1. PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS
Prof.Dr.M.Irfan Islamy,MPA
Faculty of Administrative Science
BRAWIJAYA UNIVERSITY
2008

2. What is public policy ? J.E.Anderson , 1975 :
Public policy is a purposive course of action followed by govern-ment in dealing with some topic or mater of public concern
D.Easton , 1953 :
Public policy is the authoritative allocation of values for the whole society
T.R.Dye , 1978 :
Public policy is whatever govrnments choose to do or not to do
C.L.Chochran & E.F.Malone , 1995 :
Public policy consists of political decisions for implementing pro-grams to achieve societal goals

3. actor or group of actors concerning the selection of
William Jenkins’ ( 1978 )
Public policy “ as a set of interrelated decisions taken by a political
actor or group of actors concerning the selection of
goals and the means of achieving them within a
specified situation where those decisions should , in
principle, be within the power of those actors to achieve “

4. Public Policy Typology
C.L.Chochran & E..Malone , 1995 :
1.1 Patronage / Promotional Policies : as those gvernment actions that provide incentive for idividuals or corporations to undertake activities they would only reluctantly undertake without the promise of a reward. These can be classified into three types : subsidies ; contracts; and licences.
Regulatory Policies : as those which allow the government to exert control over the conduct of certain activites ( ‘negative forms of control’). They include : invironmental pollution; civil & criminal penalties; consumption of tobacco, alcohol; consumer protection ; employee health and safety.
Redistributive Policies : as those which control people by managing the economy as a whole. The techniques of control involve fiscal (tax) and monetary ( supply of money ) policies. They tend to beneft one group at the expense of oher groups through the reallocation of wealth.

5. To be continued
J.P.Lester & J.Stewart,Jr , ( Following T.J.Lowi & Others )
Liberal or Conservative Policies : Liberal policies are those in which the government is used extensively to bring about social change, usually in the direction ofensuring greater level of social equality. Conservative policies generally oppose the use of government to bring about social change but may approve government action to preserve the status quo or to promote favored interests. Such as : Liberals tend to favor a concentration of power in higher levels of government ; whereas Conser-vatives tend to favor decentralization of power and authority.
2.2 Substantive or Procedural Policies : Substantive policies are concerned with governmental actions to deal with substantive problems, such as highway construction; environmental protection; payment of welfare benefits. Procedural policies are those that relate to how something is going to be done or who is going to take action, such as the Administrative Procedures Act of 194 G.

6. To be continued
2.3 Material or Symbolic Policies : Material policies provide concrete re-sources or substantive power to their beneficiaries , or , impose real disadvantages on those adversely affected. For example , welfare pay-ments; housing subsidies; etc. Symbolic policies appeal more to cherished values than to tangibles benefits; such as national holidays that honor patriots, concerning the flag etc. 2.4 Collective or Private Goods Policies : Collective goods policies are those benefits that cannot be given to some but denied to others, such as national defense and public safety. Private goods policies are those goods that may be divided into units, and for which consumers can be charged , such as food, trash collection, home security etc.

7. Why government intervene ?
# When society desires health care and a clean environment for everyone, why does the free market not provide it ? # Do you believe that the free market has proven a superb device for eficient-ly producing goods and services ? # What do you say when efforts to relieve market imperfections by public policy will also be flawed ? # Do you agree when others argue that government may be the only actor that can improve market efficiency or alter economic and social costs, risks, and income distribution in a positive way ? D.L.Weimer & A.R.Vining , 1999 : “ .... Greater equity in the distributions of economic and political resources, should be viewed as only necessary conditions for appropriate government intervention “

8. Market and Government Failures ( D. K
Market and Government Failures ( D.K.Gupta , Analyzng Public Policy , 2001 )
Market Failure
Government Failure
Lack ofcompetition
Barriers to entry and exit
Restricted flow of information
Externalities and social cost
Rising service costs
Inability to define social welfare
Limits to democracy and the paradox of voting
Inability to define the marginal benefts and costs of public goods
Political constraints
Cultural constraints
Institutional constraints
Legal constraints
Knowledge constraints
Analytical constraints
Timing of policies

10. What public policy analysis is ?
Chochran & Malone , 1995:
Policy analysis describes investigations that produce accurate and useful information for decision makers
Dunn , :
Policy analysis is an applied social science discipline which uses multiple methods of inquiry and argument to produce and transform policy -relevant information that may be utilzed in political setting to resolve policy problems
Jenkins-Smith, :
Policy analysis is a set of techniques and criteria with which to evaluate public policy options and select among them .... to rationalize the development and implementation of public policy .... and as the means to greater efficiency and equity in allocation of public resources

12. CHARACTERISTICS OF PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS ( H.Lasswell , 1971 )
1. MULTI-METHODS 2. MULTI-DISCIPLINARY 3. PROBLEM-FOCUSED 4. CORCERNED TO MAP THE CONTEXTUALITY OF THE POLICY PROCESS, POLICY OPTION AND POLICY OUTCOMES 5. WHOSE GOALS IS TO INTEGRATE KNOWLEDGE INTO AN OVERARCHING DISCIPLINE TO ANALYSE PUBLIC CHOICES AND DECISION MAKING AND THEREBY CONTRIBUTE TO THE DEMOCRATIZATION OF SOCIETY

13. POLICY ANALYSIS ( W.PARSONS , 1997 )
META ANALYSIS : is concerned with understanding the idea that the analysis of public policy proceeds by employing metaphors ……. By describing something in terms of something else….. As devices to explore the ‘unknown’. ( models : ‘stagist’ ; ‘pluralist-elitist’; ‘neo –marxist’; ‘policy discourse’ )
MESO ANALYSIS : is a middle-range or bridging level of analysis which is focused on the linkage between the definition of problems, the setting of agendas and decision-making and implementation processes
DECISION ANALYSIS : analysis of decision-making process and analysis in and for decision-making : who gets what and how ? ( Elitism , Pluralism, Marxism, Corporatism, Professio-nalism, and Technocracy )
4. DELIVERY ANALYSIS : is the analysis of implementation, evaluation, change and impact

14. Two Main Concerns : Positive & Normative Analysis ( C. L. Cochran & E
Two Main Concerns : Positive & Normative Analysis ( C.L.Cochran & E.F.Malone , 1995 )
Positive Analysis
Normative Analysis
A concern with understanding how the policy process works
Strives to understand publc policy as it is
Endeavors to explain how various social and political forces would change policy
Tries to pursue truth through the process of tesing hypotheses by measuring them against the standard of real-world expe-riences
Usually deals with assertions of cause and effect :
“ If the Indonesian government raises interest rates , then consumers will borrow less “. This statement may be tested by setting-up an experiment within a state. The results may confirm or refute the statement .
Is directed toward studying what public policy ought to be to improve the general welfare
2. Deals with statement involving value judgments about what should be. For example : “ The cost of health care in Indonesia is too high”. This statement cannot be confirmed by referring to data. Whether the cost is too high or is appropriate is based on a given criterion. Its validity depends upon one’s values and ethical views. Individuals may agree on the facts of healthcare costs but disagree over their ethical judgments regarding the implications of “the cost of health care”.

15. Approaches to Policy Analysis ( J.P.Lester & J.Stewart ,Jr., 2000 )
Type of Approach
Primary Objective
Process approach
Substantive approach
Logical-positivist approach
Econometric approach
Phenomenological ( Postpositivist ) approach
Participatory approach
Normative approach
Ideological approach
Historical approach
To examine a part of the policy process
To examine a substantive area
To examine the causes and consequen-ces of policy using scientifc methods
To test economic theories
To analyze events through an intuitive process
To examine the role of multiple actors in policymaking
To prescribe policy to decisons makers or others
To analyze from a liberal or conservative point of view
To examine policy over time

16. Approaches to Policy Analysis ( M.J.Dubnick & B.A.Bardes , 1983 )
Type of Policy
Analyst
Public Policy
Problem
Motivation
Approach
Relevant
Training
Scientist
Theoretic
Search for theory, regularities, truth
Scientific methods, objectivity, pure analytic
Basic research metods, canons of social science research
Professional
Design
Improvement of policy and policy-making
Utilization of know-ledge , strategic
Strategic, cost-benefit analysis, queuing, simula-tion, decision ana-lysis
Political
Value maximization
Advocacy of policy positions
Rhetoric
Gathering useful evidence, effective presentation
Administrative
Application
Effective & Efficient policy implementa-tion
Strategic, Managerial
Strategic, same as for Professional
Personal
Contention
Concern for policy impacts on life
Mixed
Use of many mo-dels & techniques from other approa-ches ; less sophisticated

17. Models of Public Policy Analysis
K.E.Portney , 1987 :
1.1 The Policy Making Process : “ public policy not as a product of government
but as a political process “ . (1) Problem formation ;(2) Policy formulation ; (3)
Policy adoption ; (4) Policy implementation ; and (5) Policy evaluation .
1.2 The Causes and Consequences of Public Policies :” the focus is on either
intended or unintended impacts of governmental decisions or non-decisions “
( the results of government action or inaction ). (1) Public policy inputs -----
(2) Policy conversion process (3) Public Policy outputs (4) Public
policy outcomes (5) Public policy feedback ( back to no.1 )
Public Policy Prescription : “ attempts to use a variety of economic, mathe-
matical, computer science and operations research techniques to systemati-
cally help us answer the question : What policy should we pursue in the fu-
ture ? And often attempts to find ways of making policy a more rational
process, and mostly never deals with the issue directly but to prescribe ways
of improving the policymaking process.

18. D.J.Palumbo , 1987 :
(1) Agenda seting : defining nature, size, and distribution of problem
(2) Problem definition : forecasting needs, defining targets
(3) Policy design : decison analysis
(4) Policy legitimation : opinion polls, surveys etc.
(5) Implementation ( formative evaluation )
( ) Impact ( summative evaluation)
(7) Termination ( political feasibility analysis )
J.P.Lester & J.Stewart , 2000 :
(1) Agenda setting
(2) Policy formulation
(3) Policy implementation
(4) Policy evaluation
(5) Policy change and termination

19. B.W.Hogwood & L.A.Gun , 1984 :
(1) Deciding to decide ( issu search or agenda setting )
(2) Deciding how to decide ( or issue filtration )
(3) Issue definition
(4) Forecasting
(5) Setting objectives and priorities
( ) Options analysis
(7) Policy implementation, monitoring and control
(8) Evaluation and review
(9) Policy maintenance, succession, or termination
J.E.Anderson , 1975 :
(1) Problems and Agendas
(2) Policy Formulation
(3) Policy Adoption
(4) Policy Implementation
(5) Policy Evaluation

20. PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS
SCOPE OF ANALYSIS
POLICY
FORMULATION
POLICY
IMPLEMENTATION
POLICY
EVALUATION
( IMPACT )

21. THE POLICY CYCLE AND THE INFORMATION CYCLE
Problem Definition
Forecasting needs,
defining targets
Policy Design
Agenda
Setting
Defining nature
size, distributions
of problem
Decision
analysis
Political
feasibility analysis
Opinion polls,
surveys,
etc.
Termination
Policy
Legitimation
Formative
evaluation
Summative
evaluation
Impact
Implementation
Source : W.Persons, 1997, public policy

22. Agendas, Alternatives, & Public Policy (J. Kingdon)
“The agenda…is the list of subjects or problems to which government officials, and people outside of government closely associated with those officials, are paying some attention at any given time.”

23. PROBLEM STREAM Streams are coupled Window of Opportunity
POLICY STREAM
Alternatives, solutions, policy communities, feasibilities. Hidden cluster of participants dominate.
POLITICAL STREAM
National mood, public opinion, electoral politics, consensus building, Visible cluster of participants dominate.
PROBLEM STREAM
Indicators, events, definitions, values, collective action. Policy entrepreneurs aware of the problem.
Streams are coupled
Kingdon’s Agenda Setting Model
Window of Opportunity
(predictable, unpredictable)
CPM/HSS2/2008

24. Important Characteristics of Policy Problems ( W.N.Dunn , 1981 )
Interdependent : Policy problem in one area frequently affect policy problems in other areas. In reality policy problems are not independent entities; they are parts of whole systems of problems.
Subjective : The external conditions that give rise to a problem are selectively defined, classified, explained and evaluated. Although there is a sense in which problems are objective , but they are typically intrepreted in markedly different ways. Policy problems are mental artifacts that come about by transforming experience through human judgment.
Artificial : Policy problems are possible when human beings make judgments about desirability of altering some problematic situation. Policy problems are products of subjective human judgment… and also come to be accepted as legitimate definitions of objective social conditions… and are therefore socially constructed, maintained, ans changed.
Dynamic : There are many different solutions for a given problem as there are definitions of that problem. Problem and solutions are in constant flux, hence problems do not stay solved.

27. AGENDA SETTING PROCESS ( T.A.Birkland , 2006 )
AGENDA SETTING : - is the process by which problems and alternative solutions gain or lose public and elite attention ; - group competition to set the agenda is fierce because no society or poli- tical instituions have the capacity to address all possible alternatives to all possible problems that arise at any one time ; - group must therefore fight to earn their issues places among all the other issues sharing the limited space or to prepare for the time when a crisis makes their issue more likely to occupy a more prominent on the agenda. * An agenda is a collection of problems, understandings of causes, symbols, solutions, and other elements of public problems that come to the attention of members of the public and their governmental officials.

28. ISSUE ATTENTION CYCLES (IACs)
(Anthony Downs : 1972)
2 Alarmed discovery
Euphhoric enthusiasm
1 Pre - problem
3 Realizing cost of
significant progress
5 Post - problem
4 Gradual decline of
public interest

29. LEVELS OF THE AGENDA ( T.A.Birkland , 2006 )

30. The expansion and control of agendas
Initiator
Trigger
device
Issue
creation
Issues
characteristics
Symbol
Utilization
Mass
media
emphasis
Expansion
to larger
publics
Patterns
af access
Agenda
of decision
makers
Systemic agenda
Institutional
agenda
All issues commonly
perceived by members of
a political community as meriting
public attention of public authorities.
To get access to systemic agenda
an issue must have :
widespread attention/awarness
shared concern of a sizeable portion
of public
shared perception that it is a matter
of concern to a public authority
Explicitly up for active and
serious consideration by
decision makers.
May be an old item which is
up for regular review or is
of periodic concern. Or it may
be a ‘new’ item.
Or governmental/ formal *
Source : Adapted from Cobb and Elder (1972)

31. THE POLICY ARENA Policy Making Arena Negotiating
Administrative Process
1. Competence and
capacity
2. Decision - Action
(Values)
Political Process
1. Pressure
2. Supports
Policy Making Arena
Negotiating
(Actors) Bargaining (Groups)
Struggling
1. Review -
Investigation
2. Enactments
Legislative Process
Judicial Process
1. Restraint
2. Performance

33. POLICY IMPLEMENTATION THEORY ( T.A.Birkland, 2006 )

34. DELIVERY MIX (W. Parsons. 1995. P. 492) MARKET MIX HIERARCHY-
BUREAUCRACY
COMMUNITY-
NETWORK
GOVERNMENTAL MIX
SECTORAL MIX
ENFORCEMENT MIX
VALUE MIX

35. An Analytical Approach for Analyzing Implementation Processes ( T
An Analytical Approach for Analyzing Implementation Processes ( T.Bredgaard,L.Dalsgaard & F.Larsen , 2003 )

37. POLICY INSTRUMENTS

38. Direct and Indirect Impacts on Implementation
Communications
Bureaucratic
Structure
Resources
Dispositions
Implementation
Source : G.C. Edwards III, 1980, Implementating Public Policy, pp. 148
Communications
Transmission
Clarity
Consistency
Resources
Staff
Information
Authority
Facilities
Bureaucratic Structure
Standard Operating Procedures
Fragmentation
Dispositions
Effect of Dispositions
Staffing the Bureacracy
Incentives

39. A Spectrum of Policy Instruments
Information and Exhortation
Auction of Property Rights
Tax and User Charges
Subsidies
Voluntary Organizations
Family and Community
Private Markets
Public Enterprises
Direct Provision
Regulation
Level of State Involvement
Low
High
Voluntary
Instruments
Mixed
Instruments
Compulsory
Instruments

41. Metaphor of implementation failure
Machine
metaphor
Result of poor chain of
command - problems
with structure and roles
Domination
Metaphor
Result of labour/
management conflict
Psychic
Result of subconscious
forces - groupthink/
ego defences/repressed
sexual instincts
Organism
Result of ‘human
relations’ or the
‘environment’
‘implementation
failure’
Autopoietic
Result of a
‘self-referencing’
system
Brain
Result of poor
Information flows-or
‘learning/ problems
Culture
Result of the ‘culture’
of the organization
Power
Result of power in and
around the implementation
process

44. CATEGORY OF POLICY EVALUATION ( Howlett & Ramesh , 1995 )
ADMINISTRATIVE
JUDICIAL
POLITICAL
Evaluating Managerial Performance and Budgeting Systems
Judicial Review and
Administrative Discretion
Consultations with Policy Subsystems and
The Public

47. Types of Evaluations Activities and
Corresponding Evaluating Issues
( Rossi, Freeman & Wright – 1979 )

50. WHO ARE STAKEHOLDERS ?
A stakeholder is any person, group or institution that has an interest in a development activity, project or programme. This definition includes both intended beneficiaries and intermedi-ries, winners or losers, and those involved or excluded from decision-making process

51. Stakeholders can be devided into :
Definition
Primary Stakeholders
Those who are ultimately affected, ie who expect to benefit from or be adversely affected by the inter-vention. Those with high power and interests.
Secondary Stakeholders
Those with intermediary role. Those with high interest but low power , or high power but low interest.
KEY STAKEHOLDERS : are those who can significantly influence the project ; both primary and secondary stakeholders may be key stake-
holders

52. What is stakeholder analysis ?
# A stakeholder analysis is a technique you can use to identify and assess the importance of key people, groups of people, or institutions that may significantly influence the success of your activity , project or programme # A methodology used to facilitate institutional and policy reform processes by accounting for and often incorporating the needs of those who have a ‘stake’ or an interest in the reforms under consideration

53. Why use stakeholder analysis ?
Stakeholder analysis aims to :
Identify and define the characteristics of key stakeholders ;
Identify people, groups, and institutions that will influence your initiative ( either positively or negatively )
Assess the manner in which they might affect or be affected by the programme /
project outcome ;
Anticipate the kind of influence, positive or negative, yhese group will have on your initiative
Understand the relations between stakeholders, including an assessment of the
real or potentials conflicts of interest and expectation between stakeholders ;
Assess the capacity of different stakeholders to participate
Develop strategies to get the most effective support possible for your initiative and reduce any obstacles to successful implementation of your program

54. Stakeholder Analysis Matrix
STAKEHOLDER INTERESTS IN THE PROJECT
ASSESSMENT OF
IMPACT
POTENTIAL STRA-TEGIES FOR OBTAI-NING SUPPORT OR REDUCING OBSTA-CLES A
Benefits
- Very important
- Engage closely B
Change
Fair
Keep informed /
Keep satisfied C
Damage /
Conflits
Not very impor-
tant
Monitor ( mini-
mum effort )

70. TERIMAKASIH