Thomas Dye defined Public Policy as “Whatever the government chooses to do or not to do”.

Public
policy can be generally defined as a system of laws, regulatory measures, courses of action, and funding
priorities concerning a given topic promulgated by a governmental entity or its representatives. The
topic of public policy, which consists of various plans, program and schemes, emanates from the
Constitution and is very relevant to governance, as a collective decision-making process is key to solving
public problems. The origin of the discipline of public policy, which is one of the most prominent means
through which government maintains order and addresses the needs of its citizens according to the
constitution, is from the realization of the fact that running a state requires a well-needed direction and
a course of action.

Nature of Public Policy

From the perspectives of Public Policy, the activities of the government can be put into three categories:

 Activities that are attached to specific policies

 Activities that are general in nature
 Activities that are based on vague and ambiguous policies

A public policy may cover a major portion of the activities of the government, and maybe either narrow,
focused towards a specific activity or broad, focusing on a more general activity. Each level of
government may have its specific as well as general policies. Although every policy contains definite
goals or objectives, they might result in outcomes that are either anticipated or not.

Policymaking is closely related to decision-making but is not the same as the latter. Generally,
decisions are made by administrators within the existing framework of policy. According to Anderson,
“Policy decisions are made by public officials that authorize or give direction and content to public policy
actions”.

Process of Public Policy Making

Public Policies are crafted by Legislature, Executive and Judiciary and are evaluated by policy analysts,
experts, media and political leaders. It involves various processes, and can be summarized into the
following:

Problem identification – the first step is to identify the problem regarding which the government has to
intervene in the form of a public policy. This might be identified through the government via various
means, such as general identification, public protests, through the media etc.

Agenda Setting – This step helps policymakers decide the agenda of problems to be addressed. Types of
agendas include:
Systematic agendas – comprise of all issues that policymakers find worthy of attention.

Institutional agendas – analyze problems and their solutions within a time boundary

Discretionary agendas – address problems that are chosen by legislators and haven’t been included in
the former ones

Decision agendas – contain the finalized list of issues to be moved to the next phase of the policy-
making cycle.

Policy formulation– It involves the proposal of solutions to issues raised in the agenda. The process of
policy formulation involves policymakers discussing and suggesting various methods to correct the
issues raised by the agenda. Various methods and paths towards framing the most apt policy are
considered, and finally, the most effective policy is chosen, on the basis of two factors:

 The policy must be an effective, reliable and implementable way to solve issues
 The policy must be politically feasible

Policy adoption – This is the process through which the finalized policy is adopted by government
bodies for implementation. It must be adopted by relevant institutions of the government to be put into
effect.

Policy implementation – This step involves the practical implementation of the theoretical proposal of
the policy. The success of the implementation of a policy is evaluated according to:

 Whether it is communicated accurately from the creator of the policy to the bureaucratic
governing body
 Whether the policy is clear, concise, and easy to interpret for the public.
 Whether the resources used in the implementation integrate with the existing processes and
agencies, not causing them extensive disruption, competition or conflict.

Policy Evaluation – Policies may be evaluated and analyzed critically at various levels. Research and
extensive studies are also conducted to analyze the success of the implemented policies. Policy analysts,
politicians and the media play significant roles in evaluating the policies that are implemented. On
evaluation, policies may be found to be either successful or failures. A policy may have a poor outcome
due to:

 Error in identifying the problem

 Faults in formulating the policy
 Inaccurate implementation of the policy
Types of Public Policy

Substantive – policies that are concerned with the general welfare and development of the society

Regulatory – deals with the regulation of trade, business, safety measures etc.

Distributive – focuses on specific sectors of the society

Redistributive – concerned with the rearrangement of policies aimed at making socio-economic changes

Capitalisation– Under this type of policy, the Union government provides subsidies to different lower
levels of government and other business undertakings.

Model Public Policy -

1. INSTITUTIONAL MODEL - Focuses on the traditional organization of government. Describes
the duties and arrangements of bureaus and departments. Considers constitutional provisions,
administrative and common law, and judicial decisions. It focuses on formal arrangements such
as federalism executive reorganizations, presidential commission, etc. Traditionally political
science has studied government institutions--Congress, presidency, courts, political parties,
etc.--that authoritatively determine, implement, and enforce public policy. Strictly speaking, a
policy is not a public policy until it is adopted, implemented and enforced by some
governmental institution. Government lends legitimacy to policies, they are then legal;
Government extends policies universally to cover all people in society; Government
monopolizes the power to coerce obedience to policy, or to sanction violators.Traditional
studies using the institutional approach focused on institutional structures, organization, duties
and function, without investigating their impact on public policy.

2. ELITE-MASS MODEL A policy-making elite acts in an environment characterized by apathy

and information distortion, and governs a largely passive mass. Policy flows downward from the
elite to the mass. Society is divided into those who have power and those who do not. Elites
share values that differentiate them from the mass. The prevailing public policies reflect elite
values, which generally preserve the status quo. Elites have hither income, more education, and
higher status than the mass. Public policy may be viewed as the values and preferences of a
governing elite. The elites shape mass opinion more than vice versa. Public officials and
administrators merely carry out policies decided on by the elite, which flows 'down' to the
mass. It assumes that

1)society is divided into the powerful few and the powerless many; only the few allocate values
(the mass do not decide public policy).

2)The few are not typical of the mass; elites are drawn disproportionately from the upper
strata.

3)There must be slow and continuous movement of non⌐elites into elite positions, but only
after they accept elite values, in order to maintain stability and avoid revolution.

4) All elites agree on basic social system and preservation values, i.e., private property, limited
government, and individual liberty.

5)Changes in public policy will be incremental rather than revolutionary, reflecting changes in
elite values (not mass demands).

6)Active elites are subject to little influence from apathetic masses.

Implications are that the responsibility for the state of things rests with the elites, including
the welfare of the mass. The mass is apathetic and ill-informed; mass sentiments are
manipulated by the elite; the mass has only an indirect influence on decisions and policy. As
communication flows only downward, democratic popular elections are symbolic in that they
tie the mass to the system through a political party and occasional voting. Policies may change
incrementally but the elites are conservative and won't change the basic system. Only policy
alternatives that fall within the range of elite value consensus will be given serious
consideration. Competition centers around a narrow range of issues, and elites agree more
than they disagree; there is always agreement on constitutional government, democratic
procedures, majority rule, freedom of speech and of the press, freedom to form political parties
and run for office, equality of opportunity, private property, individual initiative and reward,
and the legitimacy of free enterprise and capitalism. The masses cannot be relied on to support
these values consistently, thus the elite must support them.

3. GROUP MODEL -Public policy results from a system of forces and pressures acting on and
reacting to one another. Usually focuses on the legislature, but the executive is also pressured
by interest groups. Agencies may be captured by the groups they are meant to regulate, and
administrators become increasingly unable to distinguish between policies that will benefit the
general public and policies that will benefit the groups being regulated. Interaction among
groups is the central fact of politics. Individuals with common interests band together to press
their demands (formalor informally) on government. Individuals are important in politics only
when they act as part of or on behalf of group interests. The group is the bridge between the
individual and the government.

The task of the political system is to

1) establish the rules of the game

2) arrange compromises and balance interests

3) enact compromises in public policy

4) enforce these compromises

It is also called equilibrium theory, as in physics. Influence is determined by numbers,

wealth, and organizational strength, leadership, access to decision makers and internal
cohesion. Policy makers respond to group pressure by bargaining, negotiating, and
compromising among competing demands. Executives, legislators, and agency heads all put
together coalitions from their consistencies to push programs through. Political parties are
coalitions of groups. The Democrats have traditionally been central city, labor,
ethnics/immigrants, the poor, Catholics, liberals, intellectuals, blacks, and Southern blue collar
workers. Republicans have been wealthy, rural, small town, whites, suburbanites, white collar
workers, conservatives, and middle class.
The entire system assumes:

1) a 'latent' group supports the rules of the game

2) there is overlapping group membership which keeps groups from moving too far out of the
political mainstream

3) there are checks and balances on groups competition

4. SYSTEMS MODEL - Relies on information theory concepts such as input, output, and
feedback. Sees the policy process as cyclical. Asks, "what are the significant variables and
patterns in the public policy-making system?" What goes on within the 'black box' of conversion
of demands into public policy? What are the inputs and outputs? Public policy is viewed as the
response of the political system to forces brought to bear on it from the outside environment.
The environment surrounds the political system. In this model, "environment" means physical:
naturalresources, climate, topography; demographic: population size, age, and distribution, and
location; political: ideology, culture, social structure, economy, and technology. Forces enter
the political system from the environment either as demands or as support. Demands are
brought to it by persons or groups in response to real or perceived environmental
conditions,for government action. Support is given wherever citizens obey laws, vote, pay
taxes, etc., and conform to public policies. The political system is a group of interrelated
structures and processes that can authoritative allocate resources for a society. The actors are
the legislature, the executive, the administrative agencies, the courts, interest groups, political
parties, and citizens.

Outputs are decisions and actions and public policy. The political system is an identifiable
system of institutions and processes that transform inputs into outputs for the whole society.
The elements with the system are interrelated and it can respond to forces in the environment,
and it seeks to preserve itself in balance with the environment. The system preserves itself by
producing reasonably satisfactory outputs (compromises are arranged, enacted and enforced).
It relies on deep rooted support for the system itself and its use, or threat of use, of force.

5. STREAMS AND WINDOWS MODEL- This model posits three streams which are always
simultaneously ongoing. When the three streams converge, a policy window opens, and a new
policy may emerge. The problem stream focuses the public's and policy-makers' attention on a
particular problem, defines the problem, and calls for a new policy approach (or else the
problem fades). Attention comes through monitoring data, the occurrence of focusing events,
and feedback on existing polices, though oversight studies os program evaluation.
Categorization of the problem is important in determining how the problem is approached
and/or resolved: values, comparisons, and categories.

The political stream is where the government agenda is formed: the list of issues or problems
to be resolved by government. This occurs as the result of the interaction of major forces such
as the national mood, organized interests, and dynamics of public administration (jurisdictional
disputes among agencies, the makeup of government personnel, etc>). The players are often
quite visible, as members of the administration, appointees and staff, Congress, medica,
interest groups, those associated with elections, parties and campaigns, and public opinion. A
consensus is achieved among those groups and a bandwagon effect or title effect occurs as
everyone wants to be in on the policy resolution and not excluded.

The policy stream is where alternatives are considered and decisions are made. Here the major
focus in intellectual and personal; a list of alternatives is generated from which policy makers
can select one. Policy entrepreneurs and other play a role, such as academics, researchers,
consultants, career public administrators, Congressional staffers, OMB staff, and interest
groups. Trial balloons are sent up to gauge the political feasibility of various alternatives, either
publicly or privately. They must be acceptable in terms of value constraints, technical
constraints, and budgetary constraints. Consensus is developed though rational argument and
persuasion (not bargaining). Tilt occurs when a plausible solution begins to emerge.

When these three streams converge, a policy window may open, because of a shift in public
opinion, a change in Congress, or a change in administration, or when a pressing problem
emerges. Any one stream may change on its own, but all three must converge for a policy
decision to emerge.

WHAT TYPES OF POLICIES MAY EMERGE?

 1. Incremental Policy Output. This model relies on the concepts of incremental decision-
making such as satisficing, organizational drift, bounded rationality, and limited cognition,
among others. Basically can be called "muddling through." It represents a conservative
tendency: new policies are only slightly different from old policies. Policy-makers are too short
on time, resources and brains to make totally new policies; past policies are accepted as having
some legitimacy. Existing policies have sunk costs which discourage innovation, incrementalism
is an easier approach than rationalism, and the policies are more politically expedient because
they don't necessitate any radical redistribution of values. This model tries to improve the
acceptability of public policy.

2. Rational Model. This model tries to understand all the alternatives, take into account all
their consequences, and select the best. It is concerned with the best way to organize
government in order to assure and undistorted flow of information, the accuracy of feedback,
and the weighing of values. Related to techniques such as PERT, CPM, OR, and linear
programming. This model tries to improve the content of public policy.

3. Public Sector Strategic Planning. An attempt to combine the incremental and rational
approaches to public policy-making. It is an attempt to reconcile the day-to-day demands with
long range strategies for the future. It doesn't see the organization as wholly determined by the
political environment, neither does it ignore risks. It takes an active stance (versus passive)
toward the future with an outward looking, aggressive focus sensitive to the political
environment. It tries to place the organization in a distinctive position vis-a-vis the political
environment. It concentrates on making decisions (unlike the rational model) but blends
rational analysis with economic and political analyses (unlike the incremental model). It is highly
participatory and tolerant of controversy, it concentrates on the fate of the whole organization;
the fate of subunits is secondary.