinet ministers and the prime minister. In practical sense, it is the cabinet which pes the public policies in India. the post-World War II period, the classical doctrine of politics, that is administration otomy, has been proved to be an exploding fallacy. Now, there is a consensus that inistrators are also involved in the policy-formulation process in more than one way. complex industrial societies, the technicality and complexity of many policy matters, need for continuing control and the lack of time and information among others have to the delegation of much discretionary authority to administrative agencies formally, ‘ognized as ‘the rule making power’. Public officials today are associated with policy ulation in three important ways. First, they supply facts, data and analysis (regarding workability of a policy) to the ministers or to the legislature and impart content to policy. Second, they are constantly in touch with the public so that they have a better jerstanding of their problems and the solution required in the form of policies. Third, on ‘ount of lack of time and knowledge, the legislature passes ‘skeletal’ acts and leaves the 'y’ to be filled by the administration. It is here that administrators have the maximum pe for ‘policy-making’. lciary also plays an important role in the public policies. In countries where the courts the power of judicial review, they have played an important role in policy formation. ey have the power to determine the constitutionality of actions of the legislature and the ith the constitutional provisions. They play an important role in giving direction to social, nomic and political policies of national importance. In a democratic system, judiciary plays important role in the formulation of socio-economic policies. In India, judiciary has been instrument of socio-economic change. It has been instrumental in delivering a number of ements on important issues, like land reforms, child labour, environmental pollution, men empowerment and so on. .K. Sapru, Public Policy: Formulation, Implementation and Evaluation (New Delhi: Sterling, 2014), 113. Siayers MAY. Participa polky jal pis 7 Mt punt : het notte pa indivi citizens, ar unos I esa Me oy coat egret w je without J legal ayy Bes nt roses: HME gy fom pla thelt = Tess important than the offcah 4 poly wed jnfte® to n that they ei jt tobe. because they have imp, ve an thA ve the FBP Gur system of government ym oticy deste nes 1 ey hi nding P over, tt -quse the wi ‘ ¥ ne. Hower A becat in many Wer are involved in the policy " to participate gorsal pecalses acto ial active W roel mae us, unoftic® they are an effective way for many pe" L S vitho ted not work well 4 to policies | ot because = to collectively OP 1. | the function of ‘interest aggrega rest Lay ne general In modern 06 vert the part ‘ammes of policies. ese program, seek t0 con¥ own. progrerm of manifests (before the elect, urpose of the manifesto is that it promises, ; it will implement the policies outlined therein ‘al party that wins the majority f the politic: ‘in a in ne formulation of policies to which the, y perform aly Pee inte Hes or values are in order to gain. their suj that in case the party Prop he government is formed seats in the legislature, part are committed. Pe organizations with formal structures whose members share common Pressure groups 26 O18 ence the policies of the government without attempting ‘occupy political offices. The main function of these groups is to express demands and present alternatives for policy action. They constantly try to protect the interests of their members, by pressurizing either the government Or the bureaucracy to take decisions, which are likely beim consonance with the interest of their members. They employ various methods, such as publicity campaigns, lobbying, personal meetings with the officials or legislatures and, writing letters or memoranda for this purpose. Individual Citizens t « he a itisnot posible fora government to impose policies on citizens perennially ir will. Public policies have to be consistent with the inter of the citizens. A de c a. eal piesa cannot adopt policies to which a large dase Seema nus. he cizens exercise indirect influence on policy making Te = one e itizens to m: i ci ti se opportuniis forthe citizen to select between thes pete alternative policies thrown up by bodies enact th into laws. ™ the policy. fT PS and enlightened citizens contibuté making process as unofficial ns. Ing pro official actor . 52Chapter 2 Public Policy Processes Challenges in Policy Formulation Policy formulation isa key stage of policy-making process and one in which policy-makers may find their greatest opportunity to affect decision-making. However, policy-makers also face a number of challenges in policy formulation, These can be categorized as political, technical And institutional challenges. As far as political challenges are concerned, policy-makers do hot always find a political environment conducive to systematic policy formulation. Often government officials at the top do not know exactly what they want and will only form ideas in a general way, Even when political masters know which problems they want to address and express their views transparently, the public may not be supportive of the possible solutions. For example, people dislike traffic congestion in urban areas, but they dislike many solutions, like the expansion of public transport, because it is inconvenient, pricing of road use (such as additional charges for licensing, fuel, peak hour road use or parking), because it is both expensive and inconvenient. To complicate the situation, local residents want to continue to use personal cars, while wanting controls against non-resident traffic. This potential public opposition to possible measures to ease traffic congestion is distinct from the opposition of business departments of the government itself. The government agency in charge of business development, for example, may actually want more cars coming in order to enhance patronage of local business by well-heeled suburban consumers. In contrast, an environmental agency concerned about the pollution caused by vehicular traffic would be likely to advocate just the opposite.* All these contradictory demands and expectations make the task of policy formulation a challenging task. Sometimes, technical aspects of issues become barriers in policy formulation. The problem starts with understanding the cause of the problem. In the absence of clarity about the source of the problem, policy-makers cannot identify the objectives to pursue, where to look for alternatives or what criteria to use to shift or sort policy options. For example, the problem of global warming cannot be solved in the near future because there is no known solution to carbon and other greenhouse gas emissions that can be deployed without causing large- scale economic and social disruptions in the short term.* Such technical issues may become challenging to the policy-makers. Policy formulation is also disrupted by institutional challenges. Citizens’ rights as per the provisions of the constitution form a significant constraint that can limit the options available to policy-makers. The existence of two or more levels of government in a federal nation, like India, imposes such constraints, because many national policies require intergovernmental agreements, which sometimes becomes impossible due to conflicting interests of two states. The bureaucratic rules and procedures also pose challenges to policy formulation. While procedures are important for ensuring uniformity and accountability, they also become a barrier in smooth and innovative policy-making. In order to improve public policy formulation, policy-makers need to adopt some strategies, like proper understanding of the source of the problem, clarity of policy objectives, anticipating changes and building political support, formulating policies with implementation in mind, exploring innovative policy solutions, promoting research and engaging trained and experienced policy analysts. By employing these strategies policy-makers can remove the barriers in policy-making and improve the policy-formulation process. = Pa M, Ramesh, Michael Howlett and Scott Fritzen, The Public Policy Primer (London: Routledge, 2010), “Wu, Ramesh, Howlett and Fritzen, The Public Policy Primer, 37. 53Pubic Policy | tio! Public Policy implement? san ter Une 197%, poticy anahet ere x the pou’ considered a8 af merecrnatc OxteTN ned! well rad NOt PET apy, ectue ior found that many P he sch as ears implementation ag rocess. By the mid-197 'y, ne apparent that poli y, nt griculture had not a ysis began to focus oe . my to po making Pp Aas it becan on c atl and 4 and pv iblic anal jrmulated policies into precee utting f¢ ack of pultill reality. It is the “follow srt i ti Jementation is the Dans n met oe canictous cOnversIon of at , rocess of translating ‘of the public policy-making v ces eveas Wo a Pgs and wenknese ce. Policy IMP aye work ha Inadone in this field tll 1973 My ehis infant "area of study as Implementation’. While \ : f ementation, Certain aSSUMPtion c elements that com " sts over the shave wide-spread acceptance: with sufficient resources assigned to carry out the implemen, ods into an operational fram ‘There must be an entity able to translate 8 a tion task 2. The implementing age0Y must be work 3. The entity assigned the ity accountable for its actions.” ents necessary for implem' points to the myriad of hur iplementing task must deliver on its assignment and | no way a barometer of entation is in t be overcome en route Jdentification of the compon ee es that mus! success, such awareness only to fulfiling a policy objective. The Implementation Process yntinuation of the political process which had actualy nnments which have formulated a parti ‘i which inherit the he following tation process involves the co reason why gover guthored the policy. This is the iy find it easier to implement it rather than the governments Jmplementation from the previous governments. Implementation process has t characteristics: 1, Implementation translates the policies into collecti i iaries am! ci tive action. It bri beneficiaries passive people angethes so that the implementation could be i ectively channelize® ‘on deals with the problem of control and accountability in administration discretion. Luther Gullick has La ierarchY 2. Implement 3. Implementation largely depends upon street-level that the actual discretion in administ i to ac vans touch the Pl istration is used at the very bottom of # 4. Policy implementation has no clear-c it Ie 7 eats rt scago, w: poner ™ ee Gall B. Ripley and Grace A. Franklin, Poic in, Policy Implementation and the Bureaucracy (Ch * Rant 1986), Second edition, 10-11 54Chapter 2 Public Policy the other episode of problem area, It is an ongoing process which never ends till the policy is withdrawn or funds end Implementation involves intergovernmental bargaining. Since every policy involves the cooperative efforts of several agencies, their mutual understanding and coopera- tion in the policy execution, coordination among themselves and allocation of grants together play a decisive role in getting the policy implemented. is evident from the features just discussed that the successful achievement of a policy’s goals pends on its proper implementation. It requires the establishment of an appropriate set of lactivities that will bring about the result intended by the choice made in the policy decision. Policy implementation is also seen as a form of network governance since it demands smooth dination among a wide range of actors. Who Implements Policy? The process of implementation affects and is affected by a multitude of actors who define problems and solutions in a given policy framework. Bureaucracy is the most significant player in implementing a public policy. Bureaucracy is mainly a policy-implementing organization. Many other actors like legislature, courts, pressure groups and community organizations help in the process. Role of Bureaucracy Policy implementation is the primary task of bureaucracy. The bureaucrats on the basis of their skills, experience and abilities are in a better position to implement public policy in the most effective manner. In the modern political system, public policy is implemented primarily by a complex system of administrative agencies. These agencies perform most of the day-to-day work of government and thus affect citizens directly in their actions. Administrative agencies often operate under broad and ambiguous statutory mandates that leave them with much discretion to decide what should or should not be done. Lack of time, interest, information and expertise on the part of politicians may also contribute to the delegation of authority to these agencies. Policy implementation is not an easy task. Without the cooperation of top administrators, little can be achieved. In policy implementation, administrators, especially senior executives, have an important role to play. First, they must clearly understand the nature and significance of policies which the political masters have set. They are responsible for advising in the formulation of policies designed to achieve goals and also mobilizing, organizing and managing the resources necessary to carry through these policies. Second, they should assist policy-makers to avoid ambiguities. They should advise them on the importance of adopting policies which can be implemented. Third, they should be able to translate the general policies and their objectives into operational targets. This function should also include the analysis of probable cost and benefit of each objective for achieving the operational targets. As far as possible, they should adopt a rational approach and use management techniques to implement policies. Finally, they should be able to pay special attention to the question of coordination of policies and policy instruments. They should analyze the policy in question in relation to other policies to see if any inconsistencies exist and examine whether it complements or supplements other Policies to produce better results.* For implementation to occur, Larry Gerston suggests that —— *Yehezkel Dror, Public Policy Making Reexamined (Bedfordshire: Leonard Hill Books, 1974), 12. 55tant el Public Potic jhe four impor elem, le Policy t operate with ors of players and ete reir worksorce MUSE TT mited Masks. County Giposal that aransation ability, reso cout their by Thee da ts oud allow bureallc a number of criticisms. Is said to yese elemen vebeen subjected c rarchies and rigid rule framewor, ty, Bureaucratic organizations have er nsiveness, Nee chifes, "when faced with os with excesses of ul PI igance. Kennel ie (government) responds, and the a." these maladies, it holds Imi the tive Sat ae tic agencies are the rom chronic problems, or even apathy: ONT extent, o usually includes a bureaucracy» Toa the directions of public policies. Role of Legislative Bodies Tite oe pais poly ta While administrative machinery is a Or Though the role of the legislative ,aette bodies are also involved in ae ri veaministrative organizations in several ways. It su i not very crucial, they may al It can lay down limits to administya, administrative action to examination and entice 7 d expenditure and holds the ex Giecrction and delegation. It authorizes taxation and eapers ion over the to account for its financial decisions. It may specify limi Ee eet budgetary funds. In India, the parliament, the Public Accounts C e, the Coramitey Public Undertakings, the Estimates Committee and other standing cota ite af Patlaney often attempt to influence the actions of administrative agencies that fall within their purviey, Parliamentary approval is required for many top-level administrative appointments, and this may be used to influence the implementation process.” Thus, legislative bodies affect implementation in a variety of ways. However, they play an indirect role in the policy implementation proces. Role of Judiciary Judiciary also plays an important role in policy implementation. Some laws are enforced primarily through judicial action. The courts affect administration through their interpretation of statutes and administrative rules and regulations and through their review of administrative decisions in cases brought before them. Courts can facilitate, hinder or largely nullify the implementation of particular policies through their decisions. Public policies are formulate! with a specific purpose intended to serve the society. However, some policies may prow contrary to the provisions of the constitution, thereby violating the fundamental rights of the Gitizens. Under such situations, it becomes necessary for the judiciary to intervene on bebal of the victims and redress their grievances. In this way, judiciary sets the things right and participates in the policy implementation process, ” executives and the ureaucae ele implementation Process, They try to influence both they , plement policies which serve their purpose. Sometil™ Prevent the implementation of a policy which goes contrary to thik ideology The civil society groups and non- ‘ : ‘governmental organizations (NGOs) als0 P!*Y, tal) - al Smong the oe acre ertaton. NGOs play an important role in Ene waren device for praeroot agensicn apmendiment Act, the panchayats have acted as an intea? agencies in implementing pubic policies, Hwa, stitute the role of the governiner among the people to such an extent that Policy i eae it can be said that they create aware a institutions and agencies. plementation becomes easy for gover™ *RK. Sapru, Public Policy, 155.Hurdles in Policy Implementation policy Implementation is not an easy task, Policy-makers often fail to prepare the ground gystematically for implementation, resulting in high-profile policy failure. The poor design of policies implies that policies may fail even if implemented as intended. Another, hurdle involves the lack of adequate bureaucratic and political support for implementation. Support for policiescan often stop at the rhetorical level, at the agency level or at the level of government that initiated them, Lower levels of government and grass-root actors, on whom the actual implementation success hinges, may discover that they have little understanding of, or stake in, the policies they are asked to execute, A range of capacity-related difficulties may have negative repercussions on implementation. Operational capacity is the bedrock of implementation. Many ambitious attempts at integrated planning stop at the level of on-paper plans. The multiple types of capacity necessary to implement these plans often goes ignored." The high degree of interdependence among stakeholders involved in the modern policy-making process increases the complexity and vulnerability of the implementation challenge for policy-makers. The following factors make this exercise more difficult: Poor policy design, Absence of adequate financial resources, Minimal bureaucratic cooperation in providing data to substantiate the findings, Lack of political support and political interference, Conflicting presentation of data by government agencies and pressure groups and ratio- nalization of their own findings, Lack of public involvement in policy implementation programmes, Lack of administrative will and motivation, Poor coordination and cooperation, Politicization of policies to please the strong groups in the electorate and Centralization of power and hierarchical bureaucratic structure. yeene Serene 1 For policy-makers, policy implementation is one of the most difficult aspects of the public policy process, and policy failure is one of the most frustrating parts of their jobs, because all policy-makers want their ideas to work. The success of any government and administration Gepends largely upon successful implementation of policies. Policy does not implement itself. It has to be translated into action. It requires strong determination, will and action. Policies must be proposed, structured, funded and directed so that the implementing bureaucracy has a clear framework for application. For policies to succeed, clear lines of transmission and jurisdiction must be drawn. Thus, policy-makers have to be precise, while bureaucratic discretionary authority must be constrained. In addition, implementation requires willing cooperation by relevant actors and institutions. Approaches to Policy Implementation ‘There are a number of approaches to understand the public policy implementation process. This section deals with these approaches. ‘a, Ramesh, Howlett and Fritzen, The Public Policy Primer, 76. S7Public Poticy Top-down Approach Top-dow, gone opm ahora jauutles policy design and implementation ina way that cg, LICY through erest level policy designers and traces the design and implementat y one can mane the lowest level implementers, The proponents of this approach 1" org the stature eran Policy implementation by looking at the goals and Strategies aqdl™ 1 tween the goon dats structured by the implementers of the policy. They focus on the policy. Tre nippy 4 policy’s drafters and the actual implementation and Outcome and Christopher eer OF this approach include Carl Van Horn, Donald Metes Pau st Sak pet ranvolves the development of a programme of control which minimizes ¢, © People to do wn et any type of deviations from the main goal. It believes in Mig in a system Ag nat they are asked to do and keeping Control over a sequence oft message at the’ = this model, there is an implementation chain that Starts with a jag Model includes the degen MPlementation as occurring in a chain. Commitmeng Poly sgnetss a heat ie desire of the implementers to carry out the goals of the top leve} nt those at the ‘street heage Commitment means that the lower level implementers, particu? and goals of the policy feast as, teachers, police officers or social workers, share the vahe With the goals seem otesiNErS." It stresses on control to encourage and compel compliane, ignoring boticeries the top. However, this approach is criticized for directing from the into aco m-level realities, being authoritarian, over-structured and neglecting to tak, ‘Ount the interactions of factors and levels in the interactions. Bottom-up Approach This approach is the outcome of the reaction to the overly structured top-down model; in Particular, to the dissatisfaction with its abil i section to the flaws of top-down policy design. It views implementation from the perspective of “street-level bureaucrats’. Richard Elmore, the chief proponent of this approach calls this ‘backward mapping’, in which the implementation process and the relevant relationships are mapped backwards, from the ultimate implementer to the topmost policy designers." Bortor: UP approach recognizes that goals are ambiguous rather than explicit and may conflict not only with other goals in the same policy area, but also with the norms and motivations of the street-level bureaucrats. It also refutes that there be a single defined policy in the statute or any other form. Rather, it believes that policy can be thought of as a set of laws, rules, practices and norms, such as energy policy, that shapes the ways in which government and interest groups address these problems. Thus, implementation can be viewed as a continuation of the contlict and compromises that occur throughout the policy process, not just before it begins and at the point of enactment. This makes for a more realistic depiction of the implementation proces. However, this approach is also criticized for overemphasizing the ability of the street-level bureaucrats to frustrate the goals of the top policy-makers. Policy-action Approach ’ i behavioural approach that views the process of implementation as a poli Buen qonanuie in which an interactive bargaining process takes place between those wh id, An Introduction to the Policy Process: Theories, Concepts and Models of Public Policy Makin’ Thomas A. Bin ti ! PHI Learning, 2011), Third edition, 265 : (New Delhi: PHI Learn lit ot Mapping: Implementation Research and Policy Decisions,” Poliea! Science Qos | 12 Richard Elmore, terly 94, 4 (Winter 1979): 601-16, 58