Growth vs People-Centered Development Approaches

Cont…
– It is aware of risks of environmental damage from high rates
of growth and
– Accepts the need for some forms of sustainability, but believes
that technology and the use of market-based policy instruments
will advance sufficiently to keep pace with any potential long
term danger to the global environment and physical health of
the planet.

Cont
• In generally, this approach argues that economic growth will
lead to a reduction in national poverty levels and a reduction in
the development ‘gap’ between rich and poor nations.
• Unfortunately, these expectations have not been met. Growth
did not accelerate. It was much slower and more volatile.
• For example, the developing countries grew at around 3 percent
per annum in per capita terms between 1960 and 1980, the “bad
old days” of state intervention and import substitution, but their
growth rate fell to half that rate between 1980 and 2000,
following the reforms(neo-liberal market economy).

Cont…
– With increasing frequencies in financial crises, growth has been
more fitful/restless than before.
– This process of lower-quality growth was associated with
higher levels of unemployment, as well as greater insecurity of
employment, almost everywhere.
– Moreover, a substantial proportion of the workforce saw no
significant increase in real wages.

Cont…
• Available evidence suggests a divergence (difference) rather
than convergence (union/ meeting) in levels of income between
countries and between people.
• Economic inequalities increased in the last quarter of the 20th c
as the income gap between rich and poor countries, between the
rich and the poor in the world’s population, as well as between
rich and poor people within countries, has widened.
• Clearly, markets and globalization do not ensure prosperity for
everyone; in fact, they exclude a significant proportion of
countries and people. There is inclusion and growing wealth
(affluence) for a few. There is exclusion and persistent poverty
for the many. This emerging reality is morally unacceptable and
politically unsustainable.

People centered approach
• There are three fundamental points of departure from the
growth centered approach which deserve emphasis.
• First, it gives emphasis on the well-being of humankind which
is the essence of development. This is often forgotten in the
growth centered approach, where aggregate economic growth
figures or the pro-corporate concept of “economic freedom” get
more attention than the well-being of people. This approach
focuses, therefore, must be on people, ordinary people.
• Second, it is essential to make a clear distinction between means
and ends. Economic growth and economic efficiency are means.
Economic development and social progress are ends. Similarly,
trade is a means, while development is an end. All these are
often forgotten in growth centered approach.

Cont…
• Third, it must be recognized that economic growth is necessary
but not sufficient to bring about the eradication of poverty. It
cannot be enough to say that the outcomes of economic
policies, which ensure growth with efficiency, should be
moderated by social policies, say in the form of safety nets.
• Therefore, there is a clear need for integration of economic and
social policies rather than a separation of them.
• At the same time, it is important to create institutional
mechanisms that mediate (intervene) between economic growth
and social development.
• This approach believes that the time has come to explore
alternatives in development, where the focus is on people rather
than economies, and on ends rather than means.

Cont…
• It is an approach to international development that focuses on
improving local communities’ self-reliance, social justice and
participatory decision making.
• It recognizes that economic growth does not inherently
(essentially) contribute to human development and calls for
changes in social, political and environmental values and
practices.
• In the context of people centered approach, elements of
community participation include:
- Democratic process
- Government accountability
- Access to relevant information
- Gender equality

Cont…
• Democratic processes are essential to people-centered
development because they allow communities to create their
own development goals and influence the decisions that
determine their quality of life.
• Community participation and true democratic process demand
that people have the means to hold government officials and
public institutions accountable.
• It requires that governments act as enablers for the peoples’
agenda, creating policies that enhance citizen action.
• Communities must have access to relevant, reliable information
in order to make the best decisions for themselves and their
communities or to make rational decisions and protect their
interests.

Cont…
• True democratic processes can only be achieved when men and
women are represented equally. People-centered development
necessitates equality in the roles of men and women, a systemic
problem in many developing nations.
• Several reasons why women are essential to sustainable, people-
centered development:
1. the rate of return on female education investment could be higher
than that of any other investment,
2. the problems brought by poverty affect women more than other
groups,
3. as managers of natural resources, women are key contributors to
sustainability

Cont…
• In the context of people-centered development, Elements of
justice include:
1. Local ownership (communities have responsibility and control
over their resources in order to benefit themselves)
2. Sovereignty of the people (rejects the right of one person to self-
enrichment based on the appropriation/misuse/ of the resources
on which another person’s survival depends) and government
enablement (the role of government as an enabler for the
peoples’ agenda)
3. Employment and income generation (the benefits of economic
growth should increase employment and income).

Management of Development
• Management of development takes many forms at many
levels.
• At the International it is largely tied to the implementation of
aid policies.
• At the national level it may be seen broadly as the extension/
continuation of development administration (perhaps with
some injection/introduction of public sector reform).

• At lower levels development is promoted and managed
through specific projects or longer- term programmes both
by governments and various non-governmental agencies,
with a vast number of local community initiatives by a range
of civil society organizations.
• It is often at these micro, grassroots levels that effective
development is most readily achieved.

Development Policy:
• The obvious connection between development and policy is that
every kind of development policy is based on some theory of
development.
• This does not have to be a particular theoretical school, or even
carefully formulated and articulated theoretical position.

• It may be
– a general belief/principle or
– set of beliefs about what development is,
– what it should achieve, and how this can be achieved.
• The set of approaches Growth centered and People’s centered
development and the interactions between them are the bases
for the formulation of development policy.

The concept of Policy
• Policy denotes, among other elements, guidance for action. It may
take the form of:
 A declaration of goals;
 A declaration of course of action;
 A declaration of general purpose; and
 An authoritative decision.

Hogwood and Gunn specified ten uses of the term
‘policy’:
1. As a label for field of activity;
2. As an expression of desired state of affairs;
3. As specific proposals;
4. As decisions of government;
5. As formal authorization
6. As a prgramme;
7. As output;
8. As outcome;
9. As a theory or model;
10. As a process.

 As an expression of general purpose or desired state of affairs
For example,
1. to generate as many jobs as possible,
2.to promote democratization through decentralization,
3.to attack the roots of poverty

 As specific proposals/plan
o For example,
1. to limit agricultural landholdings to 10 hectares,
2. to devalue the currency by 10 percent,
3. to provide free primary education
 As Decisions of Government
o For example, policy decisions as announced in the
National Assembly or by Prime Minister.
 As Formal Authorization
o For example, Acts of Parliament or other
constitutional instruments or provisions

 As a program
o For example, as a defined and relatively specific
sphere of government activity such as land reform
program or a women’s health program
 As output
o For example, what is actually delivered such as the
amount of land redistributed in a reform program and
the number of tenants affected
 As outcome
o For example, what is actually achieved (desired
change) such as the effect on farmer income and
living standards, and of agricultural output of a land
reform program

 As Theory or Model
•For example, if you do X then Y will happen;
• if we increase incentives to manufacturers then industrial output
will grow;
• if more opportunities are provided in rural areas then migration
to cities will slow down
 As Process
 As a long-term matter starting with issues and moving though
objectives-setting,
 decision-making to implementation and evaluation

 Y.Dror, defines policies as “general directives on the main lines of
action to be followed”.
 Similarly Peter Self defines policies as “changing directives as to
how tasks should be interpreted and performed”.
 To Sir Geoffrey Vickers, policies are “decisions giving direction,
coherence and continuity to the courses of action for which the
decision- making body is responsible”.

 Carl Friedrich regards policy as “….a proposed course of action
of a person, group, or government within a given environment
providing obstacles and opportunities which the policy was
proposed to utilize and overcome in an effort to reach a goal or
realize an objective or a purpose”.
 James Anderson suggests that policy be regarded as “ a purposive
course of action followed by an actor or set of actors in dealing
with a problem or matter of concern”.

Taken as a whole,
 Policy may be defined as a purposive course of
action taken or adopted by those in power in
pursuit of certain goals or objectives.
 It should be added here that public policies are
the policies adopted and implemented by
government bodies and officials.

-The basic principles by which a government is guided or it is
a courses of action.
-The declared objectives that a government or parts seeks to
achieve and preserve in the interest of national community.
- a policy is deliberate system of principles to guide decisions
and achieve rational outcomes.
 There should be a reason why a policy exists. A policy is not
formulated unless it is thought to be necessary or to have a
benefit.
 In otherworld, the policy exists for a purpose and this may
be often expressed in the form an “underpinning principle
Example, the underpinning principle for a “Quality service
policy” might be to protect the brand of the organization

Policy- Making
 Policy- making does involve decision-making .
 Since decision- making often involves an identification of a
Problem, a careful analysis of possible alternatives and a
selection of one alternative for action.
34

• Generally decisions are taken by the administrators/development community
(a wide range of people and institutions that support the development process
in different ways). It includes, among others: Planners, development
economists, policy analysts', government and semi-government agencies,
research institutions, civil society including non-governmental
organizations…etc) in their day-to- day work within the existing framework
of policy.
• The Policy decisions ultimately provide direction to the courses of administrative
action.
These may include decisions
– To issue executive orders,
– To announce administrative rules, or
– to make important judicial interpretations of laws.

Policies and Goals
 Policies are distinct from goals and can be distinguished from the latter
as means from ends.
 By goals or objectives one means towards to the ends .
 It is reasonable to expect that a policy indicates the direction
towards which action is sought/ required.
36

• Policies involve a deliberate choice of actions designed to attain
goals and objectives.
• The actions can take the form of directives to do or refrain(avoid
doing) from certain actions.
• Public Policy is about means and ends, which have to have a
relationship to each other.
• To say that policy- making involves a choice of goals or objectives
is to argue that it deals with values.

• Policies as well as values are chosen under the influence of values.
• Decision makers often act on the basis of their beliefs or
perceptions of the public interest concerning what is a proper or
morally correct policy.
– Thus goals and objectives depend on the values of the policy-
makers. This could be explained in the following manner:
38

Value
•values are internal perception on the desirability
and priority of one's actions and choices.
•Values are expressions of or beliefs in, the worth of
objects, qualities or behaviors. They are typically
expressed in terms of goodness or desirability or
conversely, in terms of badness or avoidance.
•They often invoke feelings, define or direct us to
goal.
39

Example of Policy
• Child protection policy
• Underpinning principle: Increase the
acceptability of the sport(and organization)by
the community.
 following on from the underpinning principle,
a policy also have goals. These goals describe
the range of desired outcomes or what is to be
achieved by implementing the policy.

Example of Goals
• For example, a deriving policy might have the
following goals.
• Goal 1: minimize the risk of injury and damage
• Goal 2. maintenance of good driving record.
Policy objective
• There is always confusion about the different
between goals and objective but they are not
the same.
• Measurability is always considered to be an
important principle in setting objectives.

Cont…
Example, No accidents, self-caused or otherwise
for goal 1. above

Policy Analysis and Policy Advocacy
A distinction may be drawn between Policy Analysis
and Policy Advocacy.
Policy Analysis: aimed at finding out the impact of policy.
It is a technique to measure organizational effectiveness through an
examination and evaluation of the effect of a program.

Cont….
“ Policy Analysis” is a systematic and data-based
alternative to insightful judgments about the effects
of policy or policy options. It is used:
a) for problem assessment and monitoring;
b) as a ‘before the fact’ decision tool; and
c) for evaluation.

Policy Advocacy: is concerned with what governments ought to do, or
bringing about changes in what they do through
– Discussion
– Persuasion
– Organization and
– Activism.
• On the other hand, Policy Analysis is concerned with examination of
the impact of policy using the tools of systematic inquiry.
45

The policy Analysis has three basic concerns
1. Its primary concern is the “explanation” of policy rather than the
“prescription”.
2. It involves a rigorous search for the causes and consequences of
public policies through the use of tools of systematic enquiry.
3. It involves an effort to develop and test general propositions about
the causes and consequences of public policies.
• Thus Policy Analysis can be both scientific as well as relevant to
the problems of society.
• The role of Policy Analysis is not to replace but to Supplement
political Advocacy.
46

Policy Analysis and Policy Management
 The distinction between Policy Analysis and Policy Management
needs to be highlighted, though in practice these two related processes
overlap to some extent.
 According to Dror, ‘Policy Analysis’ deals with the substantive
examination of policy issues and the identification of preferable
alternatives, in part with the help of systematic approaches and explicit
methods.
47

• ‘Policy Management’ deals with the management of policy-
making and policy-preparation process, to assure that it
produces high quality policies.
• The interdependence of policy analysis and policy management
can be seen in the necessity of assuring, with the help of appropriate
policy management, that adequate policy analysis is undertaken as
part of crisis management systems and reinforcing innovativeness.

• Policy Analysis covers several methods and concepts, some of which
are quantitative in character, including methods like
– social experimentation,
– Non- experimentation
• Despite such distinctions between policy analysis and policy
management, both are interrelated aspects of policy- making and
cover a major part of the tasks of senior administrators/ development
practitioners..
• Therefore, it is essential that these two processes should be treated
jointly.
49

Components of a Policy:
1. Purposive and deliberatively formulated.
– Policy must have a purpose or a goal.
– it does not emerge at random or by chance.
– Once the goal is decided, the policy is devised in such a way that it
determines the course of action needed to achieve that goal.
2. A policy is well thought- out and is not a series of isolated decisions.
3. A policy is what actually done and not ,what is intended or desired.
4. Policy also delineates a time frame in which its goals have to be
achieved.
5. Policy follows a defined course of action in a sequential order:
identification, formulation, implementation, monitoring and
evaluation

53
Policy Types
 Some Social scientists and scholars have attempted to discuss the
typologies of Policy issues.
 These facilitates the comparison between issues and Policies.
Lowi, for example,
 Suggests a Classification of Policy Issues in terms of being:
 Distributive, Regulatory, Redistributive; and Constituent
Policy Issues.
 Distributive Policy Issues: Policy issues which are concerned with
the distribution of new resources.
- Meant for specific segments of the society.
- It can be in the area of grant of subsidies, loans, provision of
education, welfare or health services or other public assistance
schemes.
– Programme such as Adult Education, Food security, Social
insurance, Scholarships to students from the disadvantaged social
backgrounds, Assistance to aged, Physically challenged persons,
etc.

• Redistributive Policy Issues: are those which are concerned with
changing the distribution of existing resources.
– Concerned with the rearrangement of policies, which are
concerned with bringing about basic socio- economic changes.
– Certain public goods and welfare services are disproportionately
divided among certain segments of the society, these goods and
services are streamlined through redistributive policies.
– Income tax policies usually carry elements of redistribution of
incomes.

• Regulative Policy Issues: are those which are concerned with
regulation and control of activities.
– They deal with regulation of trade, business, safety measures,
public utilities, etc.
– this type of regulation is done by Independent organizations
that work on behalf of the government.
– regulatory agencies intended to protect standards of the
respective professions.
– The policies made by the government, pertaining to the relevant
services, and organizations rendering these services are known as
regulatory policies.
• Commercial Bank of Ethiopia, Telecom regulatory Authority
of Ethiopia

56
 Constituent Policy Issues: are those which are concerned with the
setting –up (or) reorganization of institutions.
 Each of these Policy issues forms a different power arena.
 However it may be mentioned here that LOWI’s view of Politics as a
function of policies has been criticized as
 Over- Simplistic,
 Methodologically suspect, and
 Testability

58
 These may created by such means and devices as,
a) Manufacture by a contending party who perceive unfairness (or) bias
in the distribution of positions (or) resources
b) Manufacture of an issue for Personal or Group gain; and
c) Unanticipated human events,
 Natural Disasters,
 International Conflict
 War
 Technological Changes
Such issues then constitute the agenda for Policy- making are known as
Conflict Policy issues.

59
 Bargaining Policy Issues:
 Hogwood and Wilson use the criteria of costs and benefits from the
point of view of the possibilities of different outcomes,
 Forms of bargaining and conflict and a range of alternatives.
 There are redistribution or cuts issues which involve bargaining
over who gets what, who gets more, and who gets less.
For Wilson
 Criteria of costs and benefits may be concentrated (or) dispersed.
 An Issue , which may have very concentrated benefits to a small
section of society but whose costs are widely dispersed, is of a
different kind to one that may be for, “the greatest happiness of the
greatest number”.

Stakeholder’s Participation in
Policy Process

• Stakeholder Analysis is a vital tool for identifying those people,
groups and organizations that have significant and legitimate interests
in specific issues.
• Clear understanding of the potential roles and contributions of many
different stakeholders is a fundamental prerequisite for a successful
policy process and stakeholder analysis is a basic tool for achieving
this understanding.

• Stakeholders are those:
– Affected by the issue or those whose activities strongly affect the
issue;
– Possessing information, resources and expertise needed for
strategy formulation and implementation, and
– Controlling relevant implementation, instruments.

• To ensure balanced representation, the analysis should examine and
identify stakeholders across a number of different dimensions.
• For example, the analysis should separately identify relevant groups
and interests within the public sector, within the private sector, and
within social and community sectors.
• In addition, the analysis can seek out potential stakeholders to ensure
proper representation in relation to gender, ethnicity, poverty, or
other locally relevant criterion.

• Cutting across these categories, the analysis can also look at
stakeholders in terms of their information, expertise and resources
applicable to use.
• The primary purpose of a stakeholder’s analysis to ensure inclusion
of all relevant stakeholders, reaffirming/ confirming rights of people
to know, participate and benefit from development decisions.
• A comprehensive long listing of stakeholders is the starting point for
a stakeholder mapping and analysis.

Stakeholders participation in the policy process
1. The political / power elites directly engaged in governing;
2. Interest groups and societal actors inside and outside of public
institutions entering into competition to influence the contents of
policies;
3. Groups of citizens instructing representatives and legislators
through elections, referenda, or meetings to implement a specific
policy agenda, or pressurizing them in various other more
unconventional/ alternative ways to change government policies.
4. Legislature
5. Executive

6. Bureaucracy…reasons for their role…
1. The administrative role
2. Knowledge and Experience
3. Permanence position in the administrative organization in
comparison to the frequent rotation of a minister.
7. Electorate Power (Voters/ people entitled to vote/ body of voters/
voting public)
8. Media and its influences
9. Pressure Groups
10.Political parties
11. Civil Society Organizations

The implication of this process model is that policy making occurs in
identifiable stages.
1. Those processes are using presented as the identification of policy
problems through demands/stresses for government action.
• Identifying policy issues: public opinion
o Opinion- policy linkage
o Policy effects
o Media effects
o Opinion polls/votes
o Instability of opinion
o Wording of questions
o Communicating with policy makers
69

2. Agenda setting, or focusing the attention of the mass media and
public officials on specific public problems to decide what will be
decided.
3. The formulation of policy proposals through their initiation and
development by policy- planning organizations, interest groups,
government bureaucracies, and the Prime Minister and Parliament.
4. The legitimation of policies through political actions by parties,
interest groups, the Prime Minister and the Parliament.
5. The implementation of policies through organized bureaucracies,
public expenditures, and the activities of executive agencies.
6. The evaluation of policies by government agencies themselves,
outside consultants, the press, and the public.
70

Formulating Policy:
• Policy formulation is the development of policy alternatives for
dealing with problems on the public agenda.
• Policy formulations occur in
– government bureaucracies,
– interest group offices;
– legislative committee rooms;
– meetings of special commission,
– policy- planning organizations, otherwise known as think- tanks.
Think-Tanks: A committee of experts that undertakes research or
gives advice especially to government
71

• The details of policy proposals are usually formulated by staff
members rather than by their bosses,
– but staffs are guided by what they know their leaders want.
• Policy studies often focus on how policies are made rather than on
their content or their causes and consequences.
• The study of how policies are made generally considers a series of
activities, or processes, that occur within the political system
72

Policy Implementation
• In the final analysis, the success of Public Administration for
development can be measured only in relation to implementation of
policies.
• Policy implementation is of crucial importance to the success of
government.
73

• The implementation aspect is now becoming a concern and key
element in development strategy.
Meaning
• Policy implementation, as the process of putting policy into effect
by public and private individuals.
• Implementation can be seen essentially in terms of the nature
and degree of control exercised over the operations of a policy/
programme/ project.
Pressman and Wildavsky
initially defined implementation as, “a process of interaction
between the setting of goals and actions geared to achieve them”.
74

• They go on to say,
“ Implementation, then, is the ability to forge/creat subsequent
links in the casual chain so as to obtain the desired results.”
– It is important to look at implementation, not solely in terms of
putting policy into effect, but also in terms of observing what
actually happens.
Elements in Implementation
• Implementation as putting policy into action, is a difficult exercise.
• Example: “National Health Policy”- Health for All by 2020. in
Ethiopia.
– Requires human and financial resources, time and skills and the
creation of necessary health organizations.
75

• Barret and Fudge say that policy implementation is dependent on,
1. Knowing what you want to do;
2. The availability of the required resources
3. The ability to marshal/organize and control these resources to
achieve the desired end; and
4. If others are to carry out the tasks, communicating what is wanted
and controlling their performance.
• Putting policy into effect involves not the end of policy- making but
a continuation of policy- making by other means.
76

At the minimum implementation includes,
1) Adequate personnel and financial resources to implement the policy.
2) The Administrative capacity to achieve the desired policy goals; and
3) Political and Judicial support ( from the Legislature, Executive and
Judiciary wings of the government) for the successful
implementation of policy.
77

Implementers:
1. Bureaucracy & other administrative organizations
2. Legislative bodies- (not very crucial in implementation, but they
are influencing the Bureaucrats)
3. Judicial bodies- Most laws enforced through judicial actions.
4. Interest groups- Powerful interest groups affect the implementation
process.
5. Community Groups and Agencies….e.g…Co- operatives
6. Influence of political structures:
• Political parties / politicians and executive staff agencies
78

Policy Evaluation
• The final stage of the policy process in the sequential pattern of
activities, is the evaluation of policy.
• Evaluation is concerned with what happens, once a policy has been
put into effect.
• It is concerned with the worth or social utility of a policy or
programme.
• In the words of Wholey,
“Policy evaluation is the assessment of the overall effectiveness of a
national programme in meetings its objectives, or assessment of
the relative effectiveness of two or more programmes in meeting
the common objectives.”
79

Evaluating Agencies
• Evaluation by specialized Agencies
• Evaluation by Internal Units
• Evaluation by Legislative Committees
Problems in Policy Evaluation
1. Goal specification
2. Measurement
3. Targets
4. Efficiency and Effectiveness
5. Values and Evaluation
6. Information and Data
7. Methodological Problems
8. Problem of Resources
9. The optimising dilemma
10. The unforseen consequences dilemma
11. The Equity Dilemma
12. The partisan Dilemma

81
Forecasting
Needs,
Defining
Targets
Decision
Analysis
Opinion
Polls,
Surveys,
etc
Formulative
Evaluation
Summative
Evaluation
Political
Feasibility
Analysis
Defining
Nature, Size,
Distribution
of Problem
Policy Problem
Policy Design
Policy Legitimation
Implementation
Impact
Termination
Agenda Setting

• Here an attempt is made to discuss various approaches to studying
the way in which policy change takes place.
•As already highlighted in evaluating policies, evaluation involves
some kind of feedback into the policy process which results in
change in policy.
•Evaluation often acts as an engine of policy change.
• There are generally two aspects of analyzing change:
1.How does change in policy goals, purposes, priorities takes
place?
2.What is the relationship between changing goals, values, etc,. and
the organizational context of policy and the vice versa?
POLICY CHANGE AND COINTINUITY: INTRODUCTION

Three approaches have been suggested to examine these TWO
dimensions of policy change:
i.Policy Cycle Approaches
ii.Organizational Approaches
iii.Policy Change and Policy learning models.

• Under the policy cycle,
• May and Wildavsky (1978)
•Hogwood and Peters(1985)
•de Leon (1987) and
•Hogwood (1992)
-- examined the dimensions of policy change.
• Policy Change is the consequences of earlier policies which may
have changed the conditions.
POLICY CYCLE APPROACHES

• New Policy, therefore, frequently emerges from existing policy or
overlaps with on-going programmes.
Brain Hogwood and Guy Peters suggest a model of policy
change as given below:
Policy Innovation
Policy Succession
Policy Maintenance
Policy Termination

 When government involved in a problem or an area which is
‘New.’
 Given the fact that the modern policy space is very crowded,
‘new’ policy is likely to be framed within the context of existing
related policies.
Policy Succession
• involves the replacement of existing policies by other policies.
• The change does not involve any fundamental change in approach,
• But is continuous with existing policy
Policy Innovation

• is the adaptation of policies, or adjustments to keep the
policy ‘on track’.
Policy Termination
• is the reverse/flip side of innovation.
• In termination a policy or programme is abandoned,
• ‘wound down’, and public expenditure on that policy is cut.
• It is a dead policy, a policy that has ceased to be an ex-
policy.
• They argue that policy change will take place within the
context of policy succession and in a domain between
• innovation and maintenance, maintenance and termination
Policy Maintenance

Succession Innovation Maintenance Termination
Replacement New
of existing Policies
policies Types of Policy Types of Policy
growth: reduction:
• Linear - Programme -Externally generated
• Consolidation extension decline
• Splitting -Clientele -Dilution and
• Non- linear extension deterioration
- Programme -Removal of clientele
enhancement - Elimination of a
-Indexing programme element
- Externally - Elimination of a
generated programme
expansion
Figure: Hogwood and Peter’s Model for Policy Change

i. Linear: the replacement of existing policy by another policy.
ii. Consolidation: Consolidation of a number of policies into a
unified framework.
iii. Splitting: Splitting a policy into a number of separate /divide
component parts.
iv. Non- linear: a complex combination of other types of
succession.
Policy Succession gives rise to change in policy and may
end up closer to the policy innovation type.
To hogwood and Peters there are four types of Policy succession:

• Innovation involves the entry of government into an activity in
which it has not been previously involved.
• It is viewed as a process of change on a continuum with policy
maintenance.
• Policy maintenance is also related with to policy termination in
the context of cutbacks and reductions in scalar or resources.
• Cutbacks may be affected by taking groups of clientele out of a
policy programme or a particular part of a programme, may be a
cut.

• And this results in the termination of a policy and the introduction
of a new or modified policy.
•Termination of a policy is quite problematic.
Bardach mentions five conditions which make for
implementation of termination of a policy.
i. when new governments / administrations come to power.
ii.Delegitimation of the ideological matrix in which the policy is
embedded(rooted).

• The example he gives is of the way in which opinion turned
against what Goffman termed “total institutions”.
iii.Turbulence/instability/disorder or a confusing or uncontrolled
situation which weakens attachment to existing policies.
iv. Policies may have been designed to terminate a certain time.
v.Cushioning/mitigating the blow. Policy termination can be
designed so as to lessen/decrease the damage/ injuries to those
affected.
• termination of a policy results in the end of a service and the
abolition of the organization which was implementing the policy.
• But as it is the termination is not a frequent occurrence, and
• when it happens it is more likely to be the result of a political
reason or reform/change than of evaluation and rational
thinking.

Organizational Approaches
• Policy change may be the result of an organizational change and
vice- versa.
• Change in organisation is taking place with changes in the socio-
economic- political environment.
• There are few organizational approaches, which deal with change
in the policy- making.

• For contingency theorist, it is important to understand the way in
which organizations change to meet the growing demands of
different environments and technologies.
• This approach points to the importance of organization shaping
itself to fit its wider environment.
• How and Why Change comes about in the organizations:
• Strategic Choice Approach..Change in an organization is an
essential political process.
•Population Ecology Approach.. Power of the environment to
determine organizational Change.
Contingency Approach

• In recent years managerial approach to change in public sector
has come to occupy an important place in the debate of change.
•With this domain two central ideas tend to predominate:
1. Cultural Change- Changing the culture in the Public sector
so that it is more efficient, business like/professional and less
bureaucratic.
2. Leadership role- The managerial approach has laid
carful/neat stress on the role of leadership in bringing about
change in the organization.
Managerial Approach to change

 Sabatier and Jenkins- Smith suggest that the key to
understanding policy change is the dynamic/ self-motivated of
beliefs and policy learning.
 The learning models provide an integrative/combine framework
for viewing change in the policy process.
Two models may be identified here:
(i) Organizational models of policy learning,
(ii) Social learning models
Policy Learning Models

 The focus in the organizational model of policy learning is on the
way in which people and policy- makers in the organizational
context learn.
 The learning approach has been most developed by Sabatier and
Jenkins- Smith.
 In addition there are many others who talk about learning to the
policy process.
 To David Collingridge, learning is a trial and error process. He
advocates the use of trial and error method for improving the tasks
of management.
Organizational Models of Learning

The rules of trial and error method are:
i. Trials are kept to a minor nature, thus bring expensive even when
they fail
ii. Changes are marginal/minor in nature
iii.Trials have a rapid result.
iv.The energy of critical scrutiny is to be proportional to the cost of
mistakes.
v. Many diverse interest groups take part in the decision process;
vi. Political power is shared among these groups
vii. Choice is through compromise among these groups
viii. Actions are co-ordinate by mutual interaction rather than planned
from the center”.

This method does not offer a distinct normative framework for policy-
making.
In this method, concepts fail to provide a satisfactory account of what is
happening in the post- decisional phase of policy- making.
Social Learning Models
The social process approach is concerned with the way in which
learning takes place in society as whole, and how this learning can be
promoted.
Edgar Dunn called for the development of forms of organizations
which could facilitate evolutionary social experimentation through
which learning could be improved. The political implications of the
social process model are a radical departure from the organizational
models of learning.

Methods of Evaluation
• The various methods available for studying structures and changes of
Phenomena in societies may be utilized for Policy Evaluation also,
with some adjustments depending upon the purpose and approach.
• In Evaluative studies, quantitative analysis may be sought to be used
primarily for measuring effects and impacts.
• Quantitative methods in Policy Evaluation Mostly include
• Benefit- cost Analysis
• Cost effectiveness Analysis
• Experimental Design and
• Statistical Design

Benefit- Cost Analysis
• Stokey and Zeckhauser claim that benefit- cost analysis is the
principal analytical framework, which is used to evaluate expenditure
decisions.
• Basically benefit- cost analysis requires systematic enumeration of all
benefits and all costs, tangible and intangible, readily quantifiable or
difficult to measure, which will accrue (accumulate) if a particular
project is accepted.
• With all this information at hand, the analyst should able to subtract
the total cost of each alternative from the total sum of its benefits and
identify the net gain in each case.

• In most cases, the costs may be fairly realistically quantified.
• Rossi and Freeman (1993) mention five means of monetizing
benefits.
– Direct measurement
– Market Valuation
– Economic Estimation
– Hypothetical Questions (Asking target people, how they consider
basically non- monetary benefits to be worth in monetary terms)
In practice, except the first two, the rest are not free from
Subjectivity.

Cost- Effectiveness Analysis
• Cost- Effectiveness is considered to be simplified version of benefit-
cost analysis.
• It is a technique for evaluating various alternatives in terms of the
degree to which they efficiently lead to the fulfillment of stated
objectives.
• The alternative adjudged most preferable is the one which produces
maximum effectiveness for a given level of cost or the minimum cost
for a fixed level of effectiveness.
• This method is not only useful for comparing proposed alternative
policies, but also for evaluating the current and previous policies.
• In the opinion of Rossi and Freeman, the cost- effectiveness analysis
in its conventional form, is similar to the benefit- cost analysis except
that monetizing is required only of the costs, however, the benefits
being expressed in direct outcome units.

Experimental Method
• Experimental methods are not uncommon in social research.
• The basis of evaluation is an ‘ideal’ laboratory- like situation in which
some units in a population who receive some service under the policy
measures have been randomly selected, while others have not
received it.
• In evaluating the performance of such policies and Programs, samples
of different groups (who have received and who have not received)
are selected for comparative analysis.
• Relevant variables of the groups are then studied before and after, and
even during the program period in order to find out the difference of
impact.
• Subsequently, Statistical Methods are used for testing the data for
significance levels.
• One or more control groups can be selected to test the impact of a
policy.

Statistical Surveys
• Survey Method is quite common in social research.
• In policy evaluation sphere, surveys are quite useful.
• Information (data) is collected and analyzed by applying statistical
tools especially with the help of sampling techniques, questionnaires
and interviews supported by observation method and secondary data.
• Suitable hypotheses may be developed after identifying appropriate
variables.
• Groups from population are selected on the basis of certain
characteristics, such as, the level of education, income, size of
landholding, age, sex, social backgrounds, etc.
• Subsequently, changes are sought relating to program or policy
interventions and association between degree of success of the policy/
program and different characteristics of the samples are tested
statistically

Meaning and Issues of Policy Analysis
 Questions of policy ultimately rest on the application of knowledge
to political decisions.
 Such knowledge is generated both within and outside the government
agencies and other public affairs institutions.
 An understanding of the causes and consequences of policy decisions
permits us to apply the knowledge of social science to the solution of
practical problems.
 The acquisition and dissemination of information about public
policies have become a major theme in social sciences, especially in
the discipline of public administration.
 The use of such knowledge for making, managing and evaluating
public policy is generally termed as POLICY ANALYSIS.
 Policy Analysis is a technique to measure organizational
effectiveness through the examination and evaluation of the effect of
a programme. 108

 The Dictionary of Public Administration defines policy analysis as “a
systematic and data-based alternative to intuitive judgements about
the effects of policy or policy options.
 It is used
 For problem assessment and monitoring,
As a ‘before the fact’ decision tool, and
 For evaluation”
 Policy analysis encourages social scientists and policy- makers to
examine policy issues and decisions with scientific tools.
 Thomas Dye Labels Policy analysis as the “the thinking man’s
response” to demands.
109

He observes that specifically Policy Analysis involves:
1. A primary concern with explanation rather than prescription.
2. A rigorous search for the causes and consequences of Public
Policies.
3. An effort to develop and test general propositions about the causes
and consequences of public policy and to accumulate reliable
research findings of general relevance.
- Policy Analysis as a technique puts data to use in, or deciding about,
estimating and measuring the consequences of public policies.
110

 It provides maximum information with minimum cost about the
likely consequences of proposed policies, &the actual consequences
of the policies already adopted.
 To achieve these two purposes, various methods or approaches are
applied.
 Among the principal methodologies are:
1. Systems Analysis and Simulation;
2. Cost- Benefit Analysis;
3. New Approaches to Budgeting;
4. Policy Experimentation; and
5. Policy Evaluation
111

 Policy Analysis is thus an interdisciplinary drawing upon data from
other disciplines.
 It is essentially impact research.
 A number of trends have occurred in policy analysis research since
the early 1970s.
 Stuart S. Nagel has identified four key elements to it which have
been undergoing a change over the past 20 years. These are:
1. the goals with which policy analysis is concerned,
2. the means for achieving those goals,
3. the methods for determining the effects of alternative means on
goal- achievement, and
4. the profession of policy analysis which is applying these methods
in relating means to goals.
112

 Goals refer to the societal benefits minus societal costs that one is
seeking to achieve through public decisions.
 Goals= Societal Benefits- Societal costs
 There is a greater trend towards considering goals as given
hypotheses and then attempting to determine what policies will
maximize or optimize them.
 The crime reduction field provides a good example of the need
for an approach to this problem .
 On the means element, there is a growing need for means that are
politically and administratively feasible .
 The environment policy provides a good example of this
approach.
113

 There is also an increasing concern to draw upon the various social
sciences to suggest alternative policies or means.
 As regards the methods, they refer to the procedures whereby one
can determine the relations between alternative policies and given
goals.
 Policy analysis is developing increased precision in its methods, but
at the same time, it recognizes the fact that simple methods may be
all that is necessary for numerous policy problems.
 How to provide counsel to the poor in civil cases is a good
example to illustrate this point.
114

 .Finally on the element of the profession of policy analysis,
 there is a substantial growth in the policy analysis training
programmes, research centers, funding resources, scholarly
associations and other government institutions.
 Policy analysis is not a discipline like economics, sociology or
political science.
 It is thriving as a sub discipline of the various social sciences and
as an inter discipline depending on the existing field of economics,
political science, and other social and even natural sciences.
115

• Policy Analysts and Concerns:
• There are varieties of groups and people, academics, independent
research institutions, pressure and interest groups, political parties,
free- lance consultants) who are involved in policy analysis and are
concerned with:
i. problems and the relationship of policies to these problems
ii. the content of policies;
iii. what the policy- makers do;
iv. the likely future consequences of policy in terms of outputs and
outcomes.
116

• Some analysts,
– for example may be interested in the role of political parties in
shaping policy,
• others in
– the impact of bureaucracy on decision- making, the role of
professionals in policy delivery.
• Analysts may focus on
– different stages of the policy process, such as policy formulation,
implementation, or evaluation.
117

Putting Analysis to Work:
 Policy analysis has come to be recognized as an important technique
in assessing policy problems as well as policy impacts.
 It makes use of the required information in examining, deciding
about, and finally, measuring the consequences of public policies.
 Since it is concerned with organizational effectiveness, a framework
for policy analysis may be required.
 Such a policy analysis framework would identify both the kinds of
information used to define policy, and also the analytic processes.
118

119
Policy
Problem
Policy
Alternatives
Forecasting
Policy
Selection
Policy
Monitoring
Policy
Outcomes
Evaluation
Problem
Structuring
Policy Process

o The above figure indicates the basic linkages of a framework for the
systematic analysis of information and its use in a policy- related
context.
o The basis to the framework is a process of information for policy
analysis which is derived from system or programme performance in
terms of the interaction among:
“1. inputs that indicate needs and demands;
2. processes related to the provision of long- term care services;
3. outputs in terms of the use of services and costs of care; and
4. outcomes that identify the end results of certain courses of
action”.
120

o Based on the appraisal of systems performance using the above
linkages, issues for various goals can be identified.
o Once these issues are identified, information is analyzed in terms of
how it pertains to the larger issues (for example, health, illness and the
quality of life.)
o In this way, issues related to the needs and demands are defined in
terms of health and illness as well as other coexisting social problems.
– For example, in the context of NATIONAL HEALTH POLICY,
• the inputs (in term of needs and demands) comprise health,
illness and the quality of life, expressed in physical,
psychological, social, and environmental terms.
o Needs are the conditions that ask for action.
121

o Needs are among the most important predictors of utilization, and
• are mostly described in such terms of diagnosis,
• functional limitation,
• perceived illness,
• symptoms, or poor self- rated health status.
o On the other hand, demands are needed or not. Other inputs include
resources, such as
• manpower,
• facilities and equipments, and
• performance standards.
– On the processes linkage, it is concerned with the delivery of
services to meet the needs and demands of clients and
professionals.
o Services are described in such terms as their kinds, delivery,
management and controls of cost and quality.
122

o Other services include supports such as legal aid, income support,
consumer education, and professional development.
o The outputs of service- related programmes are described in terms of
the use of those services, the cost and the quality of care.
o Finally the outcomes are the responses to the services expressed in
terms of the levels of well- being and health, and client and
professional satisfaction that are attained as a result.
STAGES IN POLICY ANALYSIS:
The stages in policy analysis can be put as follows:
1. Identifying the Underlying Problem
2. Determining Alternatives for Policy Choice
3. Forecasting and Evaluating the Alternatives
4. Making a Choice
123

Identifying the Underlying Problem:
 For an analytical approach, the first step is to identify whether and
why there is a problem at all.
 Defining the problem involves moving from mundane (ordinary)
descriptions to a more abstract, conceptual plane.
 Here an attempt should be made to diagnose the form of market
failure that is confronted.
 For example, an environmentalist who is investigating alternative
pollution control measures for the river will find that the water is
being polluted by dumping of industrial wastes and untreated sewage
into the river.
 Having identified the context of the problem the next step is to
determine what objectives are to be achieved in confronting it.
124

 Too often, we lose sight of the rational objectives.
 Paying careful attention to the objectives is important.
 For example, the distribution of doctors is merely a means to the
end of improving people’s health.
Determining Alternatives for Policy Choice:
 The next step is to determine alternative courses of action.
 Government intervention can take any form. It is important to
determine which kind of intervention is most positive in any
particular situation.
In the case of the pollution of the river, consider the following
possibilities:
1. Abutters in some areas of the river might be granted rights by
the government to clean water. They would then have the right
to sue a polluter.
125

2. The government may require the concerned industrialists and cities
and town dwellers to stop dumping wastes and untreated sewage
into the river.
 It may otherwise impose restrictions on them on the amount of
dumping. In the latter case, the government may prescribe such
specifics as enforcement stringency (strictness) of standards.
3. The government may permit polluters (contaminator, dumper,
poisoner, emitter, discharger, fly-tipper ) to purchase rights to
discharge a certain amount of pollutants (impurity, toxin, poison,
waste product, chemical ) . Polluters may be required to pay effluent
charges and to install pollution- control devices.
4. The Regional state governments itself can directly undertake the work
of cleaning and removing the pollutants that other dump.
126

 These are some of the alternatives for pollution control.
 As difficulties are identified and additional information becomes
available, reinforcement of alternative courses of action will continue
throughout the analysis.
Determining alternatives for policy choice generally offers a chance for
creative thought as well as hard work.
 Often, the process is treated merely as a mechanical exercise, and
consequently, attractive policies are not paid adequate attention,
 it rarely proceeds in a straightforward fashion from the
identification of the problem to the selection of the preferred
action.
127

Forecasting and Evaluating the Alternatives :
 Having identified the underlying problem and having determined the
alternatives for policy choice,
 what are the consequences of each of the alternatives?
 For this, the policy analyst will turn to a relevant model for
forecasting consequences.
 In the case of the pollution control problem, the models needed would
be far more complex.
128

 Here, the analyst would have to build a model of how the quality of
water in the river responds to the various types of pollution and
weather conditions.
 Only then can he forecast the consequences, in terms of quality of
water and the alternative measures and degrees of pollution control.
 In such a case a model based on Computer Simulation is the most
appropriate.
 The analyst must also try to predict the effect on the individuals and
the industrialists affected by various control measures on water
quality.
129

 It is necessary here to predict all the effects of the proposed policies,
not just the economic effects desired by the decision- maker.
 If the consequences of an alternative course of action are uncertain,
and
 especially if the possible outcomes differ widely from one another,
the analyst may wish to develop a decision tree and evaluate the
probability of each outcome.
 For instance the river pollution case, it is difficult to predict with
complete accuracy either the weather or future developments in
pollution control measures, or the vagaries of the political executive.
130

Making a Choice:
 The last step in policy analysis relates to making the
preferred choice (course of action).
 The situation may be so simple for the policy- maker that
he can simply look at the consequences predicted for each
alternative and select the one that is best.
 In contrast, it may be so complex that he will have to think
of his preferences among the various possible outcomes,
 i.e., how the world will behave in response to the possible
choices.

 The policy process may be represented in the following
diagrammatic form as shown in Figure 1.
 It has been observed that countless policy studies have
led nowhere.
 Sometimes the fault is attributed to the public decision-
makers who do not take advantage of readily accessible
data.
 Too often, it is the producers of the analysis who are to
be blame. Most policy analyses are gathering dust
because they have not been properly understood.
 The analysis should be brought out in such a way that
the essential points can be easily grasped and
communicated.

• The choice among competing policy alternatives is
complex, for the future is always uncertain.
• But, by enhancing our capability to forecast the
consequences of the alternative courses of actions,
 and providing a framework for valuing those
consequences, the techniques of policy analysis lead us
to better decisions.

Limitations
As the future is always uncertain, it is questionable
whether policy analysis can find solutions to the problems
regarding the future of society.
 Poverty, Unemployment, inequality, and the
environmental pollution are some of the major problems in
the developing countries.
Of course, this is an excuse for failing to strive for a better
society.
It must be realized that solutions to these problems may
be difficult to find.
 There are several reasons for tempering our enthusiasm
for policy analysis.

 It has been observed that policy analyses are gathering dust
because they are either too long or too hard to understand.
 A policy analysis is of no use if it cannot be communicated to
others.
 Too often, the policy analysis deals with subjective topics and
must rely upon the interpretation of results.
 Professional researchers often interpret the results of their
analyses differently.
 Obviously, quite different policy recommendations can come
out from these alternative interpretations of the results of
research.

• Secondly, policy analysis cannot provide solutions to problems when
there is no general consensus on what the problems are.
• It is incapable of resolving societal value conflicts.
• At best, it can offer advice on how to accomplish a certain set of end
values.
• It cannot determine what those end values should be. Furthermore,
social science research cannot be value- free.
• It is also very difficult for the government to cure all or even most of
the maladies of society.
136

• The government is constrained by many forces, both from within and
outside- such forces, as
– population growth,
– patterns of family life,
– class structure,
– religious beliefs,
– diversity of cultures and languages,
– financial resources and so on,
• cannot be easily managed by the government.
• Some social ills are very complex.
137

• Then also there are the inherent limitations in the design of policy
analysis research.
• For example, it becomes difficult to conduct some forms of controlled
experiments on human beings.
• Further, it has been noted that the persons doing policy research are
too often programme administrators who might be interested in
providing the positive results of their programmes.
• It is desirable to separate research from policy implementation, but
this seems to be a difficult thing to do.
138

• Another limitation of policy analysis is the fact that society’s ills are
so complex that analysts are incapable of predicting the impact of
proposed policies.
• Social scientists largely fail to give proper advice to the policy-
makers owing to lack of knowledge about individual and group
behaviour.
• The fact that social scientists offer many contradictory
recommendations indicates the absence of reliable scientific
knowledge of social problems.
• Most of society’s ills are shaped by so many forces that a simple
explanation of them is hardly possible.
139

• Despite these limitations on policy analysis, it seems safe to say that
social scientists can at least attempt to measure the impact of present
and past policies and make this knowledge available to policy-
makers.
• Reason, knowledge and scientific analysis are always better than the
absence of any knowledge.
• Robert Lineberry notes that “Policy analysis rest on the assumption
that information is better than no questions asked, even when the
answers may not be definitive.”
140

• Policy analysis may not provide solutions to society’s ills but it is still
an appropriate tool in approaching policy questions.
• Policy analysis enables us to describe and explain the causes and
consequences of policy.
• Policy analysis is applied to inform the policy- maker about the likely
future consequences of choosing various alternatives.
141

Growth vs People-Centered Development Approaches

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Growth vs People-Centered Development Approaches

Similar to Growth vs People-Centered Development Approaches (20)

More from etebarkhmichale

More from etebarkhmichale (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Growth vs People-Centered Development Approaches

Editor's Notes