THE POLICY MAKING

PROCESS
Introduction
Policies are made through an interactive
process where people exert control,
influence or power over each other. While
some scholars view the policy making
process as orderly, others posit a less
orderly process characterised by
bargaining, compromises and lobbying.
This view portrays the process as an
exercise of power; as infused with
politics; and as interactive and
iterative. According to one proponent
of this view, Charles Lindblom, the
policy process is inherently political,
iterative and interactive.
STAGES IN THE POLICY PROCESS

The policy process has several stages,

which are: the problem identification/
definition phase; agenda-setting phase;
policy formulation phase; policy adoption
phase; policy implementation phase; and
lastly, policy evaluation phase. These are
discussed in greater detail below.
(a) Problem Definition Stage
The policy process begins with
identification of the problem. The
identified problem has to be viewed as a
real problem. Problem definition entails
establishing the parameters or salient
features of the problem, that is, the
causes, symptoms, magnitude, effects and
relationships.
The issue paper instrument is usually used
to gather information about the problem.
Who are the actors at this stage? We have
multiple actors, e.g., those directly affected
by the problem; we have outsiders such as
universities, think tanks, interest groups,
NGOs, MPs, government officials, the
media, etc.
Problems: (i) multiple actors normally
create problems to do with disagreements
on salient features of a problem; (ii) multi-
faceted nature of public problems; (iii)
where outsiders define the problem there
is a possibility of distortion; (iv) differing
and conflicting interpretations.
(b) Agenda-Setting Stage

It refers to the process or stage by which

the problems are brought to the attention
of government. Problems have to be
brought to the attention of those with the
authority to decide and solve problems.
Agenda-setting is therefore a complex,
competitive and political process.
Many competing issues have to be brought
to the attention of government.
Governments are limited in terms of time
and resources. Accordingly, they are forced
to attend to few problems that are brought
to their attention. Those few demands that
policy makers feel compelled to act upon
constitute the policy agenda.
The policy agenda is either systemic or
institutional/governmental agenda. The
systemic agenda is the public or discussion
agenda. The institutional or governmental
agenda is the action agenda. To achieve
agenda status, public problems must be
converted into an issue.
An issue arises when there are
disagreements over the best solution to
the problem. Agenda-setting tactics: (a)
action by the affected people (b)
dramatizing the issue, e.g. by lobbying the
key relevant policy elites (c) seeking to
attract mass media coverage (d) to initiate
research by academics.
Some of the issues are self-triggering, e.g.,
crises, droughts, cyclones, accidents and
also the nature of the issue. Who are the
actors at this stage? They include the
media, academics, NGOs, individuals,
political candidates, office holders, MPs,
ministers and presidents.
(c) Policy Formulation Stage

It is concerned with developing acceptable

policy alternatives/solutions for dealing
with problems on the public agenda. The
formulation stage is essentially about
exploring various options available for
dealing with the problem. The range of
available options is reviewed and narrowed
down to those that policy makers accept.
The policy formulation stage therefore
entails redefining alternatives, accepting
and rejecting/eliminating some options.
Policy formulation occurs in government
bureaucracies, interests group
organisations, various think tanks, etc.
Who are the actors at this stage?
The president and the executive – these
are usually initiators of policy proposals. In
most cases, policies are developed by the
executive. Other actors include interest
groups, which usually formulate their own
policy proposals in liaison with relevant
members of parliament.
Interests groups also provide technical
knowledge to policy formulation; they
provide precise language to proposed
bills. Other actors also include
legislators, think tanks and
commissions.
(d) Policy Adoption Stage

It is the law making phase of the policy

making process; it is the decision making
phase; it is therefore the policy
legitimation phase. It involves deciding to
adopt, modify or reject a preferred policy
alternative. It may entail enactment of
legislation on an issue; an executive order
or presidential decree may be issued.
Who are the actors at this stage? They
include public officials, legislators,
executives, administrators, judges, and
members of the cabinet. Policy adoption is
the preserve of those with formal
authority to make decisions. It usually
takes place in the public legislative arena.
It translates policy decisions and
objectives into specific possible actions
and outcomes. It is undertaken within
a complex system of administrative
agencies in interaction with societal
groups.
(e) Policy Implementation Stage

Policy implementation is the responsibility

of a given ministry or department. Effective
policy implementation demands adequate
budgetary support; it demands
establishment of appropriate institutions
and institutional capacity within the
responsible ministry or department;
it also demands effective coordination
of the various institutions involved in
policy implementation. There also has
to be legal authority and adequate
time frame for implementation. Policy
implementation also demands clear
specification of goals.
Implied here is that policy implementation
has to be procedural, constitutional,
legitimate, politically accepted, etc. Who
are the actors at this stage? They include
administrative agencies, e.g., the
responsible ministry which has the legal
authority to implement the policy;
the legislature – which monitors
implementation, e.g. national budgets; the
courts – they enforce laws and policies,
e.g., matters relating to elections, law and
order; they interpret statutes and
administrative rules and regulations;
interest groups – participate through
providing advisory services.
Policy implementation is not as simple
as it sounds in theory because it is not
automatic; it is action-oriented. There
is a host of factors that interfere with
policy implementation. These can be
macro, meso or micro factors.
Problems: (i) resource constraints – policy
implementation demands budgetary
support; (ii) involvement of multiple actors
(ministries and departments) – this results
in coordination problems; (iii) attitudinal
problems, e.g., attitude of implementing
departments and officials;
(iv) social resistance, especially from those
that tend to lose from implementation,
e.g., through privatisation, indigenisation,
land reform, etc. (v) lack of clarity of goals;
(vi) poor policy design, e.g, where the
policy problem has been ill-defined. In such
cases there may be failure to anticipate or
predict dynamics, challenges or constraints
within the policy environment; (vii)
limited institutional capacity, e.g., lack
of expertise, technology, etc. (viii)
changes in the policy context, e.g.,
changes in social or economic
conditions.
(f) Policy Evaluation Stage

It is the final stage in the policy

process. However, evaluation as a
functional activity occurs throughout
the entire policy process, hence
formative and summative evaluations.
Evaluations are investigations,
assessments, appraisals of:
(i) organisational, operational and
managerial efficiency in the coordination
of programme implementation; (ii) policy
impact – outcomes, effects and
consequences (i.e. intended and
unintended). Evaluation of policy impact
directs attention to the real effects of a
policy on the public problem:
is the policy benefiting the target group?
Are there any visible changes as a result of
this policy? The problem, however, is that
government evaluators usually focus on
policy outputs rather than policy
outcomes; there is therefore need to be
clear on the distinction between policy
outputs and policy outcomes.
In evaluation of policy impacts, special
focus is on (i) the effects of the policy on
the policy problem and target groups; (ii)
third party effects of the policy, i.e., spill-
over effects or externalities of the policy,
both negative and positive; (iii) direct and
indirect costs and benefits.
Who are the actors at this stage? We have
administrative agencies, e.g., responsible
ministries which conduct internal
administrative evaluation; parliament,
comptroller and auditor-general (CAG),
presidential commissions, Land Audit
Committee. Evaluation is either internal or
external.
External actors could be members of
society, media, research institutes,
universities, etc. Problems: quantification
problems, i.e., problems of measuring the
social effects of government programmes;
lack of clarity of policy goals; causality
problems, i.e., establishing cause-effect
relationships; dearth of statistical infor;
methodological limitations, e.g.,
problems of randomising human
beings; official or institutional
resistance, e.g., government officials
may deny access to information.
- END -