Stages of the Policy Process

Analysis

Aashutosh Aahire/PPP/3.1 for educational purposes only 1

Stages of the Policy Process
Agenda Setting/ Policy Policy Adoption Implementation Policy Evaluation
Policy Initiation Formulation
Attention of Development Building or Application of Involves
policymakers is
drawn to a problem of pertinent and developing the policy by examining the
that might require acceptable support for the consequences
government proposed getting a governments of policy
attention and then
policy initiation courses of specific bureaucratic actions
takes place by action for proposal machinery including
setting the agenda dealing with accepted such often with whether or not
from among the
problems that the problems that the policy citizen, state the policy has
receive the is legitimised and local been effective.
governments serious or authorised government
attention
corporation
Aashutosh Aahire/PPP/3.1 for educational purposes only 2
Agenda Setting/ Policy Initiation
• Policy initiation takes place in terms of agenda setting by identifying
certain problems and issues that engage the attention of government
usually because they are the subject of public debate or concern.
• A problem is seen as a situation that produces a human need, deprivation
dissatisfaction self-identified or identified by others for which relief is
sought.
• Pollutions, inflation, crime, unemployment, and poverty all are problems
because they produce sufficient anxiety and dissatisfaction to cause people
to seek relief.
• Agenda comprises of the list of subjects and problems to which government
and non-governmental actors are paying serious attention at any given point
of time, while agenda setting refers to the narrowing the set of issues that the
actors want to focus on and address.
• It is a process by which problems and alternative solutions gain or lose
public and elite attention.
Aashutosh Aahire/PPP/3.1 for educational purposes only 3
Contd.
• Of the thousands of problems and issues for which people seek
governmental action only a small number of them receive serious
attention.
• only those problems that receives serious attention from the
policymakers compose the policy agenda.
• agenda setting thus begins when decision makers first recognise a
problem, feel the need for government to address it, and start
searching for a solution.

Aashutosh Aahire/PPP/3.1 for educational purposes only 4

Types of Agenda
• Agendas can be highly general, or they can be highly specialised.
• According to Cobb and Elder agendas can be classified into 2 men
types such a systemic agenda and institutional agenda.
• the systemic agenda covers all issues that are generally recognised to
deserve public attention and are matters within the government’s
legitimate jurisdiction. an example of such a matter would be
education or health.
• the institutional agenda on the other hand involves all issues
explicitly up for active and serious consideration by the authoritative
decision makers for example actual legislative bills.
• the institutional agenda is narrower in scope than the systemic agenda.
Aashutosh Aahire/PPP/3.1 for educational purposes only 5
how does an issue gain access to the political
system
• the chances of an issue proceeding to the agenda depends on how it is
generally perceived within the political system.
• If an Issue is thought to be a conflict or a crisis or if an issue is
advanced by a visibly powerful interest group or of an issue is backed
by the bureaucracy, there is a good chance that the issue will move on
to the agenda so depending upon the power status and number of
people in the group the government may be compelled to put the
matter on the agenda.

Aashutosh Aahire/PPP/3.1 for educational purposes only 6

Actors
• Political leadership is another important factor in agenda setting for a variety of
reasons such as:
• a) its usefulness in winning votes for election
• b) wide citizen interest in the policy area officials
• c) concern for public interest and show on
• leaders may take a problem seriously publicise it, and proposed solutions.
• The individual ministers in particular and the cabinet in general are the main
agenda sectors in India starting from economic liberalisation, disinvestments to
environment regulation; all important national agendas are set by the cabinet
headed by the Prime Minister.
• the agenda setting process is complex and multifaceted in order to comprehend it
one must look not only at the dynamics of the process but also at the interactions
and rols of areas governmental and non-governmental participants.

Aashutosh Aahire/PPP/3.1 for educational purposes only 7

Framework for Agenda Setting, John
Kingdon
• First, he argues that agenda setting should be viewed as the garbage can that
consists of the coupling of streams of problems, politics, solutions, participants and
choice opportunities.
• Second policy ideas are recombined and incubated over the years in policy
communities of specialists and experts.
• Third ‘policy entereprenuers’ provide the linkage between ideas and decision
makers. Such individuals are advocates who are willing to spend their resources in
the promotion of an idea they might be elected officials, civil servants, lobbyists,
academics or journalists.
• Finally, there are structures of opportunity for ideas to become part of the agenda.
• Kingdon refers to such structures as ‘policy windows’ which
‘policy-entrepreneurs’ must take advantage of.
• In kingdon’s model policy windows open and close as a result of changes in the
problemAahire/PPP/3.1
Aashutosh and political streams. for educational purposes only 8
Policy Formulation
• At this stage a particular issue is developed to a firm policy proposal
through process of debate and discussion
• it involves the development of pertinent and acceptable proposed
course of action for dealing with public problems
• policy formulation does not necessarily result in the adoption of a law,
order, or rule of some sort.
• In sort the fact that a problem is on the policy agenda doesn't mean
that the government will act effectively to resolve it

Aashutosh Aahire/PPP/3.1 for educational purposes only 9

Contd.
• various sectors are involved in policy formulation including the
cabinet various departments and agencies of the executive branch,
legislators, political parties interest groups ETC.
• similarly at the state and local level of policy making legislators
executives agency staff and interest groups are involved
• the usual interest group administration and parliamentary committee
interaction occurs during this stage as compromises are reached about
how to address an issue.

Aashutosh Aahire/PPP/3.1 for educational purposes only 10

Contd.
• The cabinet headed by the Prime Minister is the major source of policy
proposals in Indian political system
• if he expand our focus to include the various departments and agencies then
clearly most policy originates in the executive branch
• career bureaucrats occupying higher positions in administration formulate
policy ranging from standard of nutrition to measure changes in the foreign
policy
• executive Commission committees and advisory groups are also sources of
executive policy formulation
• legislators and interest groups are probably the next most frequent sources
of policy formulation
• interest groups often formulate policy proposals and then get it formally
proposed by favourably inclined officials.
Aashutosh Aahire/PPP/3.1 for educational purposes only 11
Policy Adoption
• Successfully policy formulations must deal with the question of selecting
course of action that can actually be adopted.
• in other words policy proposals have to be so formulated that will be
acceptable not only to the people who make policy decisions but also to
most other actors
• does it so happens that in most cases decision makers are influenced by what
they need to win policy adoption
• certain provisions will be included and others dropped depending upon what
builds support for the proposed policy
• the more actors involved in the adoption process the more difficulties to get
an acceptable proposal
• the process of building support for adoption can be understood as policy
legitimation
Aashutosh Aahire/PPP/3.1 for educational purposes only 12
Contd.
• policy adoption is the act of choosing which policy alternative will be
finally chosen as the preferred course of action to meet the problem.
• However, policy adoption does not always entail the familiar pattern
of executive proposals, legislative proposals and presidential assent.
• adoption strategies and policy formulation differ depending on how
many branches of government are involved in the adopting process.

Aashutosh Aahire/PPP/3.1 for educational purposes only 13

Policy Implementation:
• Policy implementation comprises the actions through which policy is
put into effect sometime in ways that differ from the original
intentions of policymakers.
• implementation can therefore be defined as the process of directed
change that follows a policy adoption.
• the content and effect of the policy may be greatly changed during the
implementation stage
• the implementation or administrative stage of policy process is quite
important because without application of the policy has no effect and
the application of policy proposals sometime change the nature of
policy itself.
Aashutosh Aahire/PPP/3.1 for educational purposes only 14
Contd.
• In practice the policy decision that emerges from the formulation and
adoption stages set off a long and complex chain, i.e., the implementation
process where any multitude of things can go wrong, including for example
judicial constraints, abandonment by the public, and resistance by those who
must alter their patterns of behaviour so as to comply with the policy.
• moreover, there is a tendency for implementation to become largely
bureaucratic and rule laden
• Thus, it is not uncommon for the original policy to be distorted, for the
original goals to be forgotten, and for bureaucrats to substitute their own
objectives as they implement policies public.
• Thus, public policies often fail to have their intended effects due to the
dynamics of the implementation process.
Aashutosh Aahire/PPP/3.1 for educational purposes only 15
Dimensions:
• Majone and wildavsky argue that implementation should be seen as
evolution.
• Therefore, policies consists of a variety of goals ideals and depositions
each connected in some disarray.
• Others may see implementation as composite of statuary structures
problem tractability and non-stationary forces
• these authors argue that there are several categories of variables
embedded in the implementation process and these affect the
achievement of policy objectives
• variables include social, economic, and technological conditions and
the target groups that are involved.
Aashutosh Aahire/PPP/3.1 for educational purposes only 16
Contd.
• According to other group of theorist’s (March and Shapier) implementation
should be viewed as planning hierarchy and control.
• this requires that administrative structures must be hierarchically organised
to ensure the higher levels of administration can ensure effective
implementation by not allowing the actual day today administrators to
implement as they see fit, rather they must implement as they are told to.
• these necessitates organizational control which is accountable to the creators
of policy.
• another way to see implementation is as Eugene argues, the planning
playing out of many loosely interrelated games, in which all the players
have goals, strategies and the arena is uncertain and there for So is the
outcome.
• this perspective views implementation as political with a backdrop of
constant accommodation and bargaining.
Aashutosh Aahire/PPP/3.1 for educational purposes only 17
types of implementation
I) program implementation: which tries to eliminate or control the
problems and pitfalls that await implementation by thorough, explicit
program of implementation procedures.
• Programmed implementation places high value on clarity and rationality and
rates on the assumption that the problems that plague implementation are the
result of:
1) Ambiguities of policy goals,
2) involvement of an excessive number of factors,
3) overlapping jurisdictions of authorities,
4) miss perceived interests,
5) Conflicts.
Aashutosh Aahire/PPP/3.1 for educational purposes only 18
Contd.
II) Adaptive Implementation: which tries to improve the process by
allowing for adjustments to the original policy mandate as events
unfold.
• in contrast to programme implementation, clarity and specification are
seen as barriers to implementation, for they produce rigidity in the face
of shifting political realities.

Aashutosh Aahire/PPP/3.1 for educational purposes only 19

Contd.
• III) Premeditated non-implementation: i.e., behaviour deliberately
aimed at preventing implementation from occurring.
• such behaviour ensurers that the policy will never be more than
partially accomplished.
• usually because of multidimensional nature of the policy process,
implementation is a combination of the programmed and adoptive
types, though premeditated non-implementation often occurs because
policy goals and objectives are vague.

Aashutosh Aahire/PPP/3.1 for educational purposes only 20

Actors:
• As regards the question of who is responsible for implementation, one
should realise that it is not of the focus of policymakers, who are in
Realty only moderately interested in it.
• Bureaucracy is the major actor in implementation of public policy.
• But other actors such as legislature in the courts may also be involved
in the implementation process.
• Legislature affect implementation in a number of ways. In some cases,
it passes its specific detailed legislation, which sevearly limits the
amount of discretion administrators have available to them.

Aashutosh Aahire/PPP/3.1 for educational purposes only 21

Contd.
• the courts relationship with policy implementation is more direct than is the
legislative relationship.
• in many instances the very meaning of policy results from judicial
interpretation of rules or statutes.
• Reservation policy for the obc’s for instances has been substantially shaped
by judicial interpretation.
• pollution control through the introduction of the CNG in New Delhi and
environmental regulation, ETC. are some of the examples of judicial
administration of policy.
• however, the most important way in which courts affect implementation is
through interpretation of statutes and administrative rules and regulations.

Aashutosh Aahire/PPP/3.1 for educational purposes only 22

Contd.
• The major means of policy administration is of course the administrative
agency.
• most of the sectoral policies are administered by various units of
administrative agencies in respective line departments.
• administrative agencies, which are numerous, often act in situations where
they have a wide range of discretion in the elaboration of policy and its
implementation.
• for a number of reasons legislature often delegates great authority to an
agency, which in turn makes policy in the implementation process.
• it is thus so obvious that agencies, courts and the legislaturecan often alter
policy through its administration.
Aashutosh Aahire/PPP/3.1 for educational purposes only 23
Policy Evaluation:
• At this stage those who have made an implemented policy are those who are
interested or affected attempt to determine whether or not the policy has
worked
• does evaluators are concerned with appraising the content of policy and its
effects
• in other words policy evaluation is concerned with assessing what actually
happened as a result of the policy implementation
• it has question whether the purposes of the policy were meet and how
implementation might be improved
• in some cases evaluation might result in the policies being changed or even
abandoned.
Aashutosh Aahire/PPP/3.1 for educational purposes only 24
Mechanisms:
• The reasons why policy does not always do what it is supposed to do
are multiple such as:
• unclear goals, inability to see how to achieve those goals, adversarial
social conditions within the system and ambiguous criteria for success
what this dictate is that policies need to be examined to see how they
are working.
• it should be noted that evolution does not have to wait until an actual
policy has been implemented.
• it can occur throughout the policy process
• evaluation can be undertaken by a variety of governmental actors as
well as non-governmental actors including the media academics and
interest groups.
Aashutosh Aahire/PPP/3.1 for educational purposes only 25
Types
• Process Evaluation: looks at the extent to which a particular policy is
implemented according to its stated guidelines.
• this type acknowledge that a policy and its impact may be modified
elaborated upon or even negated during implementation.
• Impact Evaluation: is concerned with examining the extent to which
a policy causes a change in the intended direction.
• This requires the specification of operationally defined policy goals,
delineation of criteria of success, and measurement of progress to what
the stated goals.

Aashutosh Aahire/PPP/3.1 for educational purposes only 26

References:
• Anderson, James E. (2000). Public Policy-Making: An Introduction.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
• Birkland, Thomas A. (2001). An Introduction to the Policy Process:
Theories, Concepts and Models of Public Policy Making. New York:
• Dye, Thomas R. (1998). Understanding Public Policy. Upper Saddle
River, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc.
• Sapru R.K., and Y. Sapru (2019). Public Policy: Formulation,
Implementation And Evaluation. Sterling Publishers.

Aashutosh Aahire/PPP/3.1 for educational purposes only 27