Course Unit: PUBLIC POLICY FORMULATION AND IMPLIMENTATION, INES Ruhengeri by Aime MUYOMBANO
INSTITUTE OF APPLIED SCIENCES
RUHENGERI (INES)
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND GOOD GOVERNANCE DEPARTMENT
Module Title:
PUBLIC POLICY FORMULATION AND IMPLIMENTATION
ACADEMIC LEVEL: IInd&IIIrd
. PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND
GOOD
GOVERNANCE
Lecturer: Aimé MUYOMBANO (PhD Scholar)
INES,
2016
Learning outcomes
Having
successfully completed the module, students should be able to demonstrate knowledge
and understanding the way to Introduce
Public policy formulation and
management, General Considerations of Public Policy Formulation and implementation at local,
National and International Level, Role and Responsibilities of Legislative and Executive
power; Logical framework of Public Policy Monitoring
Evaluation tools y and Public Government decision process; Political applied to
political phenomenaand
Public Policy Monitoring Evaluation tools
Communication/ICT/Numeracy/Analytic Techniques/Practical
Skills
Having
successfully completed, the module students should be able to demonstrate
knowledge and understanding of important of Public policy formulation and management, General Considerations of Public Policy Formulation and implementation at local,
National and International Level, Role and Responsibilities of Legislative and Executive
power; Logical framework of Public policy Public
Policy Monitoring Evaluation tools y and Public Government decision process;
Political applied to political phenomena and Public
Policy Monitoring Evaluation tools in general and particular
General
transferable skills; having successfully completed the module students should
be able to: Illustrate that he/she can use the gained competencies and skills
effectively
Evaluation:
a.
Assignment (Scenarios, Hard talk and
Simulation)
b.
CAT/PAT
c.
Final Examination
d.
Class attendance and participation
will be highly taken into consideration.
TOPIC I. PUBLIC
POLICYFORMULATION AND IMPLIMENTATION AT LOCAL, NATIONAL AND INTERNATION LEVEL
I.0 Introduction
Public
policies are as old as governments. Whatever be the form, oligarchy, monarchy,
aristocracy, tyranny, democracy etc., whenever and wherever governments have
existed, public policies have been formulated and implemented. To cope with the
varied problems and demands of the people the government has to make many
policies, these policies are called public policies.
This Topic
tries to explain the meaning and types of public policy, her relationship with
local, national and international politics. It will highlight the different
components of a policy and distinguish between policy, decision and goal. An
attempt will be made to bring out the relationship between politics and policy,
and importance and characteristics of public policy will also be discussed.
I.1.
Definition and impressions of Public Policy Formulation and implementation at
local, National and International Level
Public policy is the means by which a government maintains order or
addresses the needs of its citizens through actions defined by its
constitution. If this definition sounds vague or confusing, it's likely because
a public policy is generally not a tangible thing but rather is a term used to
describe a collection of laws, mandates, or regulations established through a
political process.
Public policy is the principled
guide to action taken by the administrative executive branches of the state with
regard to a class of issues in a manner consistent with lawand institutional
customs. The foundation of public policy is composed of
national constitutional laws and regulations.
Further substrates include both judicial interpretations
and regulations which
are generally authorized by legislation. Public policy is considered strong
when it solves problems efficiently and effectively, serves justice, supports
governmental institutions and policies, and encourages active citizenship.
As
definition said, Public policy affects each citizen in hundreds of ways, some
of them familiar and some unsuspected. Citizens directly confront public policy
when they are arrested for speeding, but they seldom remember that the advertising
on the television shows they watch is regulated by the Federal Communications
Commission and the Federal Trade Commission.
Relationship between Public
Policy and Politics
Before
discussing the meaning of public policy, it would be better if we are clear
about the relationship between public policy and politics. Policy making
process is a part of politics and political action.
According
to this model the remaining demands which have not been included in the
decisions and policies will again be fed back through the same process for the
purpose of its conversion into decisions. These two models establish clear the
relationship between politics and policies in a political system.
There
are various studies about public policy and many scholars have attempted to
define public policy from different angles. Before explaining the meaning of
public policy, let us first go through some of its definitions. Robert Eye
Stone terms public policy as "the relationship of government unit to its
environment.
The Separation of Policy and Politics
Political
leaders constantly struggle to reconcile policy and politics. That is, they
must somehow square what they want to do with what the political system will
allow them to do. What they think is desirable “on the merits” must be
reconciled with what they can get accepted by other politicians and then
implemented by administrators. Squaring that circle is what statecraft is all
about.
Economists
wielding new analytic tools believed that they could do better, and the national
planning offices hired them. Ever since, policy analysis rooted in economics
has become a common language for policy argument in Washington (Radin, 1997).
Programs to teach these skills arose at leading universities, and today the
faculties of those schools comprise much of the membership of the Association
for Public Policy Analysis and Management, the leading organization of policy
scholars.
As
they have developed, however, these programs seldom teach statecraft as
officeholders experience it, with policy and politics in constant tension.
Rather, research and teaching in the two subjects are largely separate. Policy
analysis, or the study of what government should do about public problems, is
done and taught mostly by economists; the subjects here include microeconomics
and statistics.
Studies
about politics are done and taught largely by political scientists; the
subjects here include the legislative process, implementation, and
administration. The first group focuses largely on policy, the second mostly on
politics, and neither says much about the other. Thus, ironically, economics
tells government what to do while ignoring it, while political science does
focus on government but will not tell it what to do.
Neither achieves that union of policy and
politics that Aristotle imagined. Each side makes assumptions that effectively
exclude the other subject. When discussing policy argument, economists often
make the “Model 1” assumption (Allison, 1971), the idea that government
consists of a single decision maker, thus eliminating politics as a constraint.
Economists,
after dominating the early curricula of the policy schools, came to accept the
need for more courses about politics and implementation, because these subjects
were so important in the real world.
From
these definitions, it is clear that public policies are governmental decisions,
and are actually the result of activities which the government undertakes in
pursuance of certain goals and objectives. It can also be said that public
policy formulation and implementation involves a well-planned pattern or course
of activity. It requires a thoroughly close knit relation and interaction
between the important governmental agencies viz., the political executive,
legislature, bureaucracy and judiciary.
The
following points will make the nature of public policy more clearly in your
minds:
Ø Public Policies are goal
oriented. Public policies are formulated and implemented in order to attain the
objectives which the government has in view for the ultimate benefit of the
masses in general. These policies clearly spell out the programmes of
government.
Ø Public policy is the
outcome of the government's collective actions. It means that it is a pattern
or course of activity or' the governmental officials and actors in a collective
sense than being terms Bd as their discrete and segregated decisions.
Ø Public policy is what the
government actually decides or chooses to do. It is the relationship of the
government units to the specific field of political environment in a given
administrative system. It can take a variety of forms like law, ordinances,
court decisions, executive orders, decisions etc.
Ø Public policy is positive
in the sense that it depicts the concern of the government 'and involves its
action to a particular problem on which the policy is made. It has the sanction
of law and authority behind it. Negatively, it involves a decision by the
governmental officials regarding not taking any action on a particular issue.
Policy and Goals
To
understand the meaning of policy in a better manner, it is very important to
make a distinction between policy and goals.
Goals
are what policies aim at or hope to achieve. A goal is a desired state of
affairs that a society or an organisation attempts to realize. Goals can be
understood in a variety of perspectives. These can be thought of as abstract
values that a society would like to acquire.
There
are also goals that are specific and concrete. Removal of poverty is a goal
that the government wants to pursue. Public policies are concerned with such
specific goals. They are the instruments which lead to the achievement of these
goals.
Characteristics of Public Policy
Making
The
meaning and nature of public policy will become clearer by throwing light on
different characteristics of public policy. Some of the major characteristics
of public policy making are:
Public
Policy Making is a Very Complex Process:Policy
making involves many components. Which are interconnected by communication and
feedback loops and which interact in different ways. Some parts of the process
are explicit and directly observable, but many others proceed through hidden
channels that the officials themselves are often only partly aware of.
It is a Dynamic Process: Policy making is a process
that is a continuing activity taking place within a structure; for sustainance,
it requires a continuing input of resources and motivation. It is a dynamic
process, which changes with time. the sequences of other.
Comprises Various
Components:
The complexity of public policy making as we know. is an important
characteristic of policy making. Public policy formulation foten involves a
great variety of substructures.
Policy Structure makes
Different Contributions:
This characteristic suggests that every substructure makes a different, and
sometimes unique
Decision-Making: Policy making is a species
of decision-making because it lets us use decision-making models for dealing
with policy making.
Lays down Major Guidelines: Public policy, in most
cases, lays down general - directives, rather than detailed instructions, on
the main lines of action to be followed. After main lines of action have been
decided on, detailed sub-policies that translate the general theory into more
concrete terms are usually needed to execute it.
Results in Action: Decision-making can result
in action. in changes in the decision-making itself, or both or neither. The
policies of most socially significant decision-making, such as most public
policy making are intended to result in action. Also policies directed at the
policy making apparatus itself such as efficiency drives in government are
action oriented.
Directed at the Future: Policy making is directed
at the future. Thls is one of its most important characteristics since it
introduces the ever-present elements of uncertainty and doubtful prediction
that establish the basic tone of nearly all policy making. Actual policy making
tends to formulate policies in vague and elastic terms; because the future is
so uncertain. It permits policy makers to adjust their policy according to
emerging facts and enables them to guard against unforeseen circumstances.
Mainly Formulated by Governmental
Organs:
Public policy is also directed. in part, at private persons and
non-governmental structures, as 'when it calls for a law prohibiting a certain
type of behaviour or appeals to citizens to engage in private saving. But
public policy, in most cases, is primarily directed at governmental organs, and
only intermediately and secondarily at other factors.
Aims at Achieving what is
in the Public Interest:
However difficult it might be to find out what the "public interest"
may come ,rely refer to, the term never the less conveys the idea of a "general"
orientations 2nd seems therefore to be important and significant.
Policy Formulation &
Implementation
Policy Formulation stands at the top of the transport
planning process. It is a strategic planning process leading to a general
concept, usually a “Transport Masterplan”. Such a masterplan is a political
decision. It includes a set of measures aimed at the future developments of the
transport system. A consensus has to be found on which scenario or group of
measures out of different scenarios and bundles of measures is apt to fulfil
the intended goals in the best way.
Policy Formulation is most important at higher strategic
levels but has to be considered at each level of a transport planning process:
• Strategic
policies in transport cover a larger area and include long-term strategies.
These policies have to be far sighted and consequently implemented.
• Regional and local transport policies are applied on
regions and small areas (towns, villages, etc.), following the overall
principles of a general concept – however on a smaller scale. The differences
between the various levels - national, regional, local – appear in the
allocation of authorities and competence and in the extent of impacts and
effects.
Participation and information of all involved parties
should be regarded as an important aspect to gain accepted goals and accepted
policies. One problem of environmentally sound policies is that the measures to
achieve transport systems heading towards sustainability are in most cases
unpopular. All transport policies should basically have common features such
as:
Inclusion
of all affected parties (transport operators, transport users, politicians,
etc.);
Inclusion
of all affected aspects (transport, modes of transport, health, environment,
social policies, economics, etc.);
Approval
of a majority (voters, experts, etc.);
Strategic
view, logical and consistent layout and implementation over longer periods;
Possibilities
to (re)adjust the policies based on feedback and evaluation, etc. Policy
Formulation and Implementation
It is essential that implementation also comprises the
analysis of social and political acceptability of measures and the sensibility
of citizens, politicians, journalists and experts for objectives and programmes
before, during and after implementing transport measures. Public awareness and
information campaigns as well as the installation of a permanent marketing
procedure may help to enhance the acceptability of transport plans or single
measures.
Quality control concerning acceptability as well as
functionalism of implemented measures provides the possibility for
readjustment, improvement and reaction.
|
Policy
Formulation in transport planning
|
|
Strategic
planning process
|
|
Transport
policy formulation General concept of measures Transport Master plan
|
|
Planning
process of the allocated measures
|
|
Design
of the measures
|
|
Concept
of implementation • Information • Awareness raising
|
|
Implementation
process
|
|
Implementation
of transport measures
|
|
Realised
/ implemented measures
|
|
Evaluation
of success, Quality control
|
Figure
1: Overview from the strategic planning process to the implementation in local
or regional transport policy (BOKU-ITS
|
Planing
Process
|
|
Problem
analysis
|
|
Evaluation
|
|
Comunication
and participation process
|
|
Project
organisation, citizens assembly, etc
|
|
Discussion
and report to the citizens about impacts/effects; citzens‘assembly
|
|
Scenarios
and development of measures
|
|
Implementation
|
|
Detailed
planning
|
|
Political
decision
|
|
Working
groups
|
|
Report
to the citizens about sucess
|
|
Quality
control
|
|
Problem
analysis
|
Figure 2: Example of policy formulation leading to a
political decision and to implementation (SAMMER, ROESCHEL 2000)
The
basic structures and the important ingredients of Policy Formulation and
Implementation processes in transport planning are shown in figure 4.
|
Problem analysis
|
|
Formulation
of objectives
|
|
Analysis
of deficiencies
|
|
Analysis
of current situation
|
|
Tools
for Implementation
|
|
Tools
for Policy Formulation
|
|
Implementation
• Realisation of defined measures/ plans
•
Paying attention to social & political acceptability
•
Quality control • Etc
|
|
Policy
Formulation • Planning process.
•
Goals of policy formulation.
•
Problem analysis.
•
Development of scenarios. • Etc.
|
|
Development
of measures Combine measures to alternatives and scenarios
|
Formulation
ready
|
Evaluation
of the alternatives and scenarios
|
|
Transport
Policy – Model (Leitbild) Transport Policy – Goals / objectives Transport
Policy - Principles
|
Determination
the Developments and Administrative impacts of projects in Public Policies
With
the help of the indicators, which were defined at the beginning of the policy
formulation process, each scenario can be described. The impacts of each
indicator in each scenario are determined and documented (shown in a matrix,
with figures, etc.). In the next step the respective impacts of all the
evaluated indicators can be summarised in an evaluation of each scenario. In
the final step the comparison of the resulting effects of each scenario leads
to the final evaluation: a ranking of the scenarios. Evaluation tools Different
assessment tools have been developed for the evaluation of the scenarios or
alternatives. Some examples of the most important are:
Net
Present Value Method (NPV) of Developments and Administrative projects in
Public Policies
In
the NPV method, the revenues and costs of a project are estimated and then are
discounted and compared with the initial investment. The preferred option is
that with the highest positive net present value. Projects with negative NPV
values should be rejected because the present value of the stream of benefits
is insufficient to recover the cost of the project.
Once
we have the total present value of all project cash flows, we subtract the
initial investment on the project from the total present value of inflows to
arrive at net present value.
Thus
we have the following two formulas for the calculation of NPV:
When
cash inflows are even:
NPV = R ×
|
1 − (1 + i)-n
|
− Initial Investment
|
i
|
However
in such cases, the results indicated by the NPV method are more reliable. The
NPV method should be always be used where money values over time need to be
appraised. Nevertheless, the other techniques also yield useful additional
information and may be worth using.
The
key determinants of the NPV calculation are the appraisal horizon, the discount
rate and the accuracy of estimates for costs and benefits.
Discount
rate of Developments and Administrative project in Public Policies
The
discount rate is a concept related to the NPV method. The discount rate is used
to convert costs and benefits to present values to reflect the principle of
time preference. The calculation of the discount rate can be based on a number
of approaches including, among others:
The social rate of time preference
The opportunity cost of capital
Weighted average method
The
same basic discount rate (usually called the test discount rate or TDR) should
be used in all cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analyses of public sector
projects.
The
current recommended TDR is 5%. However,
if a commercial State Sponsored Body is discounting projected cash flows for
commercial projects, the cost of capital should be used or even a project-specific
rate.
Internal
Rate of Return (IRR) of Developments and Administrative projects in Public
Policies
The
IRR is the discount rate which, when applied to net revenues of a project sets
them equal to the initial investment. The preferred option is that with the IRR
greatest in excess of a specified rate of return. An IRR of 10% means that with
a discount rate of 10%, the project breaks even. The IRR approach is usually
associated with a hurdle cost of capital/discount rate, against which the IRR
is compared. The hurdle rate corresponds to the opportunity cost of capital. In
the case of public projects, the hurdle rate is the TDR. If the IRR exceeds the
hurdle rate, the project is accepted.
An
investment has money going out (invested or spent), and money coming in
(profits, dividends etc). You hope more comes in than goes out, and you make
a profit!
But
before adding it all up you should calculate the time value of money.
|
Money now is
more valuable than money later on.
Example:
Let us say you can get 10% interest on your money.
So
$1,000 now earns $1,000 x 10% = $100 in a year.
Your $1,000
now becomes $1,100 in a year's time.
Present
Value: So $1,000 now is the same as $1,100 next year (at 10% interest).
The
Present Value of $1,100 next year is $1,000
Present
Value has a detailed explanation, but let's skip straight to the formula:
PV
= FV / (1+r)n
PV
is Present Value; FV is Future Value; r is the interest rate (as a decimal, so
0.10, not 10%); n is the number of years
And
let's use the formula:
Example:
Alex promises you $900 in 3 years, what is the Present Value (using a 10%
interest rate)?; The Future Value (FV) is $900,
The
interest rate (r) is 10%, which is 0.10 as a decimal, and The number of years
(n) is 3.; So the Present Value of $900 in 3 years is:
PV
= FV / (1+r)n PV = $900 / (1 + 0.10)3;
PV = $900 / 1.103 ; PV = $676.18 (to nearest cent)
Example
2.try that again, but use an interest rate of 6%
The
interest rate (r) is now 6%, which is 0.06 as a decimal:
PV
= FV / (1+r)n; PV = $900 / (1 + 0.06)3; PV = $900 / 1.063; PV = $755.66 (to
nearest cent)
Benefit
/ Cost ratio (BCR) of Developments and Administrative project in Public
Policies
The
BCR is the discounted net revenues divided by the initial investment. The
preferred option is that with the ratio greatest in excess of 1. In any event,
a project with a benefit cost ratio of less than one should generally not
proceed. The advantage of this method is its simplicity.
Formula:
BCR = Discounted value of incremental benefits
÷ Discounted value of incremental costs
To
create a benefit cost ratio example we’ll use Widget Corp. as our
fictitious business. Widget Corporation’s top account executive has an idea for
a new widget that will revolutionize the widget industry. The total cost to
plan, develop and produce the widget is 55,000 RwF. Once the production line
has been set up, the revolutionary widget sells like hotcakes and produces
record net profits for Widget Corp. of 500,000 RwF for the year. Using the
formula listed above, we can figure the benefit cost ratio.
Given
Discounted
value of incremental benefits: 500,000 RwF
Discounted
value of incremental costs: 55,000 RwF
Answer
500,000/55,000 = 9.09
500,000/55,000 = 9.09
The
final outcome of $9.09 is the dollar representation of a $9.09 return for every
$1.00 invested in the revolutionary widget. After one year of sales, the
revolutionary widget paid for itself almost ten times.
Payback
and Discounted payback of Developments and Administrative project in Public
Policies
The
payback period is commonly used as an investment appraisal technique in the
private sector and measures the length of time that it takes to recover the
initial investment. However this method presents obvious drawbacks which
prevent the ranking of projects.
Developments
and Administrative Payback of projects in Public Policies
The
payback period is the time a project will take to pay back the money spent on
it. It is based on expected cash flows and provides a measure of liquidity.
Formula
Constant
annual cash flows:
Uneven
annual cash flows:
Where
cash flows are uneven, payback is calculated by working out the cumulative cash
flow over the life of the project.
Developments
and Administrative project Decision rule in Public Policies
When
using Payback, the company must first set a target payback period.
Select
projects which pay back within the specified time period
Choose
between options on the basis of the fastest payback
Example
using Payback
Constant
annual cash flows
An
expenditure of $2 million is expected to generate net cash inflows of $500,000
each year for the next seven years.
What is
the payback period for the project?
Advantages
and disadvantage of Payback
Advantages
include:
it
is simple
it
is useful in certain situations:
rapidly
changing technology
improving
investment conditions
it
favours quick return:
helps
company growth
minimises
risk
maximises
liquidity
it
uses cash flows, not accounting profit.
Disadvantages
include:
it
ignores returns after the payback period
it
ignores the timings of the cash flows. This can be resolved using the discounted payback
period.
it
is subjective as it gives no definitive investment signal
it
ignores project profitability.
Sensitivity
analysis of projects of Developments or Administrative in Public Policies
An
important feature of a comprehensive CBA is the inclusion of a risk assessment.
The use of sensitivity analysis allows users of the CBA methodology to
challenge the robustness of the results to changes in the assumptions made
(i.e. discount rate, time horizon, estimated value of costs and benefits, etc).
In doing so, it is possible to identify those parameters and assumptions to
which the outcome of the analysis is most sensitive and therefore, allows the
user to determine which assumptions and parameters may need to be re-examined
and clarified.
Sensitivity
analysis requires a degree of exploratory analysis to ascertain the most
sensitive variables and should lead to a risk management strategy involving
risk mitigation measures to ensure the most pessimistic values for key
variables do not materialize or can be managed appropriately if they do
materialise. It is important to take into account the level of disaggregation of
project inputs and benefits sensitivity analysis based on a mix of highly
aggregated and disaggregated variables may be misleading.
Developments
and Administrative Scenario analysis of projects in Public Policies
The
scenario analysis technique is related to sensitivity analysis. Whereas the
sensitivity analysis is based on a variable by variable approach, scenario
analysis recognizes that the various factors impacting upon the stream of costs
and benefits are inter-independent.
In
other words, this approach assumes that that altering individual variables
whilst holding the remainder constant is unrealistic (i.e. for a tourism
project, it is unlikely that ticket sales and café-souvenir sales are
independent). Rather, scenario analysis uses a range of scenarios (or variations
on the option under examination) where all of the various factors can be
reviewed and adjusted within a consistent framework.
Switching
values of Developments and Administrative projects in Public Policies
This
process of substituting new values on a variable-by-variable basis can be
referred to as the calculation of switching values. This is very useful
information and should be afforded a prominent place in any decision-making
process. Moreover, given the importance of this information the switching values
chosen should be carefully considered and should be realistic and justifiable.
For example, for capital projects requiring an
Exchequer commitment over the medium to long-term, operating and maintenance
costs should always be examined. Similarly, any project reliant upon user
charges should always examine the impact of changes in volumes and the level of
charges.
Distributional
Analysis The calculation of NPV’s makes no allowance for the distribution of
costs and benefits among members of society. This is an important drawback if
the intended objectives of a programme/project aimed at specific income groups.
Differential impact may arise because of income, gender, ethnicity, age,
geographical location or disability and any distributional effects should be
explicit and quantified where appropriate.
Developments
and Administrative projects of Economic appraisal techniques in Public Policy
Economic
analysis aims to assess the desirability of a project from the societal
perspective. This form of appraisal differs from financial appraisal because
financial appraisal is generally done from the perspective of a particular
stakeholder e.g. an investor. Economic analysis also considers non-market
impacts such as externalities.
In
cost-benefit analysis all of the relevant costs and benefits, including
indirect costs and benefits, are taken into account. Cash values, based on
market prices (or shadow prices, where no appropriate market price exists) are
placed on all costs and benefits and the time at which these costs/benefits
occur is identified.
Developments
and Administrative Cost Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) of Developments and
Administrative projects in Public Policy
It
is difficult to measure the value to society of public investment in social
infrastructure because the outputs may be difficult to specify accurately and
to quantify, and are not frequently marketed. In cases like these, the cost of
the various alternative options should be first determined in monetary terms.
Cost
Effectiveness Ratio= Total Cost /Units of Effectiveness
A
choice can then be made as to which of the options (if they all achieve the
same effects) is preferable. CEA is not a basis for deciding whether or not a
project should be undertaken. Rather, it is concerned with the relative costs
of the various options available for achieving a particular objective. CEA will assist in the determination of the
least cost way of determining the capital project objective. A choice can then
be made as to which of these options is preferable.
Net
Benefits= Total Benefits -Total Cost.
Cost
Utility Analysis (CUA) of Developments and Administrative of projects in Public
Policy
CUA
is a variant of CEA that measures the relative effectiveness of alternative
interventions in achieving two or more objectives. It is often used in health
appraisals. This outcome measure is a combination of duration of life and
health related quality of life. Whereas in a CBA, there is a requirement to
attempt to place a monetary value on all benefits, CUA allows for a comparison
of the benefits of health interventions without having to place a financial
value on health states.
Multi
Criteria Analysis (MCA)
Multi-criteria
analysis (MCA) establishes preferences between project options by reference to
an explicit set of criteria and objectives. These would normally reflect
policy/programme objectives and project objectives and other considerations as
appropriate, such as value for money, costs, social, environmental, equality,
etc. MCA is often used as an alternative to appraisal techniques because it
incorporates multiple criteria and does not focus solely on monetary values.
In
constructing a multi criteria analysis scorecard and determining the weightings
to be given to criteria the aim should be to achieve an objective appraisal of
project options and consistency in decision making. Judgments regarding the
scoring of investment options should be based on objective, factual
information. The justification for scoring and weighting decisions must be
documented in detail. In this regard, the system should be capable of producing
similar results if the selection criteria were applied by different decision
makers.
The
main steps in the MCA process include:
Identify
the performance criteria for assessing the project
Devise
a scoring scheme for marking a project under each criterion heading
Devise
a weighting mechanism to reflect the relative importance of each criterion
Allocate
scores to each investment option for each of the criteria
Document
the rationale for the scoring results for each option
Calculate
overall results and test for robustness
Report
and interpret the findings investment appraisal techniques
before
committing to high levels of capital spend, companies normally undertake
investment appraisal. Investment appraisal has the following features:
Assessment
of the level of expected returns earned for the level of expenditure made
estimates
of future costs and benefits over the project's life.
When
a proposed capital project is evaluated, the costs and benefits of the project
should be evaluated over its foreseeable life. This is usually the expected
useful life of the non-current asset to be purchased, which will be several
years. This means that estimates of future costs and benefits call for
long-term forecasting.
A
problem with long-term forecasting of revenues, savings and costs is that
forecasts can be inaccurate. However, although it is extremely difficult to
produce reliable forecasts, every effort should be made to make them as
reliable as possible.
A
business should try to avoid spending money on non-current assets on the basis
of wildly optimistic and unrealistic forecasts.
The
assumptions on which the forecasts are based should be stated clearly. If the
assumptions are clear, the forecasts can be assessed for reasonableness by the
individuals who are asked to authorise the spending.
Two
basic appraisal techniques covered here are Return on Capital Employed (ROCE)
and Payback.
A
project requires an initial investment of $1200,000 and then earns net cash
inflows as follows
:
In
addition, at the end of the seven-year project the assets initially purchased
will be sold for $300,000.
Required:
as you
Were
assigned me to follow up the preparation and way forward of the Private Sector
investment conference (PSIC). I did some
of the outcome are in the following
Determine
the project's ROCE using:
Average
annual inflows?
Average
annual depreciation?
Average
annual profit?
Average
capital invested?
ROCE
Rate on Initial capital costs
ROCE
Rate on average capital investment?
Solution:
The
process of implementation
The
political decision to implement a transport masterplan or a similar guideline
stands at the beginning of the implementation.
|
Consolidation
|
|
Political
Decision
|
|
Transport
Framework Transport Master Plan Transport Plan Analysis of current
situation
|
|
Participation
and up - to date Information to the stakeholders
|
|
Analysis
of the market and Awareness raising
|
|
Implementation
(Operational Phase)
|
|
Acceptability
|
|
Evaluation
|
|
Feedback
|
|
Quality
control Adjustments
|
Participation,
the flow of information and awareness raising play an essential role assuring
the acceptability by the citizens and simultaneously enhancing the
effectiveness of the project.
Public
Policy formulation and Implementation at Local and National level
Policy-making
is often undervalued and misunderstood, yet it is the central role of the city,
town, and county legislative bodies. The policies created by our local
governments affect everyone in the community in some way. Public policy
determines what services will be provided to the residents and the level of
those services, what kinds of development will occur in the community, and it
determines what the community’s future will be. Policies are created to guide
decision making.
Local
policy-making is complex. It demands the very best of local officials. The
public policy-making process is highly decentralized. Policy initiation,
formulation, adoption, and implementation involve many interests. This process
has been characterized as tending to be "fluid, incremental, confused,
often disorderly and even incoherent."
Making
a Public Policy as Responsibilities of Legislatives power
The
key to avoiding conflicts is to recognize that the general public policy of the
municipality is usually a matter for the legislative body to determine: the
city or town council, the county council, and the board of county
commissioners, though the latter also has an executive and administrative
function. It is also important to recognize that it is not the role of the
legislative body to administer city or county affairs, except in the case of
the county commission. The council sets policy, but it is either the county executive, the mayor, or city
manager that actually sees that the policies are implemented.
Since
the distinction between formulation and implementation is not always clear,
open communications between legislators and administrators is absolutely
necessary.
Legislative
bodies are most effective and are most successful when they focus on strategic
activities that guide the future of their communities. Whether it is called
goal setting, strategic planning or futures planning, the process of assessing
need and establishing priorities is a necessary function of local government.
It
Key
policy-making activities include:
Creating
community vision: This is the "big picture" for your community. A
vision captures the dreams, aspirations, and hopes of your community. It is a
choice of one future out of many possibilities. Important community values
shape this vision. Does your community see itself as a trader in a global
village? A place where diversity is cherished? A place where there is peace and
harmony between the built and the natural environment? A "vision
statement" could provide a benchmark against which all other local
government actions are measured.
Community
goals and objectives: Community goals identify components of the community
vision and provide direction for implementation. A goal statement may grow out
of a difficult community problem, for example, a high crime rate. The goal is
to find a satisfactory resolution to this problem by implementing policies
designed to reduce crime. A goal may also be born of a desire to instill some
quality that is not currently part of the community, such as economic growth.
Comprehensive
plan: The comprehensive plan represents the community’s policy for future
growth. The plan assists in the management of the city or county by providing
policies to guide decision-making (Small Communities Guide to Comprehensive
Planning, Washington State Department of Community Development, June 1993).
Local
services: Some local services are mandated by state statute. Other services,
while not mandated by statute, are prudent to provide, while others are
discretionary. General-purpose local governments make key decisions about which
services to provide to residents, at what service level, the manner in which
these services will be provided.
Budget
and capital facilities plan: These address the allocation of scarce financial
resources to achieve the community’s vision, accomplish goals and objectives,
implement the comprehensive plan, and provide services. The budget is
considered one of the strongest policy-making tools.
Type
of good Public Policy
Since there is usually not a "right or
wrong" policy, how are good policy decisions recognized? The following
qualities may assist in defining "good public policy:"
Public
support: Usually policy adopted by a majority vote of a legislative body is
"good" policy. A supermajority vote makes "great" policy.
Public
Policis are Just: Good policy is fair and equitable; it does not impose
disproportional impacts on interest groups. Policy decisions should be based
upon due process that respects the constitutional rights of individuals.
Sound
decision are backed by solid analysis: Good policy analysis starts with clear goals
and objectives, considers a range of alternatives, expresses evaluation
criteria, and assesses the impacts of alternatives with respect to these
criteria. Measure the consequences of policy decisions against the community’s vision,
values, and goals.
Policies
are relevant: The decision addresses a
problem or issue that is generally perceived as significant to the community.
Policy
can be implemented: The decisions are feasible for local government to
implement. The adopted policy has a reasonable chance of working. There are
clear assignments of responsibilities for implementation.
Result
are monitory: There is always a risk
that policy decisions have unintended consequences, or simply do not accomplish
their goals. During the analysis phase it is useful to think about how a policy
choice may fail. Good monitoring systems may provide early warning about policy
failures or unintended consequences. This would enable policy-makers to alter
the policy to increase effectiveness, or abandon it completely.
Limitation
to the Policy Making
No one said that effective policy-making is
easy. It is easier to second guess how something might have been done, than to
determine what needs to be done. There are many challenges and hazards along
the way.
Public
policy-making involves multiple interests, complex analysis, conflicting
information, and human personalities. Listed below are some factors that make
public policy a fascinating, sometimes frustrating, but absolutely essential
exercise. These are listed to alert the reader about circumstances where extra
care is necessary.
Legitimate
community interests have multiple and often conflicting goals. This is the
essence of the policy-making challenge. For example, the business community may
be motivated primarily by a profit goal in presenting its position on the
comprehensive plan.
With
multiple interest groups and centers of power, there is a tendency to
"take a step in the right direction" rather than commit to
significant change. Some participants are frustrated because they believe that
the policy-making process should produce more dramatic changes than it usually
does.
Failure
to have the right information can impede decision-making. Elected officials are
often faced with information overload. Too much information can create
uncertainty and weaken decisiveness. When this occurs, all information becomes
diluted in its persuasiveness.
Some
interest groups may use analysis to rationalize choices they have already made.
Research can be politicized. Some people are skilled in using statistics to
prove anything.
Close inspection of their analysis, however, may reveal serious
flaws.
Many forces that impact local communities are
beyond local control. Local governments are subject to federal and state
mandates. Income levels of individual jurisdictions depend upon job creation
and retention throughout the region.
It
is not always clear or obvious how to implement good policy, even when there is
a high level of agreement about a desired direction.
Resources to implement policy may be limited
Mediation may be required to resolve issues
where communities are polarized.
Role
and Responsibilities of Legislative and Executive power
Constitutions,
charters, statutes, and ordinances are the sources of authority for elected
officials and staff in the policy-making process. A clear understanding of
roles and responsibilities can increase the effectiveness of participants in
the policy-making process. Whether legislative or executive, the goal is to serve
the community
Legislative
power system
City,
town, and county council members and county commissioners are legislators.
Together they constitute a legislative body which is given authority by the
state constitution and state law to make local law. Local legislative authority
is generally limited to what the state specifically grants to counties, cities
and towns.
Executive
power system
While
mayors and city managers often develop and propose policies, their basic
authority is to carry out the council’s directives and to implement the policy
adopted by councils. Commissioners serve both legislative and executive roles.
The relationship of the executive to the legislative body varies by form of
local government.
Mayor
and Council form of Government: Policy and administration are separated. All
legislative and policy-making powers are vested in the city council. This is
also true for charter counties that have county councils: King, Snohomish,
Pierce and What com Counties. Administrative authority is vested in a directly
elected mayor or county executive. Mayors in second class mayor-council and
code mayor-council cities may veto ordinances but the mayor’s veto can be
overruled by two-thirds vote of the council.
Council
manager form of Government: All legislative and policy powers are vested in the
city council. The council employs a professionally trained administrator to
carry out the policies it develops. The city manager is head of the
administrative branch of government.
Commission
form of Government: In the commission form of government one elective body
includes the executive, legislative, and administrative functions of
government.
While
much of this publication is relevant to counties, there are some factors that
make the policymaking process of counties different from cities. Elected county
offices are partisan; candidates declare party affiliation when they run for
office.
TOPIC
II. UNDERSTAND THE LOGICAL FRAMEWOR OF PUBLIC AND GOVERNMENT DECISION PROCESS
(DEVOLUTION AND GOVERNMENT OPERATION)
II.0.
Introduction
This
Topic provide details on logical framework of public government decision
process (power of government, decision making by devolution, decentralization
and others decision organ system)
The
political actors and institutions act as gatekeepers, filtering demands
into the tightly sealed political black box. The gatekeeper function is
important, for it determines the political agenda. Most demands on the
political system fail to pass through this filter.
The
outputs of these political decisions are the actual policies formulated by the
political institutions and actors.
II.1.
Definition and impressions of Logical framework of Public policy and Public
Government decision process
Public
policy Declared State objectives relating
to the health, morals,
and wellbeing of the citizenry. In the interest of
public policy, legislatures and courts seek
to nullify any action, contract,
or trust that
goes counter to
these objectives even if there is no statute that
expressly declares it void.
Government:
A group of
people that governs a community or unit.
It sets and administers public policy and exercises executive,
political and sovereign
power through customs, institutions,
and laws within
a state. A government can be classified into
many types like democracy, republic, monarchy, aristocracy, and dictatorship
and others…….
Public
policy Cycle
Easton
cast policy as the output of a closed political process, a sealed black
box. Rather than ad hoc, messy, unconnected events, policy could now be
depicted as smooth, flowing, logical, and even harmonious. Easton's model could
be broken down into particular discrete stages, each understood as a coherent
chain of events and given a context by which the chronology could be coherently
organized.
Without
the appealing design of a logo or diagram, political scientist Charles O. Jones
elaborated on the idea of a system and a process, contributing a comprehensive
treatment of policy as a cycle, a logical sequence of
recurring events.
This
replaced Easton's black box, a reductionist depiction of the political process,
and provided more definition without losing the coherence provided by a
systematic model. Further, Jones attached elements of analysis to the stages in
the cycle, creating an orderly, but somewhat arbitrary, container by which to
logically organize a comprehensive and integrated study of public policy.
Jones's treatment was seminal.
The impacts of the policy are concrete
changes categorized as economic, social, and environmental. Hopefully, the
impacts are what were intended, even desired and anticipated, but there may be
impacts that were not intended and that might be adverse.
Finally,
such impacts are perceived and then injected back into the political system
as feedback. The majority of agenda items in the political system may come
from feedback. Most policy decisions are relatively minor modifications of past
policies, a phenomenon called policy succession or incrementalism.
Easton's
simple but elegant model was well received. Many political scientists find that
it provided a systematic, comprehensive, orderly, coherent, and consistent
framework from which to conceptualize political processes. Perhaps it could
serve as a scientific statement advancing the field of policy analysis.
At
least it appealed to those who sought rigor and definition. Policy students
recognized that it provided a useful alternative to the
historical-institutional approach which had dominated the field. Easton opened
up a systematic approach for public policy.
The
policy cycle has thus been cast as steps that display the sequential flow
depicted by Jones's approach to public policy:
Agenda
setting: Problems are defined and issues are raised. Gatekeepers filter out
those which well be given attention by either the executive or the legislative
branches.
Formulation:
Analysis and politics determines how the agenda item is translated into an
authoritative decision: a law, rule or regulation, administrative order, or resolution.
There are two steps in policy formulation:
Alternative
policy proposals are put forth, claiming to inject rationality and
technical analysis within the process. Policy analysts bring these
alternatives to the attention of political decision makers with their
recommendations.
The
policy prescription is chosen among the alternatives, including the no-action
option. This is usually accomplished by building the support of a majority.
What is produced here is a binding decision or series of decisions by
elected or appointed officials who are not necessarily experts but who are
presumably accountable to the public.
Implementation:
The authorized policy must be administered and enforced by an agency of
government. The agency must take instructions as stated in the policy, but will
probably be called upon to provide missing pieces and to make judgments as to
intent, goals, timetables, program design, and reporting methods. The agency's
mission may be well defined or poorly understood, but the field of action has
shifted.
Budgeting:
Financial resources must be brought to bear within an ongoing annual stream of
budget cycles. Budget decisions are generally made with partial information and
by changes from year to year which are only slightly different from the year
before, a process called incrementalism. In recent years, budget
constraints have significantly elevated budget considerations in importance
within the policy cycle. Budget items are highly competitive but essential for
policy delivery.
Evaluation:
The impacts of the policy may be assessed. If goals exist, the effectiveness of
the policy and its components can be determined. Side-effects must also be
discovered and reckoned. The output of evaluation may be no change, minor
modification, overhaul, or even (but rarely) termination. The feedback provided
by evaluation is injected back into the agenda-setting stage, thus closing the
loop of the cycle.
Different
Public and government Organ System (Devolution, decentralization, Decontralisation)
in the World Affairs
Devolution, the
transfer of power from a central government to sub-national (e.g., state,
regional, or local) authorities. Devolution usually occurs through conventional
statutes rather than through a change in a country’s constitution;
thus, unitary systems of government that have devolved powers in this manner
are still considered unitary rather than federal systems, because the powers of
the sub-national authorities can be withdrawn by the central government at any
time (compare federalism).
Important of Devolution
First a
word about what devolution is. It is a system under which certain governmental
powers are exercised by the counties, not by the national government, and
through institutions elected by their people. Counties can make law about,
and administer these matters. They have resources, from the national government
and those they raise in the county. The Administration Police were an essential
component of the PA, and like it, directly accountable to the governor.
Devolution, refers to: “The transfer of ‘natural resource management
to local individuals and institutions located within and outside of government’
(Edmunds et al. 2003:1), though some people use ‘devolution’ only in reference
to direct community transfers” (Larson)
• “The
transfer of rights and assets from the centre to local governments or
communities. All of these processes occur within the context of national laws
that set the limits within which any decentralised or devolved forest
management occurs” (Sayer et al.).
• “The
transfer of governance responsibility for specified functions to sub-national
levels, either publicly or privately owned, that are largely outside the direct
control of the central government” (Ferguson and Chandra sekharan).
• “One
form of administrative decentralization which transfers specific decision
making powers from one level of government to another (which could be from
lower level to higher level of government, in the case of federations, or
government transfers decision-making powers to entities of the civil society.
Regional or provincial governments, for example, become semi-autonomous and
administer forest resources according to their own priorities and within clear
geographical boundaries under their control. Most political decentralization is
associated with devolution”
(Gregersen et al.).
Different
between Devolution, Decentralization and Decontralisation
The
different between Devolution to the regular term decentralization, seem very
similar when looked at superficially. However the important fact that needs to
be realized when it comes to the governing power of a country is that
decentralization amounts to the transfer of that power from the central
government to a local authority be it a region, a province or a district while
devolution is on the other hand the removal of central government power and
handing that power over to a region, a province or a district.
Therefore
decentralized power if misused by a region, a province or a district could be
recalled by the central government while devolved power cannot be recalled by
the central government if misused by a region, a province or a district.
Decentralization
Definitions and descriptions of decentralization used in the papers include:
“Decentralisation
is usually referred to as the transfer of powers from central government to
lower levels in a political-administrative and territorial hierarchy (Crook and
Manor 1998, Agrawal and Ribot 1999).
This
official power transfer can take two main forms. Administrative
decentralisation, also known as deconcentration, refers to a transfer to
lower-level central government authorities, or to other local authorities who
are upwardly accountable to the central government (Ribot 2002). In contrast,
political, or democratic, decentralisation refers to the transfer of authority
to representative and downwardly accountable actors, such as elected local
governments” (Larson).
“The
term decentralisation is used to cover a broad range of transfers of the
"locus of decision making" from central governments to regional,
municipal or local governments” (Sayer et al.).
Decentralization
reform refers to “transforming the local institutional infrastructure for
natural resource management on which local forest management is based” (Ribot).
“Decentralization
is "the means to allow for the participation of people and local
governments” (Morell).
Decentralization
is transferring the power from the federal to regional level or delivering
management functions to other authorities. Decentralization in decision making
including in forest management: user-defined functions being transferred to
Deconcentration,
is the term referring to:
“The
process by which the agents of central government control are relocated and
geographically dispersed” (Sayer et al.).
“Administative
decentralization, i.e. a transfer to lower-level central government
authorities, or to other local authorities who are upwardly accountable to the
central government” (Ribot 2002 in Larson).
“The
transfer of administrative responsibility for specified functions to lower
levels within the central government bureaucracy, generally on some spatial
basis” (Ferguson and Chandrasekharan).
“One of administrative decentralization which
redistributes decision-making authority and financial and management
responsibility among levels of the central government; there is no real
transfer of authority between levels of government. It may involve only a shift
of responsibilities from federal forest service officials of the capital city
to those stationed in provinces, districts, etc” (Gregersen et al.).
Delegation
refers to:
• “The transfer of managerial responsibility
for specified functions to other public organizations outside normal central
government control, whether provincial or local government or parastal
agencies” (Ferguson and Chandrasekharan).
Disengagement
of the State, Economic Liberalization and Decentralization
The
failures of the centralized forms of state intervention and the realization
that deconcentration had its limits, and the renewal of free-market theories
embodied by structural adjustment and macro-economic stabilization policies,
are all reasons for adapting public service in the direction of true
decentralization.
During
the 80s, and more intensely during the 90s, governments have tried to overcome
the flaws of deconcentration by transferring decision-making powers, not to
local levels of central government organs, or to semi-autonomous public
agencies, but rather to elected officials of local jurisdictions, and to civil
society organizations. Decentralization by devolution is therefore, the
transfer of functions, resources and decision-making to citizens themselves,
who would exercise the powers ceded to either their local government, or to
their representative organizations.
Administrative
decentralization on the other hand, means that the decentralized jurisdiction
remains under the supervision of the state, that its leadership is generally
appointed, and that it does not have enough autonomy in the use of its
resources. Administrative decentralization is thus associated more with the
notion of deconcentration, while political decentralization involves a true
devolution of powers.
In
other words, the transfer of functions and resources between the different
levels of the national government (deconcentration), becomes more significant
with the transfer of decision-making powers and resources of the central
government to civil society (devolution). These new reforms by devolution (8) are
characterized by four major changes, which seek to make the objectives of
effective administration and local democracy compatible:
The
creation of new sub-national jurisdictions at regional or local level;
The
generalization of elections by universal suffrage to cover all subnational
jurisdictions;
The
transfer of authority with sufficient financial resources for subnational
jurisdictions to carry out functions assigned;
The
removal of the a priori supervisory role of state representatives, and the
institution of legal administrative control (administrative tribunals), and a
posteriori control of budgets.
Decentralization
by devolution or territorial decentralization makes it possible for inhabitants
of a town, a department, or region to settle their administrative affairs
through their elected representatives.
All the same, during the first wave of
this type of decentralization, local jurisdictions were placed under the
supervision of a representative of the national government, with the task of
making an a posteriori check on the legality of their decisions.
New
waves of decentralization gradually improved the representation of citizens in
the process of decision-making. Representative democracy was limited,
nevertheless, especially with local élite capturing the decentralized
functions. This situation made it necessary to strengthen the process with
participatory democracy, based on civil society organizations
Accountability
and Institution Building for Local Jurisdictions and Civil Society
Organizations: Participation, Consultations and Partnerships
Devolution
is the most advanced yet the least generalized form of decentralization. It
involves the transfer of powers to a local institution or association, with
broad autonomy, legal status, and which is representative. To take its full
meaning, this form of decentralization has to be accompanied by mechanisms
which institute popular participation in the process of decision-making. It
means also that accountability of civil servants and elected officials to
citizens should be integrated into the process.
Theory
of a States
There
is no academic consensus on the most appropriate definition of the
state. The term "state" refers to a set of different component,
but interrelated and often overlapping, theories about a certain range of
political phenomena.
The
act of defining the term can be seen as part of an ideological conflict,
because different definitions lead to different theories of state function, and
as a result validate different political strategies.
According
to Jeffrey and Painter, "if we define the 'essence' of the state in one
place or era, we are liable to find that in another time or space something
which is also understood to be a state has different 'essential'
characteristics"
The
most commonly used definition was given by Max Weber, who
described the state as a compulsory political organization with a centralized government
that maintains a monopoly of the legitimate use of
force within a certain territory.
According
to this definitional schema, the states are nonphysical persons of international
law, governments are organizations of people.
The
composition of a State:
Recognized
(familiarized) Population (Ex: Rwandan community);
State
institutions leadership (administrative bureaucracies, legal systems,
Military and
Private Sector organizations);
Territory
with borders;
Sovereignty
(Independently, Autonomy, ruled, Secured and powerful)
and
respect Balance of Power.
A
frontrunner of a State should be someone who are trusted and whispered
(believed) by the population as head of National, Kingdom or empire for
monarchy community
Types
of states
Sovereign
state (Independently, Autonomy, ruled, Secured and powerful)
Dependent
State when lies in other Sovereign State
Federal
State (federal union)
Theories
of Governments
A government is
a system by which a community or society is controlled. Is a group of flew
individuals elected or nominated with the purpose of facilitate the community/
society to implement their will. In the Commonwealth of Nations, the
word government is also used more narrowly to refer to the collective group of people that
exercises executive authority in a state
In
the case of its broad associative definition, government normally consists of
Judiciaries, administrators, and arbitrators.
Government is the means by which state policy is enforced, as well as the
mechanism for determining the policy of
the state.
A
form of government, or form of state governance, refers to the set of political
systems and institutions that make up the organisation of a specific
government.
Government
of any kind currently affects every human activity in many important ways. For
this reason, political scientists generally argue that
government should not be studied by itself; but should be studied along with
other disciplines like: anthropology, economics, environmentalism, history, philosophy, sciences,
Administration, leadership, sociology and so on….
Different
scholars were discussed on Government regime, most identified, the Classical
Greek philosopher Plato included deliberated the five types of
regimes that are aristocracy, Geniocracy,
timocracy, oligarchy, democracy and tyranny.
Plato also assigned responsible to each of these regimes to illustrate what
they stand for. The tyrannical man would represent tyranny for example. These
five regimes progressively degenerate starting with aristocracy at the top and
tyranny at the bottom.
Aristarchic
attributes
Governments
with aristarchy attributes are traditionally controlled and organised
by a small group of the most-qualified people, with no intervention from the
most part of society; this small group usually shares some common trait. The
opposite of an aristarchic government is kakistocracy.
Types
|
Definition
|
Rule
by elite citizens. It has come to mean rule by "the aristocracy"
who are people of noble birth. An aristocracy is a government by the
"best" people. A person who rules in an aristocracy is an
aristocrat.
|
|
Rule
by the intelligent; a system of governance where creativity, innovation,
intelligence and wisdom are required for those who wish to govern.
|
|
Rule
by the strong; a system of governance where those who are strong enough seize
power through physical force, social manoeuvring or political cunning.
|
|
Rule
by the meritorious; a system of governance where groups are selected on the
basis of people's ability, knowledge in a given area, and contributions to
society.
|
|
Rule
by the educated or technical experts; a system of governance where people who
are skilled or proficient govern in their respective areas of expertise in
technology would be in control of all decision making. Doctors, engineers,
scientists, professionals and technologists who have knowledge, expertise, or
skills, would compose the governing body, instead of politicians,
businessmen, and economists
|
Autocratic
attributes
Governments
with autocratic attributes are dominated by one person who has all
the power over the people in a country.
The Roman
Republic made dictators to lead during times of war;
the Roman dictators only held power for a small time. In modern times, an
autocrat's rule is not stopped by any rules of law, constitutions,
or other social and political institutions. After World War II, many
governments in Latin America, Asia, and Africa were ruled by autocratic
governments. Examples of autocrats include Adolf Hitler and
others………….
Type
|
Definition
|
Rule
by one individual, whose decisions are subject to neither external legal
restraints nor regular mechanisms of popular control (except perhaps for
implicit threat). An autocrat needs servants while a despot needs slaves.
|
|
Rule
by a single entity with absolute power. That entity may be an individual, as
in an autocracy, or it may be a group, as in an oligarchy. The word despotism
means to "rule in the fashion of a despot" and does not necessarily
require a single, or individual, "despot". A despot needs slaves
while an autocrat needs servants.
|
|
Rule
by an individual who has full power over the country. The term may refer to a
system where the dictator came to power, and holds it, purely by force; but
it also includes systems where the dictator first came to power legitimately
but then was able to amend the constitution so as to, in effect, gather all
power for themselves.[15] In
a military dictatorship, the army is in control. Usually, there is little or
no attention to public opinion or individual rights. See also Autocracy and Stratocracy.
|
|
Rule
by leader base only. Focuses heavily on patriotism and national identity. The leader(s) has the
power to make things illegal that do not relate to nationalism, or increase
belief in national pride. They believe their nation is based on commitment to
an organic national community where its citizens are united together as one
people through a national identity. It exalts nation and race above the
individual and stands for severe economic and social regimentation, and
forcible suppression of opposition.
|
The
government and its officials and agents as well as individuals and private
entities are accountable under the law.
Monarchic
attributes
Governments
with monarchic attributes are ruled by a king/emperor or a
queen/empress who usually holds their position for life. There are two types of
monarchies: absolute monarchies and constitutional monarchies. In an absolute
monarchy, the ruler has no limits on their wishes or powers. In a
constitutional monarchy a ruler's powers are limited by a document called a
constitution. The constitution was put in place to put a check to these powers.
Type
|
Definition
|
Rule
by royalty; a system of government where the
role has been inherited by an individual, the monarch, who expects to
bequeath it to them.
|
|
Variant
of monarchy; a system of governance in which a monarch exercises ultimate
governing authority as head of
state and head of government such as
the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
|
|
Variant
of monarchy; a system of governance that has a monarch, but one whose powers
are limited by law or by a formal constitution,
such as that in the United
Kingdom.
|
|
Variant
of monarchy; a system of government in which two individuals,
the diarchs, are the heads of
state. In most diarchies, the diarchs hold their position for life
and pass the responsibilities and power of the position to their children or
family when they die. Diarchy is one of the oldest forms of government. In
modern usage diarchy means a system of dual rule, whether this be of a
government or of an organisation. Such 'diarchies' are not hereditary.
|
|
Variant
of monarchy; a system of governance that has an elected monarch, in contrast
to a hereditary monarchy in which the office is automatically
passed down as a family inheritance. The democratic manner of election, the
nature of candidate qualifications, and the electors vary from case to case.
|
|
Similar
to a monarchy or sultanate; a system of governance in which the supreme
power is in the hands of an emir (the ruler of a Muslim state);
the emir may be an absolute overlord or a sovereign with constitutionally
limited authority.
|
|
Variant
of monarchy; a system of governance where a federation of states with a
single monarch as overall head of the federation, but retaining different
monarchs, or a non-monarchical system of government, in the various states
joined to the federation.
|
Pejorative
attributes
Regardless
of the form of government, the actual governance may be influenced by sectors
with political power which are not part of
the formal government. Certain actions of the governors, such as corruption,
demagoguery,
or fear mongering, may disrupt the intended way of
working of the government if they are widespread enough.
Type
|
Definition
|
Rule
by banks; a system of governance with excessive power or influence of
banks and other financial authorities on public policy-making. It can also
refer to a form of government where financial institutions rule society.
|
|
Rule
by corporations; a system of governance where an economic and political
system is controlled by corporations or corporate interests. Its use is
generally pejorative. Examples include company rule in India and business
voters for the City of London Corporation.
|
|
Rule
by nephews; favouritism granted to relatives regardless
of merit;
a system of governance in which importance is given to the relatives of those
already in power, like a nephew (where the word comes from). In
such governments even if the relatives aren't qualified they are given
positions of authority just because they know someone who already has
authority. Pope Alexander VI (Borgia)
was accused of this.
|
|
Rule
by the stupid; a system of governance where the worst or least-qualified
citizens governor dictate policies. Due to human
nature being inherently flawed, it has been suggested that
every government which has ever existed has been a prime example of
kakistocracy. See Idiocracy.
|
|
Rule
by thieves; a system of governance where its officials and the ruling class
in general pursue personal wealth and political power at the expense of the
wider population. In strict terms kleptocracy is not a form of government but
a characteristic of a government engaged in such behavior. Examples
include Mexico as being considered a narcokleptocracy, since its
democratic government is perceived to be corrupted by those who profit from
trade in illegal drugs smuggled into the United States.
|
|
Rule
by the general populace; a system of governance where mob rule is
government by mob or a mass of people, or the intimidation of
legitimate authorities. As a pejorative for majoritarianism,
it is akin to the Latin phrase mobile vulgus meaning "the
fickle crowd", from which the English term "mob" was
originally derived in the 1680s. Ochlocratic governments are often a
democracy spoiled by demagoguery, "tyranny of the majority" and the
rule of passion over reason; such governments can be as oppressive as
autocratic tyrants. Ochlocracy is synonymous in meaning and usage to the
modern, informal term "mobocracy."
|
By
elements of who elects the empowered
Term
|
Definition
|
Rule by authoritarian
governments is identified in societies where a specific set of people possess
the authority of the state in a republic or
union. It is a political system controlled by unelected
rulers who usually permit some degree of individual freedom.
|
|
Rule by a totalitarian
government is characterised by a highly centralised and coercive authority
that regulates nearly every aspect of public and private life.
|
Authoritarian attributes
Democratic
attributes
Governments
with democratic attributes are most common in the Western world and
in some countries of the east that have been influenced by western society,
often by being colonised by western powers over the course of history. In
democracies, large proportions of the population may vote, either to make
decisions or to choose representatives to make decisions.
Commonly significant
in democracies are political parties, which are groups of people with similar
ideas about how a country or region should be governed. Different political
parties have different ideas about how the government should handle different
problems.
Regime
|
Significance
|
Variant
of democracy; government in which the state is
governed by randomly selected decision makers who
have been selected by sortition (lot) from a broadly inclusive
pool of eligible citizens.
These groups, sometimes termed "policy
juries", "citizens' juries", or "consensus
conferences", deliberately make decisions about public policies in much
the same way that juries decide criminal cases.
Demarchy,
in theory, could overcome some of the functional problems of
conventional representative democracy, which is
widely subject to manipulation by special interests and a division between
professional policymakers (politicians and lobbyists) vs. a largely passive,
uninvolved and often uninformed electorate. According to Australian
philosopher John Burnheim, random selection of
policymakers would make it easier for everyday citizens to meaningfully
participate, and harder for special interests to corrupt the process.
More
generally, random selection of decision makers from a larger group is known
as sortition (from
the Latin base for lottery). The Athenian democracy made much use of
sortition, with nearly all government offices filled by lottery (of full
citizens) rather than by election. Candidates were almost always male, Greek,
educated citizens holding a minimum of wealth and status.
|
|
Rule
by a government chosen by election where most of the populace are
enfranchised. The key distinction between a democracy and other forms of
constitutional government is usually taken to be that the right to vote is
not limited by a person's wealth or race (the main qualification for
enfranchisement is usually having reached a certain age).
A democratic
government is, therefore, one supported (at least at the time of the
election) by a majority of the populace (provided the election was
held fairly). A "majority" may be defined in different ways. There
are many "power-sharing" (usually in countries where people mainly
identify themselves by race or religion) or "electoral-college" or
"constituency" systems where the government is not chosen by a
simple one-vote-per-person headcount.
|
|
Variant
of democracy; government in which the people represent themselves and vote
directly for new laws and public policy
|
|
Variant
of democracy; a form of government in which representative democracy operates
under the principles of liberalism.
It is characterized by fair, free, and competitive elections between
multiple distinct political parties, a separation of powers into
different branches of government, the rule of law in
everyday life as part of an open
society, and the protection of human
rights and civil
liberties for all persons.
To define the system in practice,
liberal democracies often draw upon a constitution,
either formally written or uncodified, to delineate the powers of
government and enshrine the social
contract. After a period of sustained expansion throughout the
20th century, liberal democracy became the predominant political system in
the world. A liberal democracy may take various constitutional forms: it may
be a constitutional republic, such as France, Germany, India, Ireland, Italy,
or the United States; or a constitutional monarchy, such as Japan, Spain,
or the United Kingdom. It may have a presidential system (Argentina, Brazil, Mexico,
or the United States), a semi-presidential system (France or Taiwan), or a parliamentary system (Australia, Canada,
India, New Zealand, Poland,
or the United Kingdom).
|
|
Variant
of democracy; wherein the people or citizens of a country elect
representatives to create and implement public policy in place of active
participation by the people.
|
|
Variant
of democracy; social democracy rejects the "either/or"
phobiocratic/polarisation interpretation of capitalism versus socialism. It
claims that fostering a progressive evolution of capitalism will gradually
result in the evolution of capitalist economy into socialist economy. Social
democracy argues that all citizens should be legally entitled to certain
social rights.
These are made up of universal access to public services such
as: education, health care, workers' compensation, public transportation, and
other services including child care and care for the elderly. Social
democracy is connected with the trade union labour movement and supports
collective bargaining rights for workers. Contemporary social democracy
advocates freedom from discrimination based on differences of:
ability/disability, age, ethnicity, sex, gender, language, race, religion,
sexual orientation, and social class.
|
|
Variant
of democracy; refers to a system of government in which lawfully elected
representatives maintain the integrity of a nation state whose citizens,
while granted the right to vote, have little or no participation in the
decision-making process of the government.
|
Oligarchic
attributes
Governments
with oligarchic attributes are ruled by a small group of segregated,
powerful and/or influential people, who usually share similar interests and/or
family relations. These people may spread power and elect candidates equally or
not equally.
An oligarchy is different from a true democracy because very few
people are given the chance to change things. An oligarchy does not have to be
hereditary or monarchic. An oligarchy does not have one clear ruler, but
several rulers.
Some
historical examples of oligarchy are the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
Some critics of representative democracy think
of the United States as an oligarchy. The Athenian democracy used sortitionto
elect candidates, almost always male, white, Greek, educated citizens holding a
minimum of land, wealth and status.
Regime
|
Significance
|
Rule
by the proletariat, the workers, or the working
class. Examples of ergatocracy include communist revolutionaries and rebels
which control most of society and create an alternative economy for people
and workers.
|
|
Rule
by various judges, the kritarchs; a system of governance composed of law
enforcement institutions in which the state and the legal
systems are traditionally and/or constitutionally the
same entity.
The kritarchs, magistrates and other adjudicators have the legal
power to legislate and administrate the enforcement of government laws, in
addition to the interposition of laws and the resolution of disputes. (Not to
be confused with "judiciary" or "judicial
system".) Somalia, ruled by judges with the tradition of xeer, as well as
the Islamic Courts Union, is a historical
example.
|
|
Rule
by social connections; a term invented by the editorial board of the American
technology magazine Wired in the early 1990s. A portmanteau of
Internet and aristocracy, netocracy refers to a perceived global upper-class
that bases its power on a technological advantage and networking skills, in
comparison to what is portrayed as a bourgeoisie of a gradually diminishing
importance. The netocracy concept has been compared with Richard
Florida's concept of the creative
class. Bard and Söderqvist have also defined an under-class in
opposition to the netocracy, which they refer to as the
consumtariat.
|
|
Rule
by a system of governance with small group of individuals,
the oligarchs, who share similar interests or family relations.
|
|
Rule
by the rich; a system of governance composed of the wealthy class. Any of the
forms of government listed here can be plutocracy. For instance, if all of
the elected representatives in a republic are wealthy, then it is a republic
and a plutocracy.
|
|
Rule
by military service; a system of governance composed of military government
in which the state and the military are traditionally and/or constitutionally the
same entity. Citizens with mandatory or voluntary active military service, or
who have been honorably discharged, have the right to govern. (Not to be
confused with "military
junta" or "military dictatorship".) The Spartan city-state is
a historical example; its social system and constitution, were completely
focused on military training and excellence. Stratocratic ideology often
attaches to the honor-oriented timocracy.
|
|
Rule
by a religious elite; a system of governance composed of religious
institutions in which the state and the church are traditionally and/or constitutionally the
same entity. Citizens who are clergy have the right to govern. The Vatican's
(see Pope),
the Tibetan government's
(see Dalai Lama) and Islamic
states are historically considered theocracies.
|
Other
attributes
Regime
|
meaning
|
A
society without a publicly enforced government or violently enforced
political authority. Sometimes said to be non-governance; it is a
structure which strives for non-hierarchical voluntary associations among
agents. Anarchy is a situation where there is no government. When used in
this sense, anarchy mayor may not be intended to imply political
disorder or lawlessness within a society.
This
can happen after a civil war in a country, when a government has been
destroyed and many anti-government individuals, the anarchs, are
fighting to take its place and corrupt the society. These individuals are
most often called anarchists, for they believe that any government is a bad
thing this belief is called anarchism. Anarchists think governments stop
people organising their own lives. Instead they think people would be better
off if they ruled their own lives and worked together to create a society in
any form they choose.
Outside
of the U.S., and by most individuals that self-identify as anarchists, it
implies a system of governance, mostly theoretical at a nation state level.
There are also other forms of anarchy that attempt to avoid the use of
coercion, violence, force and authority, while still producing a productive
and desirable society.
|
|
An
regime type where power is not vested in public institutions (as in a normal
democracy) but spread amongst elite groups who are constantly competing with
each other for power. Examples of anocracies in Africa include the warlords
of Somalia and
the shared governments in Kenya and Zimbabwe.
Anocracies are situated midway between an autocracy and
a democracy.
The
Polity IV data setrecognised anocracy as a category. In that dataset,
anocracies are exactly in the middle between autocracies and democracies.
Often
the word is defined more broadly. For example, a 2010 International Alert publication
defined anocracies as "countries that are neither autocratic nor
democratic, most of which are making the risky transition between autocracy
and democracy".
Alert
noted that the number of anocracies had increased substantially since the end
of the Cold War. Anocracy is not surprisingly the least resilient political
system to short-term shocks: it creates the promise but not yet the actuality
of an inclusive and effective political economy, and threatens members of the
established elite; and is therefore very vulnerable to disruption and armed
violence.
|
|
A
politically unstable kleptocratic government that economically depends upon
the exports of a limited resource (fruits, minerals), and usually features a
society composed of stratified social
classes, such as a great, impoverished ergatocracy and a ruling
plutocracy, composed of the aristocracy of business, politics, and the
military. In political science, the term banana
republic denotes a country dependent upon limited primary-sector productions,
which is ruled by a plutocracy who exploit the national
economy by means of a politico-economic oligarchy. In American literature, the term banana
republic originally denoted the fictional Republic of Anchuria, a
servile dictatorship that abetted, or supported for kickbacks,
the exploitation of large-scale plantation agriculture, especially banana
cultivation. In U.S. politics, the term banana republic is a pejorative
political descriptor coined by the American writer O. Henry in Cabbages
and Kings (1904), a book of thematically related short stories derived
from his 1896–97 residence in Honduras,
where he was hiding from U.S. law for bank embezzlement.
|
|
The
theory and practice of Marxism-Leninism developed
in China by Mao Zedong (Mao
Tse-tung), which states that a continuous revolution is necessary
if the leaders of a communist state are to keep in touch with the people.
|
By
elements of how power distribution is structured
Republican
attributes
A
republic is a form of government in which the country is considered a
"public matter" (Latin: res publica), not the private concern or
property of the rulers, and where offices of states are subsequently directly
or indirectly elected or appointed rather than inherited.
Term
|
Definition
|
Rule
by a form of government in which the people, or some significant portion of
them, have supreme control over the government and where offices of state are
elected or chosen by elected people. A common simplified definition of a
republic is a government where the head of state is not a monarch. Montesquieu included
both democracies,
where all the people have a share in rule, and aristocracies or oligarchies,
where only some of the people rule, as republican forms of government.
|
|
Rule
by a government whose powers are limited by law or a formal constitution, and
chosen by a vote amongst at least some sections of the populace (Ancient
Sparta was in its own terms a republic, though most inhabitants were
disenfranchised). Republics that exclude sections of the populace from
participation will typically claim to represent all citizens (by defining
people without the vote as "non-citizens"). Examples include
the United States, South
Africa, India, etc.
|
|
A
republic form of government where the country is considered a "public
matter" (Latin: res publica), not a private concern or property of
rulers/3rd world, and where offices of states are subsequently, directly or
indirectly, elected or appointed – rather than inherited – where all eligible
citizens have an equal say in the local and national decisions that affect
their lives.
|
|
Republics
governed in accordance with Islamic law. Examples include Afghanistan, Pakistan,
and Iran.
|
Role
of Devolution of power and resources in 3rd World Countries
Democracy as championed
by Abraham Lincoln is basically the rule of the people, by the people
and for the people. It consequently means that all those affected by any
decision should at all times have the opportunity to take part in the decision
making process, either directly or via chosen reps and thus the will of the
majority should at all times prevail.
In republics where civic
society is strong, well-knit and inclusive, the system founded on majoritarian
social equality may not produce adversarial results on an excessive scale.
Besides, in a political sphere, when the decisions are taken by the majority,
the minority interests will be taken into account because of the strength
of the civil society and the prevailing democratic culture.
People do not vote
just to feel good about them, they vote in addition because they want to
influence who gets elected. Democracy means not only the ability to cast
a ballot, but the ability to cast a ballot that leads to the election
of a representative, and then the ability of that representative to have some
fair chance of influencing legislative policy". A very interesting
emerging devolution of power is in Sri Lanka.
The new
constitution proposes to establish a decentralized state by creating a number
of provincial governments. These provincial governments have exclusive power to
make laws on 43devolved subjects and execute them.
This power is not
granted to the provincial governments by the central government but
will be derived from the constitution. The central government and the
provincial government are coordinate and not subordinate to each other. The
exclusion of Tamils from the law making
TOPIC.III.
ANALYZE THE PROCESS, CONSTAINTS OF PUBLIC POLICY POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC
IMPLICATIONS
III.0
Introduction
This
Topic is conducted to inform the discussion among the local, national and global
donor community on their contribution on how to improve the quality of micro
and macro-level social and political analysis, and how to enhance its impact on
Public policy dialogue, program design, and implementation. Again is also
intends to contribute to the harmonization of approaches to macro social and
political analysis employed by….
III.1.
Definition and impressions of Logical framework of Public policy and Public
Government decision process
The
Political, Economic and Social Development Policy Nexus
This
section summarizes relevant recent literature in order to identify important
concepts and approaches for the practice of macro-level social analysis. It
starts by outlining two main reasons for drawing on political economy research
to inform development practice.
It
continues by examining the key factors that condition the uneven distribution
of endowments across social groups and the way in which institutional factors
intervene to modify this distribution. A discussion of the use of social
analysis to promote social change follows, with a strong emphasis on
understanding the historical context and human agency.
Political
economy concepts are increasingly relevant for development research due to 1)
the widely recognized insufficiency of economic models to explain development
outcomes, and 2) a changing geopolitical environment, which has brought new
security concerns to the development arena.
A
growing trend in contemporary development research is to define development not
only in economic terms but also as freedoms and capacities that individuals
have to improve their social and economic standing (see Sen 1999, and World
Bank 2005a). While economic growth is crucial to sustained poverty reduction,
institutional and social changes are also essential to the development
processes and the inclusion of poor people (World Bank 2001, 2005).
At
the same time, themes of political stability and corruption have called for an
analysis of global and national political structures and of their impact on
socio-economic relationships.
Equity
and Development
The
distribution of public goods and resources is unequal in most countries. As a
result, certain social groups experience inequality by virtue of their race,
ethnicity, gender, religion, family/clan affiliation, political views, etc.
(World Bank 2005a). The distribution is not only unequal but inequitable when
it deprives the excluded groups of the opportunity to access civil, political,
and economic mechanisms to improve their status
Institutions
and Good Governance
Multiple
studies show that functioning institutions translate into better economic
outcomes since people (or economic agents) seek trust and social control when
making economic decisions, and tend to rely on networks more than on
independent rules or information.20 Acemoglu (2002) offers a historical
perspective to support his “institutions hypothesis” that associates economic
performance with the organization of society.
Social
change and agency
Addressing systemic inequalities requires a
deeper understanding of how social change takes place (DFID 2004). Different
factors contribute to social change. Processes of conflict are frequently
powerful contributors to social change.
Group solidarity, which is based on similar
social values and inter-group competition for resources, contributes to social
change by defining the group’s boundaries and social mobilization strategies.
These strategies are translated into organizational structures to help mobilize
resources that might challenge the existing power relations among groups and
their subsequent access to resources (Dahrendorf 1959, Ritzer 2002).25 Social agency,
or the capacity to act upon the institutions and norms, is the way in which
organized individuals and social groups attempt to change the social system
(Touraine 1985).
This
perspective allows one to understand how perception of structural conflicts and
institutional processes contribute to explain social mobilization. Only when
the members of competing groups perceive the contextual conditions as favorable
will they mobilize and use the existing resources to engage in political action
to alter the current situation.
A
variety of donor organizations are developing approaches to macro-level social
and political analysis. The common objective of these approaches is to better
understand the social, political, cultural, and institutional context of the
countries they work in. With this common objective, different donors have
developed approaches that match the particular principles, operational
priorities, and institutional framework of the respective agencies. In some
cases, multiple instruments that emphasize different social or political
dimensions or analytical lenses have been developed within individual agencies.
Experiences
with conducting macro social and political analysis
There
are a number of common lessons and challenges that have emerged from the
experiences of conducting the different types of social and political analysis.
The central challenge identified by all donor agencies is translating the
analysis into operational recommendations that lead to real impact on policy.
It has been difficult to balance analytical complexity with the formulation of
actionable policy recommendations and effective policy dialogue.
Political
and Economic implications
Political
economy is a term used for studying production and trade, and their
relations with law, custom,
and government, as well as with the distribution of national income and wealth. Political
economy originated in moral philosophy.
It was developed in the 18th century as the study of the economies of states,
or polities,
hence the term political economy.
In
the late 19th century, the term economics came
to replace political economy, coinciding with the
publication of an influential textbook by Alfred Marshall in
1890. Earlier, William Stanley Jevons, a proponent of
mathematical methods applied to the subject, advocated economics for
brevity and with the hope of the term becoming "the recognized name of a
science.
Today, political
economy, where it is not used as a synonym for economics, may refer to very
different things, including Marxian analysis,
applied public-choice approaches emanating from
the Chicago school and the Virginia school, or simply the advice given by
economists to the government or public on general economic policy or
on specific proposals.
A
rapidly growing mainstream literature from the 1970s has expanded beyond the
model of economic policy in which planners maximize utility of a representative
individual toward examining how political forces affect the choice of economic policies,
especially as to distributional conflicts and political
institutions.
Descendant
Theories
Idealism
proper was a relatively short-lived school of thought, and suffered a crisis of
confidence following the failure of the League of Nations and the outbreak
of WW II.
Liberalism
Liberalism is
one of the main schools of international relations theory. Its roots lie
in the broader liberal thought originating in the Enlightenment. The
central issues that it seeks to address are the problems of achieving lasting
peace and cooperation in international relations, and the various methods that
could contribute to their achievement.
The Democratic
peace theory and, more broadly, the effect of domestic political regime
types and domestic politics on international relations;
The Commercial
peace theory, arguing that free trade has pacifying effects on international
relations. Current explorations of globalization and interdependence are
a broader continuation of this line of inquiry;
Institutional
peace theory, which attempts to demonstrate how cooperation can be sustained
in anarchy, how long-term interests can be pursued over short-term
interests, and how actors may realize absolute gains instead of
seeking relative gains;
Related,
the effect of Int Organizations on international politics, both in
their role as forums for states to pursue their interests, and in their role as
actors in their own right;
Neo
liberalism
In
the study of Int system, neo liberalism refers to a school of
thought which believes that nation-states are, or at least should be, concerned
first and foremost with absolute gains rather than relative
gains to other nation-states. Although both theories use common
methodologies including game theory neoliberalism is not the same as
neoliberal economic ideology.
Neoliberal
international Int system thinkers often employ game theory to explain
why states do or do not cooperate; since their approach tends to emphasize the
possibility of mutual wins, they are interested in institutions which can
arrange jointly profitable arrangements and compromises.
I.1.2.3
Democratic peace theory (liberal peace theory)
Some
theorists prefer terms such as "mutual democratic pacifism"or
"inter-democracy nonaggression hypothesis" so as to clarify that a
state of peace is not singular to democracies, but rather that it is
easily sustained between democratic nations.
I.1.2.3.1
Defining Democracy
Democracies
have been defined differently by different theorists and researchers. Rummel
(1997) is one of them and he states:
"By democracy is meant liberal democracy, where those who hold
power are elected in competitive elections with a secret ballot and wide
franchise (loosely understood as including at least 2/3 of adult males); where
there is freedom of speech, religion, and organization; and a constitutional
framework of law to which the government is subordinate and that guarantees
equal rights."
According
to Karl Popper, democracy is defined in contrast to dictatorship or
tyranny, thus focusing on opportunities for the people to control their leaders
and to oust them without the need for a revolution.
I.1.2.3.2
Variants of Democracy
Though
there are several variants of democracy, two of them are basic forms and both
concern how the whole body of all eligible citizens executes its will.
Direct
democracy: in which all eligible citizens have direct and active participation
in the decision making of the government.
Representative
democracy: In most modern democracies, the whole body of all eligible citizens
remains the sovereign power but political power is exercised indirectly through
elected representatives. The concept of representative democracy arose largely
from ideas and institutions that developed during the European middle
Ages, the Age of Enlightenment, and the American and French
Revolutions.
I.1.2.4
defining war
War
should be understood as an actual,
intentional and widespread armed conflict between political
communities. War is a phenomenon which occurs only between political
communities, defined as those entities which either are states or intend to
become states (in order to allow for civil war).
Classical
war is international war, a war between different states, like the two World
Wars.
Civil
War: This is a war within a state between rival groups or communities. Certain
political pressure groups, like terrorist organizations, might also be
considered “political communities,” in that they are associations of people
with a political purpose and, indeed, many of them aspire to statehood or to
influence the development of statehood in certain lands. One of many examples
of Political communities is El Shabbab in Somalia, JEM (Justice Equity
Movement) in Darfur-Sudan
Monadic
vs. Dyadic Peace
Most
research is regarding the dyadic peace, that democracies do not fight
one another. Very few researchers have supported the monadic peace, that
democracies are more peaceful in general. There are some recent papers that
find a slight monadic effect. Müller and Wolff (2004), in listing them, agree
"that democracies on average might be slightly, but not strongly, less
warlike than other states," but general "monadic explanations is
neither necessary nor convincing"
.
Democratic
Norms
Some
norms regulate political life in democratic states as follows:
A
liberal democratic culture makes the leaders accustomed to negotiation and
compromise (Weart, 1998).
A
belief in human rights may make people in democracies reluctant to go to war,
especially against other democracies (Müller & Wolff 2004).
The
decline in colonialism, also by democracies, may be related to a change in
perception of non-European peoples and their rights (Ravlo&Gleditsch,
2000).
Bruce
Russett also argues that the democratic culture affects the way leaders resolve
conflicts.
Political
similarity
One
general criticism motivating research of different explanations is that
actually the theory cannot claim that "democracy causes peace",
because the evidence for democracies being, in general, more peaceful is very
slight or nonexistent; it only can support the claim that "joint democracy
causes peace". According to Rosato (2003), this casts doubts on whether
democracy is actually the cause because, if so, a monadic effect would be
expected.
Perhaps
the simplest explanation to such perceived anomaly is that democracies are not
peaceful to each other because they are democratic, but rather because they
are similar. This line of thought started with several independent
observations of an "Autocratic Peace" effect, a reduced probability
of war (obviously no author claims its absence) between states which are both
non-democratic, or both highly so.
Autocratic
peace and the explanation based on political similarity is a relatively recent
development, and opinions about its value are varied. Henderson (2002) builds a
model considering political similarity, geographic distance and economic
interdependence as its main variables, and concludes that democratic peace is a
statistical artifact which disappears when the above variables are taken into
account. Werner (2000) finds a conflict reducing effect from political
similarity in general, but with democratic dyads being particularly peaceful,
and noting some differences in behavior between democratic and autocratic dyads
with respect to alliances and power evaluation.
Democratic
dyads have a 55% reduced chance. He concludes that autocratic peace exists, but
democratic peace is clearly stronger. However, he finds no relevant pacifying
effect of political similarity, except at the extremes of the scale.
To
summarize a rather complex picture, there are no less than four possible
stances on the value of this criticism:
Political
similarity, plus some complementary variables, explains everything. Democratic
peace is a statistical artifact. Henderson subscribes to this view.
Political
similarity has a pacifying effect, but democracy makes it stronger. Werner
would probably subscribe to this view.
Political
similarity in general has little or no effect, except at the extremes of the
democracy-autocracy scale: a democratic peace and an autocratic peace exist
separately, with the first one being stronger, and may have different
explanations. Bennett holds this view, and Kinsella mentions this as a
possibility
Political
similarity has little or no effect and there is no evidence for autocratic
peace. Petersen and Ray are among defendants of this view.
A
majority of researchers on the determinants of democracy agree that economic
development is a primary factor which allows the formation of a stable and
healthy democracy (Hegre, 2003; Weede, 2004). Thus, some researchers have
argued that economic development also plays a factor in the establishment of
peace.
Mousseau
(2005) finds that democracy is a significant factor only when both democracies
have levels of economic development well above the global median. In fact, the
poorest 21% of the democracies studied, and the poorest 4–5% of current
democracies, are significantly more likely than other kinds of
countries to fight each other. Mousseau, Hegre&Oneal (2003) confirm that if
at least one of the democracies involved has a very low level of economic
development, democracy is ineffective in preventing war; however, they find
that when also controlling for trade, 91% of all the democratic pairs had high
enough development for the pacifying effect of democracy to be important during
the 1885–1992 period and all in 1992.
Other
factors related to democracies being more peaceful
According
to Azar Gat's War in Human Civilization, there are several related and
independent factors that contribute to democratic societies being more peaceful
than other forms of governments:
Wealth
and comfort: Increased prosperity in democratic societies has been associated
with peace because civilians are less willing to endure hardship of war and
military service due to a more luxurious life at home than in pre-modern times.
Increased wealth has worked to decrease war through comfort (Gat, 597–598).
Metropolitan
service society: The majority of army recruits come from the country side or
factory workers. Many believe that these types of people are suited for war.
But as technology progressed the army turned more towards advanced services in
information that rely more on computerized data which urbanized people are
recruited more for this service (Gat 600–602).
Sexual
revolution: The availability of sex due to the pill and women joining the labor
market could be another factor that has led to less enthusiasm for men to go to
war. Young men are more reluctant leave behind the pleasures of life for the
rigors and chastity of the army (Gat 603- 604).
Fewer
young males: There is greater life expectancy which leads to fewer young males.
Young males are the most aggressive and the ones that join the army the most.
With less younger males in developed societies could help explain more
pacificity (Gat 604–605).
Fewer
Children per Family: During pre-modern times it was always hard for families to
lose a child but in modern times it has become more difficult due to more
families having only one or two children. It has become even harder for parents
to risk the loss of a child in war. However, Gat recognizes that this argument
is a difficult one because during pre-modern times the life expectancy was not
high for children and bigger families were necessary (Gat 605–606).
Women's
franchise: Women are less belligerent than men. Therefore women are less
inclined to serious violence and do not support it as much as men do. Electing
more women could have an effect on whether liberal democracies take a more
aggressive approach on certain issues (Gat 606- 607).
Nuclear
weapons: Nuclear weapons could be the reason for not having a great power war.
Many believe that a nuclear war would result in mutually assured destruction
(MAD) which means that both countries involved in a nuclear war have the
ability to strike the other until both sides are wiped out.
Sociological
Liberalism
Sociological
liberalism is an international Int system theory. It is critical
of realist theory which it sees as too state-centric. Sociological
liberals see international relations in terms of relationships between people,
groups and organizations in different countries. Many sociological liberals
believe that increased transnational relations could help create new forms of
human society.
Interdependence
Liberalism
Interdependence
liberalism is a strand of liberal international Int system thinking
which argues that increased interdependence between countries reduces the
chance of them engaging in conflict. Interdependence liberals see
modernization as increasing the levels and scope of interdependence between
states leading to greater cooperation. Such thinkers also see welfare as the
primary concern of states.
Institutional
liberalism or liberal institutionalism
Institutional
liberalism or liberal institutionalism is modern theory of
international relations which claims that international institutions and
organisations such as the United Nations, NATO and
the European Union can increase and aid cooperation between states.
The theory can be compared to idealism, the international relations theory
which emerged after the First World War when the League of
Nations was founded.
Republican
liberalism
Republican
liberalism is also a part of the Public Policy theory which
claims that liberal democracy are more peaceful than other states and
should share their powers. This is explained as a result of the existence of
similar domestic political cultures, common moral values, economic cooperation
and interdependence.
Realism
Realism is
one of the Public Policy theory which claims that community should
leave under a orientation world politics which driven by competitive
self-interest.
Common
assumptions
Realism
is a tradition of international theory centered upon four propositions.
a.
The international system is anarchic
In
summary, realists think that humankind is not inherently benevolent but rather
self-centered and competitive. This perspective, which is shared by theorists
such as Thomas Hobbes, views human nature as egocentric (not necessarily
selfish) and conflictual unless there exist conditions under which humans may
coexist. This view contrasts with the approach of liberalism to Public
Policy.
Background
of realism in Public Policy
Realism
in Public Policy is not recent rather this theory exists since before the
birth of Christ. Realism in Public Policy has a rich background and many
thinkers wrote many on this so expanded theory.
Historic
antecedents
While
Realism as a formal discipline in Public Policy did not arrive
until WW II, its primary assumptions have been expressed in earlier
writings and here we only evocate few:
Han
Feizi, Chinese scholar who theorized Legalism (or Legism) and who
served in the court of the King of Qin - later unifier of China ending
the Warring States Period. His writings include The Two Handles (about
punishments and rewards as tools of governance). He theorised about a neutral,
manipulative ruler who would act as head of state while secretly controlling
the executive through his ministers - the ones to take real responsibility for
any policy.
Niccolo
Machiavelli, a Florentine political philosopher, who wrote IL
Principe (The Prince) in which he held that the sole aim of a prince
(politician) was to seek power, regardless of religious or ethical
considerations.
Cardinal
Richelieu, French statesman who destroyed domestic factionalism and guided
France to a position of dominance in foreign affairs.
Carl
Von Clausewitz, 18-19th century Prussian general and military theorist who
wrote On War.
Otto
von Bismarck, Prussian statesman who coined the term balance of power.
Balancing power means keeping the peace and careful realpolitik
practitioners try to avoid arms races.
Branches
of Realism
a.
Classical Realism
Classical
realism states that it is fundamentally the nature of man that pushes states
and individuals to act in a way that places interests over ideologies.
Classical realism is an ideology defined as the view that the "drive for
power and the will to dominate are held to be fundamental aspects of human
nature".
b.
Liberal realism or the English school or rationalism
The
English School holds that the international system, while anarchical in
structure, forms a "society of states" where common norms and
interests allow for more order and stability than what might be expected in a
strict realist view. Hedley Bull remained the prominent English School
writer and a prominent liberal realist.
c.
Neorealism or structural realism
Neorealism
derives from classical realism except that instead of human nature, its focus
is predominantly on the anarchic structure of the international system. States
are primary actors because there is no political monopoly on force existing
above any sovereign. While states remain the principal actors, greater
attention is given to the forces above and below the states through levels of
analysis or structure-agency debate. The international system is seen as
a structure acting on the state with individuals below the level of
the state acting as agency on the state as a whole.
d.
Neoclassical realism
Neoclassical
Realism can be seen as the third generation of realism, coming after the
classical authors of the first wave like Machiavelli/Thomas Hobbes and the
neorealists (eg. Kenneth Waltz). The neoclassical realism has a double meaning
as follows:
The
primary motivation underlying the development of neoclassical realism was the
fact that neorealism was only useful to explain political outcomes (classified
as being 'theories of international politics'), but had nothing to offer about
particular states' behavior (or 'theories of foreign policy'). The basic
approach, then, was for these authors to "refine, not refute, Kenneth
Waltz", by adding domestic intervening variables between systemic
incentives and a state's foreign policy decision.
e.
Symbiotic realism
The
Symbiotic Realism theory of IR is based on four interlocking
dimensions of the global system:
Interdependence;
Instant connectivity;
Global anarchy;
The neurobiological substrates
of human nature.
He
defines the neurobiological substrates of human nature that motivate
behavior as basic needs, ego and fear. When basic survival needs
met, Nayef Al-Rodhan argues that humans can aspire to higher things
such as morality. Thus, in order for society to prosper, the state of
nature among individuals must be mitigated. This has historically been done
through the establishment of states and of domestic governments.
Internationally,
however, the relations between states have historically and continue to be
dominated by anarchy. With no overarching authority to regulate state
behavior and ensure the safety and prosperity of all, international
life could be considered somewhat precarious. Nayef Al-Rodhan argues that
increased integration brought about by globalization helps to
mitigate the consequences of global anarchy.
However, globalization is also undermining the capacities of states
to act as viable sites for collective action and credible commitments. This is
because the states are becoming more intertwined in webs of power that are
linked to shifts in the material distribution of power and authoritative
resources.
f.
Realism in statecraft
The
ideas behind George F Kennan’s work as a diplomat and diplomatic historian
remain relevant to the debate over American foreign policy, which since the
19th century has been characterized by a shift from the Founding Fathers'
realist school to the idealistic or Wilsonian school of international
relations. In the realist tradition, security is based on the principle of a
balance of power and the reliance on morality as the sole determining factor in
statecraft is considered impractical.
Criticisms
of Realism
The
democratic peace theory advocates also that realism is not applicable to
democratic states' relations with each another, as their studies claim that
such states do not go to war with one another. However, Realists and proponents
of other schools have critiqued both this claim and the studies which appear to
support it, claiming that its definitions of "war" and
"democracy" must be tweaked in order to achieve the desired result.
Federalism
The
term refers to the theory or advocacy of federal political orders, where final
authority is divided between sub-units and a centre. Unlike a Unitary state,
sovereignty is constitutionally split between at least two territorial levels
so that units at each level have final authority and can act independently of
the others in some area. Citizens thus have political obligations to two
authorities.
Post-realism
Post
realism suggests that Realism is a form of social scientific
and political rhetoric. It opens a debate about what is real and what is
realistic in international relations. The post realism bears aspects of
offensive and defensive kinds. Prominent Post-Realists are Francis A Beer,
James Der Derian , Robert Hariman and Micheal J Shapiro.
Offensive
Realism
This
structural theory belonging to the realist school of thought first postulated
by John Mearsheimer that holds the anarchic nature of the international
system responsible for aggressive state behavior in international politics. It
fundamentally differs from defensive realism by depicting great powers as
power-maximizing revisionists
privileging buck-passing over balancing strategies in their ultimate
aim to dominate the international system. The theory brings important
contributions for the study and understanding of Public
Policy but remains nonetheless the subject of criticism.
Main
Tenets of offensive Realism
The
offensive realism theory is grounded on five central assumptions which are
similar to the ones that lie at the core of Kenneth Waltz’s defensive realism.
These are:
Great
powers are the main actors in world politics and the international system
is anarchical
All
states possess some offensive military capability, States can never
be certain of the intentions of other states, States have survival as their
primary goal, and States are rational actors, capable of coming up
with sound strategies that maximize their prospects for survival
Status
Quo Vs. Power-Maximizing States
John
Mearsheimer’s offensive realism intends to fix the ‘status quo bias’ of Kenneth
Waltz’ defensive realism theory. While
both realist variants argue that states are primarily concerned with maximising
their security, they disagree over the amount of power required in the process.
Indeed, in offensive realism, the international system provides great powers
with strong incentives to resort to offensive action in order to increase their
security and assure their survival.
The international system characterized
by anarchy the absence of a central authority capable of enforcing rules
and punishing aggressors uncertain state intentions and available offensive
military capabilities, leads states to constantly fear each other and resort to
self-help mechanisms to provide for their survival. In order to alleviate this
fear of aggression each holds of the other, states always seek to maximize
their own relative power, defined in terms of material capabilities.
This
relentless quest for power inherently generates a state of "constant
security competition, with the possibility of war always in the background.”
Only once regional hegemony attained do great powers become status quo states.
Balancing
Vs. Buck-Passing State Behavior
The
emphasis offensive realism puts on hegemony as states’ end aim stands in sharp
contrast to defensive realism’s belief that state survival can be guaranteed at
some point well short of hegemony. In a defensive realist mindset, security
increments by power accumulation end up experiencing diminishing marginal
returns where costs eventually outweigh benefits.
Responding to defensive realists’ posture on
state behaviour towards the most powerful state in the international system,
Mearseimer believes that threatened states will reluctantly engage in balancing
against potential hegemons but that balancing coalitions are unlikely to form
against a great power that has achieved regional hegemony. This lack of
balancing is best explained by the regional hegemon’s newly acquired status quo
stance, which follows from the geographical constraints on its power projection
capability.
Contributions
and Criticism
Mearsheimer’s
offensive realism represents an important contribution to the Public
Policy theory yet also generated important criticism. While the inputs
and critics below provide a good sample of the theory’s contributions and the
kind of arguments that have been addressed against it, the listing should in no
case be considered as exhaustive.
Theoretical
Inputs
Firstly,
scholars believe that Mearsheimer’s offensive realism provides a nice
complement to Waltz’ defensive realism. The theory adds to defensive realists’
argument that the structure of the international system constrains state
behaviour. Setting to rectify the status quo bias pertaining to defensive
realism by arguing that anarchy can also generate incentives for states to
maximise their share of power, offensive realism solves anomalies that Waltz’
theory fails to explain.
Mainly, the theory is able to provide an explanation
for the amount of conflict occurring among states in the international system.
As Snyder states, Mearsheimer’s offensive realism "enlarges the scope of
neorealist theory by providing a theoretical rationale for the behavior of
revisionist states.
Defensive
Realism
In IPolicy, defensive
realism is a variant of political. Defensive realism looks at states
as socialized players who are the primary actors in world affairs. Defensive
realism predicts that anarchy on the world stage causes states to become
obsessed with security. This results in Security Dilemma wherein one
state's drive to increase its security can, because security is Zero Sum,
result in greater instability as that state's opponent(s) respond to their resulting
reductions in security.
Among
defensive realism's most prominent theories is that of offense-defensive theory
which states that there is an inherent balance in technology, geography, and
doctrine that favors either the attacker or defender in battle. Offense-Defense
theory tries to explain the First World War as a situation in which all
sides believed the balance favored the offense but were mistaken.
In
modern times, several economic and political groups are known to benefit from
the effects Defensive Realism, in terms of both the economic activity
generated in delivering the resources or technology needed to increase a
particular state's own security, as well as the positive feedback effect
caused by the perceived destabilization to an opponent’s own security by
comparative observation.
Maximist
This
theory was first developed by Karl Marx, a German philosopher (19th century)
who observed the existence of inequity between the rich and poor in society and
the tendency for the wealthy, more powerful classes to exploit the poorer,
weaker ones. Marxists consider the international relations as an extension of
the struggle between the classes, with wealthy countries exploiting poor
countries.
Marxists mainly study the imperialism; a practice of powerful
nations to control and influence weak nations. The theory of imperialism was
developed by Vladmir Lenin before the 1917 Communist Revolution in Russia and
sees the economic relationships as both the cause of and potential solution to
the problem of war.
Marxist
and Neo-Marxist Public Policy theories
Are
paradigms which reject the realist/liberal view of state conflict or
cooperation, instead focusing on the economic and material aspects. It purports
to reveal how the economic trumps other concerns, which allows for the
elevation of class as the focus of the study. Marxists view the
international system as an integrated capitalist system in pursuit
of capital accumulation. Thus, the period of colonialism brought in
sources for raw materials and captive markets for exports, while
decolonialization brought new opportunities in the form of dependence.
Dependency
theory
Dependency
theory is a body of social science theories predicated on the
notion that resources flow from a "periphery" of poor and
underdeveloped states to a "core" of wealthy states, enriching the
latter at the expense of the former. It is a central contention of dependency
theory that poor states are impoverished and rich ones enriched by the way poor
states are integrated into the "world system."
This theory came as a reaction
to modernization theory, an earlier theory of development which held
that all societies progress through similar stages of development, that today's
underdeveloped areas are thus in a similar situation to that of today's developed
areas at some time in the past, and that therefore the task in helping the
underdeveloped areas out of poverty is to accelerate them along this supposed
common path of development, by various means such as investment, technology
transfers, and closer integration into the world market.
The dependency
theories argue that underdeveloped countries are not merely primitive versions
of developed countries, but have unique features and structures of
their own; and, importantly, are in the situation of being the weaker members
in a world market economy.
Basics
The
premises of dependency theory are that:
a.
Poor nations provide natural resources, cheap labor, a destination for obsolete
technology, and markets for developed nations, without which the latter could
not have the standard of living they enjoy.
b.
Wealthy nations actively perpetuate a state of dependence by various means.
This influence may be multifaceted, involving economics, media control,
politics, banking and finance, education, culture, sport and all aspects of
human resource development (to include recruitment and training of workers).
c.
Wealthy nations actively counter attempts by dependent nations to resist their
influences by means of economic sanctions and/or the use of military
force.
Dependency
theory states that the poverty of the countries in the periphery is not because
they are not integrated into the world system, or not 'fully' integrated
as is often argued by free market economists, but because of how they
are integrated into the system. This introduces a paradoxical effect, in that
although both the first and third-world countries are benefitting, the poorer
side is being locked into detrimental economic position.
Historical
background of dependency theory
In
1949, Hans Singer and Raul Prebisch observed that the term of
trade for underdeveloped countries relative to the developed countries had
deteriorated over time: the underdeveloped countries were able to purchase
fewer and fewer manufactured goods from the developed countries in exchange for
a given quantity of their raw materials exports. This idea is known as the
Singer-Prebisch
Thesis. Prebisch, an Argentine economist at the United Nations
Commission for Latin America (UNCLA) suggests that the underdeveloped nations
must employ some degree of protectionism in trade if they were to enter a
self-sustaining development path. According to Prebisch, the
Import-substitution industrialization (ISI) and not the trade-and- export
orientation, was the best strategy for underdeveloped countries.
Feminism
Feminism
in Public Policy is a broad term given to works of those scholars who
have sought to bring gender concerns into the academic study
of International policies.
In
terms of Public Policy theory it is important to understand
that feminism is derived from the school of thought known as
reflectionism referring to the many different roles that women play in
international politics as plantation sector workers, diplomatic wives, sex
workers on military bases etc. In this sense, there is no clear cut division
between feminists working in IR and those working in the area
of International Political Economy (IPE).
World system theory
World-systems
theory (also known as world-systems
analysis or the world-systems perspective) is a
multidisciplinary, macro-scale approach to World
History and social change that stresses that
the world-system (and not nation states) should be the primary
(but not exclusive) unit of social analysis.
World-system refers to the
inter-regional and transnational division of labor, which divides the
world into core, semi-periphery and periphery countries. Core
countries focus on higher skill, capital-intensive production, and the
rest of the world focuses on low-skill, labor-intensive production and
extraction of raw materials.
This includes, especially, the
divisions within the social sciences, and between the social sciences and
history.
·
Influences and major thinkers
World-systems theory traces emerged
in the 1970s and its roots could be found in sociology, but it has
developed into a highly interdisciplinary field.
World-systems theory was aiming to
replace modernization theory. Wallerstein criticized modernization theory
due to:
ü Its focus on the state as the only unit of
analysis,
ü Its assumption there is only a single path of
evolutionary development for all countries,
ü Its disregard of transnational structures that constrain
local and national development.
Three major predecessors of
world-systems theory are: the Annales School, Marxist, and dependence theory.
The Annales School tradition (represented most notably by FernandBraudel)
influenced Wallerstein in focusing on long-term processes and
geo-ecological regions as unit of analysis. Marxist theories added:
ü a stress on social conflict,
ü a focus on the capital accumulation process and
ü competitive class struggles,
ü a focus on a relevant totality,
ü the transitory nature of social forms, and
ü a dialectical sense of motion through conflict and
contradiction.
World-systems theory was also
significantly influenced by dependency theory -
a neo-Marxist explanation of development processes.
Wallerstein sees the development of
the capitalist world-economy as detrimental to a large proportion of the
world's population. Wallerstein views the period since the 1970s as an
"age of transition," one that will give way to a future world-system
(or world-systems) whose configuration cannot be determined in advance.
Other approaches
International
Ethics
International
ethics is an area of international relations theory which
concerns the extent and scope of ethical obligations between states in an era
of globalization. Schools of thought include cosmopolitanism and anti-cosmopolitanism.
Realism, Liberalism, and Marxism are ethical traditions that conceptually
address moral issues in international relations.
Post-colonial
International relations scholarship
Postcolonial
International relations scholarship posits a critical
theory approach to International (IR), and is a non-mainstream
area of international relations scholarship. According to Baylis, postcolonial
Public Policies scholarship has been largely ignored by mainstream Public
Policy theorists and has only recently begun to make an impact on the
discipline. Post colonialism focuses on the persistence of colonial forms
of power and the continuing existence of racism in world politics.
Postmodern
of Public Policy
Approaches
have been part of Public Policy scholarship since the 1980s. Although
there are various strands of thinking, a key element to postmodernist theories
is a distrust of any account of human life which claims to have direct access
to the "truth". Post-modern international relations theory critiques
theories like Marxism that provide an overarching
metanarrative to history. Key postmodern thinkers includeLyotard, Foucault
and Derrida.
Regime
theory
Regime
theory is a theory within Public Policy derived from the liberal
tradition that argues that international institutions or regimes affect
the behavior of states (or other international actors). It assumes
that cooperation is possible in the anarchic system of states, as
regimes are by definition instances of international cooperation.
The
theoretical foundations of Regime theory is based on the fact that
while realism predicts that conflict should be the norm in Public
Policy , there is cooperation despite anarchy. Often they cite cooperation
in trade, human rights and collective security among other issues. These
instances of cooperation are regimes. The most commonly cited definition of
regimes comes from Stephen Krasner.
State
Cartel Theory
State
cartel theory is a new concept in the field of Int. System theory and
belongs to the group of institutionalist approaches. Up to now the
theory has mainly been specified with regard to the EU, but could be made
much more general
a. The starting material of a state
cartel theory is the intellectual corpus of a broad existing theory of
international relations. For instance the following theories might be
adaptable: the Realism, the neo-functionalist Europe-science, or
even a Marxist imperialism theory. Their statements on the relationships
between the industrialized nation states are called into question as these are
thought to be ideologically biased and therefore these are marked up for
revision and change.
b. The losses and vacancies are now to be
refilled by another theory, the classical cartel theory of economic
enterprises. This theory, made up mainly in Germany, was authoritative in
Europe till the end of the World War II and was pushed aside globally by the American
anti-trust policy up to the 1960s.
c. In a third step the transfer results
were rechecked in the light of available facts of international relations and
they were stated more precisely and with greater differentiation.
The cartel
gain: Cooperating within international institutions normally provides the
participating states with substantial benefits. "The cartel gain of the EU
consists of the various gains in prosperity, which result from economic
integration and now make the member states adhere like being glued together.
Tendencies
for crises: According to state cartel theory inter-state organizations
typically develop severe problems and crises. The EU is seen to be in a
permanent crisis. The causes for this
are thought to lie in the clashes of increasingly unbridgeable interests
between the participating nations. The EU as a particularly advanced
cartel combine would strike more and more against a systemic barrier of
development, i.e. could only be upgraded effectively by a change-over of power,
by a Federal revolution, in which the cartel form will be conquered and a
federal state with its considerable potentials for rationalization will be
erected.
One
of the element explain the Weber’s theory
The
Future of Underdeveloped Countries: Political Implications of Economic
Development
This
study is a pioneering effort of considerable interest. Focusing attention on
the political implications of economic development, the author emphasizes that
in the choice to be made by the underdeveloped areas may lie the survival of
Western civilization. At the same time he points out the limited influence of
economic aid on political and social development, and makes certain challenging
observations concerning the nature of the Communist appeal in underdeveloped
areas. Based on a careful survey of much of the literature in the field, the
book is divided into three major sections: a consideration of the objectives of
the Western World in the underdeveloped area; the Communist strategy in this
area; and policy recommendations for the Western World.
TOPIC
IV. DIFFERENT POLITICAL APPLIED TO POLITICAL PHENOMENA
IV.0.
Introduction
This
Topic of political applied to political phenomena and Public Policy major is
designed to prepare students for careers in public service, advocacy, and
analysis. It aims at a broad understanding of the goals and problems of public
policy, the political process that leads to policy development, and the
implementation and evaluation of public policy. The major is valuable
preparation for those who intend to engage in research for public agencies,
non-profits, or voluntary associations interested in the problems of
government.
IV.1.
Definition and impressions of Political applied to political phenomena
A political
system is a system of politics and government.
It is usually compared to the legal system, economic
system, cultural system, and other social
systems. However, this is a very simplified view of a much more
complex system of categories involving the questions of who should have
authority and what the government's influence on its people and economy should be.
The
definition that can be found in Van Dale's dictionary reads as follows: ‘study
of political phenomena'. Not very clearly put. When it comes to ‘politics' the
very same dictionary states that it involves ‘a whole system of
fundamental principles set down by an administrative body', the ‘policy of
a ruling government', ‘how law is enforced' or ‘the whole governing
body'.
Political Science is
the academic study of governments, public policies and political behavior. The
major is designed for students interested in domestic and foreign policy
issues, politics, public administration, and related areas like policy analysis
and policy advocacy. Political scientists use both scientific skills and
humanistic perspectives to study political decision-making in the United States
and other countries and regions of the world.
The Public Policy major is designed for students
interested in policy issues, politics, public administration, and related areas
like policy analysis and policy advocacy. The program explores a myriad of
critical issues facing our communities, the nation, and the world. The program
provides students the foundation for careers in the public sector, in
government-related businesses, and in non-profit organizations, as well as for
graduate work in the fields of law, public administration, criminal justice,
public policy, political science, and health care administration.
Foreign
policy
Foreign
policy analysis is the study of the conduct and practice of relations between
different actors, primarily states, in the international system. Diplomacy,
intelligence, trade negotiations and cultural exchanges all form part of the
substance of foreign policy analysis.
FPA
developed as a separate area of enquiry within the discipline of International
Relations, both because of its initially exclusive focus on the actual conduct
of interstate relations and due to its normative impulse.
While International
Relations scholars understood their role to be to interpret the broad features
of the international system, FPA specialists took as their mandate a
concentration on actual state conduct and the sources of decisions themselves.
International
System: International relations (IR) or international
affairs, depending on academic institution, is either a field of political science or
an interdisciplinary academic field similar to global studies,
in which students take a variety of internationally focused courses in social science and humanities disciplines.
In both cases, the field studies relationships among countries, the roles of sovereign states, inter-governmental organizations (IGOs), international non-governmental
organizations (INs), non-governmental organizations (NGOs),
and multinational corporations (MNCs).
International relations is an academic and
a public policy field,
and so can be positive andnormative, because it analyzes and formulates
the foreign policy of a given State.
Power in International System
Power in International System defined in several different ways. Political scientists, historians, and practitioners of international relations (diplomats) and System have used the following concepts of political power:
- Power as a goal of states or leaders;
- Power as a measure of influence
or control over outcomes, events, actors and issues;
- Power as reflecting victory in conflict and the
attainment of security;
- Power as control over resources and
capabilities;
- Power as status, which some states or actors
possess and other do not.
Modern discourse generally speaks in
terms of state power, indicating both economic and military power. Those states
that have significant amounts of power within the international system are
referred to as middle powers, regional powers, great powers, superpowers, or hyper powers/hegemons, although there is no commonly accepted standard for what
defines a powerful state.
Entities other than states can also
acquire and wield power in international relations. Such entities can include multilateral
international organizations, military alliance organizations like NATO, multinational corporations like Wal-Mart, non-governmental organizations, the Roman Catholic Church, Al-Qaeda, or other institutions such as the Hanseatic League
Power
as a goal
Primary usage of "power"
as a goal in international relations belongs to political theorists, such as Niccolò Machiavelli and Hans Morgenthau. Especially among Classical Realist
thinkers, power is an inherent goal of mankind and of states. Economic growth,
military growth, cultural spread etc. can all be considered as working towards
the ultimate goal of international power
Power as influence
NATO accounts for over 70% of global military expenditure, with the United States alone accounting for 43% of global military expenditure.
Political scientists principally use "power" in terms of an actor's
ability to exercise influence
over other actors within the international system. This influence can be coercive, attractive, cooperative, or competitive. Mechanisms of influence can include the threat or use of
force, economic interaction or pressure, diplomacy, and cultural exchange.
Spheres, blocs,
and alliances
Under certain circumstances, states
can organize a sphere of influence or a bloc within which they exercise predominant influence.
Historical examples include the spheres of influence recognized under the Concert of Europe,
or the recognition of spheres during the Cold War following the Yalta Conference.
The Warsaw Pact, the "Free World", and the Non-Aligned Movement were the blocs that arose out of the Cold War contest.
Military alliances like NATO and the Warsaw Pact are another forum through which
influence is exercised. However, "realist" theory often attempts to stay away from the creation
of powerful blocs/spheres that can create a hegemon within the region. British foreign policy, for example, has always sided against the hegemonic forces
on the European continent, i.e. Nazi Germany, Napoleonic France or Habsburg Austria.
Power as
security
Power
is also used when describing states or actors that have achieved military victories or security for their state in the international
system. This general usage is most commonly found among the writings of
historians or popular writers. For instance, a state that has achieved a string
of combat victories in a military campaign against other states can be
described as powerful. An actor that has succeeded in protecting its security, sovereignty, or strategic interests from repeated or significant
challenge can also be described as powerful.
Power as
capability
Power is the capacity to direct the decisions and actions of
others. Power derives from strength and will. Strength comes from the
transformation of resources into capabilities. Will infuse objectives with
resolve. Strategy marshals capabilities and brings them to bear with precision.
Statecraft seeks through strategy to magnify the mass, relevance, impact, and
irresistibility of power. It guides the ways the state deploys and applies its
power abroad. These ways embrace the arts of war, espionage, and diplomacy. The
practitioners of these three arts are the paladins of statecraft
Power as
status
Much effort in academic and popular
writing is devoted to deciding which countries have the status of
"power", and how this can be measured. If a country has
"power" (as influence) in military, diplomatic, cultural, and
economic spheres, it might be called a "power" (as status). There are
several categories of power, and inclusion of a state in one category or
another is fraught with difficulty and controversy.
Categories of
Power
In the modern geopolitical
landscape, a number of terms are used to describe various types of powers, which
include the following:
- Superpower: In 1944, Foxdefined superpower as "great
power plus great mobility of power" and identified 3 states, the British Empire, the Soviet Union and the United States. The United States is currently the only country
considered to be a superpower, with China, Russia, India and the European
Union being potential superpowers.
- Great power: In historical mentions, the term great power
refers to any nations that have strong political, cultural and economic
influence over nations around it and across the world. China,
France, Germany, Japan, Russia, and the United Kingdom are often considered to be current great powers.
- Regional power: Used to describe a nation that exercises influence
and power within a region. Being a regional power is not mutually
exclusive with any of the other categories of power. Many countries are
often described as regional powers, among those are Australia, Brazil, Canada, India, Italy, Mexico, South Korea and Spain.
- Middle power: A subjective description of second-tier influential
states that could not be described as great powers, such as Argentina, Netherlands, Indonesia, Israel, Poland and South Africa.
other types of power
The term energy superpower describes a country that has immense influence or even
direct control over much of the world's energy supplies. Saudi
Arabia and Russia, are generally acknowledged as the world's current energy
superpowers, given their abilities to globally influence or even directly
control prices to certain countries. Canada and Australia are potential future energy superpowers.
The term cultural/entertainment
superpower describes a country in which has immense influence or even
direct control over much of the world's entertainment or has an immense large
cultural influence on much of the world. Although this is debated on who meets
such criteria, many agree that the United Kingdom, United States, and Japan are generally acknowledged as the entertainment and
cultural superpowers, given their abilities to distribute their entertainment
and cultural innovations worldwide. South Korea is generally considered potential entertainment and
cultural superpower.
Small Power
“Diplomats
from a military weak country may have trouble making their point. Those from
military strong country are listened to carefully” (Roskin& Berry,
2002:280)
There is
considerable literature on the foreign policy challenges of states
that are not great powers, termed variously as middle powers, small states,
regional powers,
secondary powers
and the like. The formalization of the division between small and great powers
came about with the signing of the Treaty of Chaumont
in 1814. Before that the assumption had been that all independent states were
in theory equal regardless of physical strength and responsibilities.
The International
System is for the most part made up by small powers (and small states). This is
easily forgotten by the single minded focus of academia on the great powers.
Over time the impact of a small power in the international system may never
equal or surpass the impact of greater powers.
Nevertheless small powers can
influence the workings of the international system together with other states
causing reactions from other nations. Small powers are instruments of great
powers and they are actors; they may act to strengthen stability or they may
promote chaos. They may at times be dominated, but they cannot be ignored.
Powers
great and small
Almost all
studies of power in international relations focus on great power politics and
it will for this reason not be discussed here. For, as László Réczei noted,
power status hinges on the capacity for violence: "If the notion of war
were unknown in international relations, the definition of ‘small power’ would
have no significance; just as in the domestic life of a nation it has no
significance whether a man is less tall or has a weaker physique than his
fellow citizen.
The weakening
of the non-alignment movement during the 1970s coincided with a gradual decline
in small-state studies, culminating in Peter Baehr’s critical appraisal of the
research tradition in which he questioned smallness as a useful framework for
analysis. The small-power category was first taken into serious account with
David Mitrany’s study on world government (paxoecumenica) in 1933.
Characteristics
of small powers
Though a single
definition has proved elusive due to the number of potential variables and
their particular interpretation under given conditions, AsleToje claims that to have found recurring traits in the research
literature regarding the behavioral patterns of small powers on the
international stage.
a.
The strategic behavior of small
powers is characterized by dependence. A small power recognizes that it cannot
obtain security by relying solely on its own capabilities. They cannot affect
the international system alone but with some concerted effort they can have an
impact on the way the system works.
b.
Small powers display variable
geometry. In terms of military capabilities there is no ability to project
power on a global scale. They are forced by their limited resources, their
location and by the international system itself to establish clear priorities.
To this end, they identify a hierarchy of risks and attempt to internationalize
those considered to be most serious.
c.
Small powers are the primary
beneficiaries of international institutions and are, by necessity, lovers of
the law. A small power will often seek to minimize the costs of conducting
foreign policy and will increase the weight behind its policies by engaging in
concerted efforts with other actors.
d.
Small powers are risk averse. They
see more dangers than opportunities in international politics, which leads them
both to shun system-upholding tasks and to display a penchant for token
participation in such endeavours.
Balance
of Power
In
international Policy, the balance of power is the posture and policy of
a nation or group of nations protecting itself against another nation or group
of nations by matching its power against the power of the other side. States
can pursue a policy of balance of power in two ways:
The term balance of power came into
use to denote the power relationships in the European state system from the end
of the Napoleonic Wars to World War I. Within the European balance of power,
Great Britain played the role of the “balancer,” or
“holder of the balance.”
It was not permanently identified with the policies of
any European nation, and it would throw its weight at one time on one side, at
another time on another side, guided largely by one consideration the maintenance of the balance itself.
Naval supremacy and its virtual immunity from foreign invasion enabled Great
Britain to perform this function, which made the European balance of power both
flexible and stable.
World War II ended with the major
weights in the balance of power having shifted from the traditional players in
western and central Europe to just two non-European ones: the USA
and the USSR. The result was a bipolar balance of power
across the northern half of the globe that pitted the free-market democracies
of the West against the communist one-party states of Eastern Europe. More
specifically, the nations of Western Europe sided with the United States in the
NATO military alliance, while the Soviet Union’s
satellite-allies in central and Eastern Europe became unified under Soviet
leadership in the Warsaw
Pact.
Forms of Power System
Soft power System
The
concept of Soft power was developed by Joseph Nye of Harvard University to
describe the ability to attract and co-opt rather than coerce, use force or
give money as a means of persuasion. Nye coined the term in a 1990 book, Bound
to Lead: The Changing Nature of American Power. He further developed the
concept in his 2004 book, Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics.
For Nye, power is the ability to
influence the behavior of others to get the outcomes you want. There are
several ways one can achieve this: you can coerce them with threats; you can
induce them with payments; or you can attract and co-opt them to want what you
want. This soft power-getting others to want the outcomes you want co-opts
people rather than coerces them. It is
also considered the "second face of power" that indirectly allow you
to obtain the outcomes you want.
Soft power resources are the assets
that produce attraction which often leads to acquiescence. Nye asserts that,
“Seduction is always more effective than coercion, and many values like
democracy, human rights, and individual opportunities are deeply seductive.”
Angelo Codevilla observed that an often overlooked essential aspect of soft
power is that different parts of populations are attracted or repelled by
different things, ideas, images, or prospects. Soft power is hampered when policies,
culture, or values repel others instead of attracting them.
In his book, Nye argues that soft
power is a more difficult instrument for governments to wield than hard power
for two reasons; First, many of its critical resources are outside the control
of governments; Second, soft power tends to “work indirectly by shaping the
environment for policy, and sometimes takes years to produce the desired
outcomes." The book identifies three broad categories of soft power:
“culture,”“political values,” and “policies.”
Hard power System
Hard power is the use of military and economic means to influence the behavior or interests of other political bodies. This
form of political power is often aggressive, and is most effective when imposed
by one political body upon another of lesser military and/or economic power.
Hard power contrasts with soft power, which comes from diplomacy, culture and history.
According to Joseph Nye, the term is “the ability to use the carrots and sticks
of economic and military might to make others follow your will.” Here, “carrots” are inducements such as the
reduction of trade barriers, the offer of an alliance or the promise of
military protection. On the other hand, “sticks” are threats including the use
of coercive diplomacy,
the threat of military intervention, or the implementation of economic sanctions.
Ernest Wilson
describes it as the capacity to coerce “another to act in ways in which that
entity would not have acted otherwise.”
Joseph Nye has used the term to
define some policy measures in regards to Iran as well. For instance, there are many sanctions against
Iran passed by UN Security Council and numerous nations such as the United States and European
Union also impose bilateral sanctions against Iran. They impose restrictions on
exports of nuclear and missile to Iran, banking and insurance transactions,
investment in oil, exports of refined petroleum products, and so on. Such
measures are taken by many nations to deter Iran’s possible nuclear weapon
program.
Smart
power System
In IP, the term smart power
refers to the combination of hard power and soft power strategies. The Center
for Strategic and International Studies defines the smart power as "an
approach that underscores the necessity of a strong military, but also invests
heavily in alliances, partnerships, and institutions of all levels to expand
American influence and establish legitimacy of American action."
Joseph Nye, former Assistant
Secretary of Defense under the Clinton Administration and author of several
books on smart power strategy, suggests that the most effective strategies in
foreign policy today require a mix of hard and soft power resources. Employing
only hard power or only soft power in a given situation will usually prove
inadequate.
Nye utilizes the example of terrorism, arguing that combating
terrorism demands smart power strategy. He advises that simply utilizing soft
power resources to change the hearts and minds of the Taliban government would
be ineffective and requires a hard power component. In developing relationships
with the mainstream Muslim world, however, soft power resources are necessary
and the use of hard power would have damaging effects.
TOPIC V.
PUBLIC POLICY MONITORING AND EVALUATION TOOLS
V.0.
Introduction
This last
topic provides an overview of the characteristics of public policy monitoring
and advocacy evaluation activities and the challenge these pose for monitoring
and evaluation. In part one we will define what we mean by policy and advocacy,
the nature of policy and advocacy programmes and the evolution of M&E in
policy and advocacy. In part two we will outline some of the current issues and
debates: the purpose of M&E in policy and advocacy; how to measure success;
the debate between attribution and contribution; and using M&E to
understand causes. These sections will conclude with a summary of the relevance
of M&E of advocacy for an organisation’s strategy.
Policy,
and approaches to influencing it This Topic looks at how to monitor and
evaluate activities that aim to influence policy. A starting point, then, is to
look at what ‘policy’ is, and how to understand change (or stasis) in policy.
Rather than seeing policy as one single, discrete decision, it is important to
broaden one’s view, so that policy is understood as a series of documents and
decisions that are best described as a set of processes, activities or actions
(Neilson, 2001).
V.1.
Definition and impressions of Public Policy Monitoring Evaluation tools
The
M&E is, as its name indicates, separated into two distinguished categories:
Evaluation and Monitoring. An evaluation is a systematic and objective
examination concerning the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and impact of
activities in the light of specified objectives. The idea in evaluating projects is to isolate errors
not to repeat them and to underline and promote the successful mechanisms for
current and future projects.
Monitoring
is a continuous assessment that aims at providing all stakeholders with early
detailed information on the progress or delay of the ongoing assessed
activities. It is an
oversight of the activity's implementation stage.
Monitoring
and evaluation (M&E)
is a process that helps improving performance and achieving results. Its goal
is to improve current and future management of outputs, outcomes and impact. It
is mainly used to assess the performance of projects, institutions and
programmes set up by governments, international organisations and NGOs. It establishes links between the past,
present and future actions.
Monitoring
and evaluation processes can be managed by the donors financing the assessed
activities, by an independent branch of the implementing organization, by the
project managers or implementing team themselves and/or by a private company.
The credibility and objectivity of monitoring and evaluation reports depend
very much on the independence of the evaluator or evaluating team in charge.
Their expertise and independence is of major importance for the process to be
successful.
Many
international organizations such as the United Nations, the World Bank group and the Organization of American States have been
utilizing this process for many years. The process is also growing in
popularity in the developing countries where the governments have created their
own national M&E systems to assess the development projects, the resource
management and the government activities or administration. The developed
countries are using this process to assess their own development and cooperation
Differences
between Monitoring and Evaluation
The common
ground for monitoring and evaluation is that they are both management tools.
For monitoring, data and information collection for tracking progress according
to the terms of reference is gathered periodically which is not the case in
evaluations for which the data and information collection is happening during
or in view of the evaluation.
The
monitoring is a short term assessment and does not take into consideration the
outcomes and impact unlike the evaluation process which also assesses the
outcomes and sometime longer term impact. This impact assessment occurs
sometimes after the end of a project, even though it is rare because of its
cost and of the difficulty to determine whether the project is responsible of
the observed results.
Importance
of Monitoring and Evaluation
Although
evaluations are often a retrospective, their purpose is essentially forward
looking. Evaluation applies the lessons and recommendations to decisions about
current and future programmes. Evaluations can also be used to promote new
projects, get support from governments, raise funds from public or private
institutions and inform the general public on the different activities.
The Paris Declaration on
Aid Effectiveness in
February 2005 and the follow-up meeting in Accra underlined
the importance of the evaluation process and of the ownership of its conduct by
the projects' hosting countries. Many developing countries now have M&E
systems and the tendency is growing.
Performance
measurement
The
credibility of findings and assessments depends to a large extent on the manner
in which monitoring and evaluation is conducted. To assess performance, it is
necessary to select, before the implementation of the project, indicators which
will permit to rate the targeted outputs and outcomes.
According
to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), an
outcome indicator has two components: the baseline which is the situation
before the programme or project begins, and the target which is the expected
situation at the end of the project. An output indicator that does not have any
baseline as the purpose of the output is to introduce something that does not
exist yet.[5]
The Global
management (United Nations)
The most
important agencies of the
United Nations have a
monitoring and evaluation unit. All these agencies are supposed to follow the
common standards of the United Nations Evaluation Group (UNEG).
These norms concern the Institutional framework and management of the
evaluation function, the competencies and ethics, and the way to conduct
evaluations and present reports (design, process, team selection, implementation,
reporting and follow up). This group also provides guidelines and relevant
documentation to all evaluation organs being part of the United Nations or not.
Sustainable
Development Goals
The
Sustainable Development Goals, otherwise known as the Global Goals,
build on the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs), eight anti-poverty targets that the world
committed to achieving by 2015. The MDGs, adopted in 2000, aimed at an array of
issues that included slashing poverty, hunger, disease, gender inequality, and
access to water and sanitation.
Enormous
progress has been made on the MDGs, showing the value of a unifying agenda
underpinned by goals and targets. Despite this success, the indignity of
poverty has not been ended for all.
The new
SDGs, and the broader sustainability agenda, go much further than the MDGs,
addressing the root causes of poverty and the universal need for development
that works for all people.
UNDP
Administrator Helen Clark noted: "This agreement marks an important
milestone in putting our world on an inclusive and sustainable course. If we
all work together, we have a chance of meeting citizens’ aspirations for peace,
prosperity, and wellbeing, and to preserve our planet."
The Sustainable
Development Goals will now finish the job of the MDGs, and ensure
that no one is left behind.
Role of
UNDP on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG)
All 17
Sustainable Development Goals are connected to UNDP’s Strategic Plan focus
areas: sustainable
development, democratic
governance and peace building, and climate and disaster
resilience. SDGs Number on poverty, Number 10 on
inequality and Number 16 on
governance are
particularly central to UNDP’s current work and long-term plans.
Having an
integrated approach to supporting progress across the multiple goals is crucial
to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals, and UNDP is uniquely placed to
support that process. UNDP supports countries in three different ways, through
the MAPS approach: mainstreaming, acceleration and policy support.
Providing
support to governments to reflect the new global agenda in national development
plans and policies. This work is already underway in many countries at national
request;
Supporting
countries to accelerate progress on SDG targets. In this, we will make use of
our extensive experience over the past five years with the MDG Acceleration Framework;
and
Making the
UN’s policy expertise on sustainable development and governance available to
governments at all stages of implementation.
Collectively,
all partners can support communication of the new agenda, strengthening
partnerships for implementation, and filling in the gaps in available data for
monitoring and review. As Co-Chair of the UNDG Sustainable Development Working
Group, UNDP will lead the preparation of Guidelines for National SDG Reports
which are relevant and appropriate for the countries in which we work.
UNDP is
deeply involved in all processes around the Sustainable Development Goal roll
out. We are bringing our extensive programming experience to bear in supporting
countries to develop their national SDG efforts.
A guide to monitoring and evaluating policy
influence
Influencing
policy is a central part of much international development work. Donor
agencies, for example, must engage in policy dialogue if they channel funds
through budget support, to try to ensure that their money is well-spent. Civil
society organisations are moving from service delivery to advocacy in order to
secure more sustainable, widespread change. And there is an increasing
recognition that researchers need to engage with policy-makers if their work is
to have wider public value.
Monitoring
and evaluation (M&E), a central tool to manage interventions, improve
practice and ensure accountability, is highly challenging in these contexts.
Policy change is a highly complex process shaped by a multitude of interacting
forces and actors. ‘Outright success’, in terms of achieving specific,
hoped-for changes is rare, and the work that does influence policy is often
unique and rarely repeated or replicated, with many incentives working against
the sharing of ‘good practice’.
This paper
provides an overview of approaches to monitoring and evaluating policy
influence, based on an exploratory review of the literature and selected
interviews with expert informants, as well as ongoing discussions and advisory
projects for policy-makers and practitioners who also face the challenges of
monitoring and evaluation.
There are a number of lessons that can be learned,
and tools that can be used, that provide workable solutions to these
challenges. While there is a vast breadth of activities that aim to influence
policy, and a great deal of variety in theory and practice according to each
different area or type of organisation, there are also some clear similarities
and common lessons.
Tackling
the challenges of M&E of policy influence
Monitoring
and evaluation (M&E) are widely recognised as being crucial elements of
managing and implementing projects, programmes and policies in both public and
private sector organisations.
The production and use of M&E information
during and after an intervention is generally seen as a central plank in
systems for reporting and accountability, in demonstrating performance, and/or
for learning from experience and improving future work. Monitoring and
evaluating policy influencing work, however, presents some particular
challenges and complexities. These challenges are, in general, integral to
policy influencing work and not specific to one particular sector or approach
to policy influence. Although they have been well documented and described
elsewhere, they provide a useful
First,
there are a range of conceptual and technical challenges. It can be very
difficult to determine the links between policy influencing activities and
outputs, and any change (or stasis) in policy. Policy change is highly complex
and proceeds in anything but a ‘linear’ or ‘rational’ fashion, with policy
processes shaped by a multitude of interacting forces and actors. starting
point for looking at approaches to the M&E of policy influence.
Second,
the nature of policy influencing work presents further challenges to more
traditional M&E approaches. ‘Outright success’ in terms of achieving the
specific changes that were sought is rare, with some objectives modified or
jettisoned along the way.
Third,
there are further practical problems that constrain the production and use of
knowledge about influencing activities. Staff carrying out influencing work
rarely have the time or resources to conduct robust M&E, and there tend to
be further problems of M&E capacity at the individual and institutional
level in many organisations that work in advocacy and other influencing
activities.
Public
campaigns and advocacy
Typical
activities: Some approaches to policy influencing target large numbers of
individuals, or the political debate on an issue, through public messaging and
campaigning. They might try to build up public support for a new policy, using
public meetings and speeches to communicate the rationale for a proposed
reform, or using television and radio to raise public awareness of an issue.
Based on
various models of behaviour change and public interest in political issues, a
number of outcomes may be of relevance: awareness of an issue or campaign,
perception of saliency or importance of an issue, attitudes, norms and
standards of behaviour, and actual behaviour. There are a number of ways to
ascertain this information:
• Surveys
can be used to gauge attitudes of particular audiences, and to make judgements
about how these change over time and the influence of a project over them. Because
of the large number of people targeted by campaigns, quasi-experimental methods
can sometimes be used, given the large number of people targeted by campaigns.
• Focus
group discussions are a key tool for understanding the perspectives of a target
audience on an issue, idea or event, and what drives that audience. If
facilitated effectively, they can provide richer and deeper information than
surveys, although with less information about ‘coverage’.
• Direct
responses and informants represent a ‘light touch’ way to track influence on a
target audience. One method is to track the number of enquiries received from
the audience, or the number attending public meetings. Another could be to
interview individuals who are judged to be ‘well placed’ to assess a particular
target audience.
Description
of different Activities, outputs, outcomes, context
There are many options for monitoring an
advocacy intervention’s strategy, activities, outputs and intended outcomes,
some of which are presented: theory of change, logical framework, outcomes
hierarchy, impact pathway, programme theory and logic model.
They all
share the same broad purpose: to develop a shared, explicit understanding of
how things are understood to change, how the intervention will engage to support
certain changes and/or inhibit others, what causal steps are involved, what
assumptions are being made about this and what rationale we have for making
these causal claims.
Developing
some kind of theory of change not only helps in planning the intervention
strategically but it will also help prioritise evaluation efforts. The most
basic M&E system is one that can tell you at any given time what has been
done by the programme, where, when, with whom, what the aim was and what
actually happened. More sophisticated M&E systems will also be able to tell
you the effects of those actions: - how did key actors react? -what kinds of
changes were observed? -what kind of secondary or knock-on effects have been
observed positive or negative?
In
addition to this, a good M&E system will also provide information on the
context within which these activities were conducted or change was observed.
This kind of descriptive data is essential for the majority of purposes of
M&E and should be the minimum standard for most M&E systems.
REFERENCES,
BOOKS,
SYLLABUS AND JOURNAL
Hill,
Michael (2005). Public
Policy Process. Pearson.
Allison,
G. T. (1971). Essence of decision: Explaining the Cuban missile crisis.
Aristotle.
Politics (trans. Earnest Barker, 1962). New York, NY: Oxford.
Jones, B.
D. (2009). Agendas and instability in American politics (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press. Bok, D. (2001). The trouble with government.
Breyer, S.
(1982). Regulation and its reform.
C. E.
Mayer, L. C., Carr, T. R., Cayer, N. J., McKenzie, M., and Peck, L. R. (2012).
American public policy: An introduction. Boston, MA: Wadsworth.
Derthick,
M., & Quirk, P. J. (1985). The politics of deregulation.
Dror, Y.
(1968). Public policymaking reexamined.
Boston,
MA: Longman. Frederickson, H. G. (1999). The repositioning of American public
administration.
Acemoglu,
Daron. 2002. “Why Not a Political Case Theorem? Social Conflict, Commitment,
and Politics.” Department of Economics Working Paper Series.
Daron, Simon Johnson, and James Robinson.
2002. “Reversal of Fortune: Geography and Institutions in the Making of the
Modern World Income Distribution.”
Ackerman,
John M. 2005. Social Accountability in the Public Sector: A Conceptual
Discussion. MINECOFIN (2007), Financial sector development program, report (First
initiative) , Kigali, Republic of Rwanda.
MINECOFIN
(2007), Poverty analysis for Rwanda’s Economic Development and Poverty
reduction strategy. Kigali, Republic of Rwanda.
MINECOFIN,
(2007) EDPRS poverty analysis for Ubudehe, Kigali, Republic of Rwanda.
MINICOFIN
(2007), National guide for planning, budgeting and policy review, Republic of
Rwanda, Kigali.
Vera A.
Wilhelm, et al, 2004: Tools for development Public Sector Governance Reform.
WORLD BANK
(1994), Rwanda poverty reduction and sustainable growth, Washington.
WORLD BANK
(2006), Agricultural policy note, promoting pro-poor growth in Rwanda
challenged and opportunities, Washington D.C.
(Gustier
Papanek, “The Effect of Aid and Other resource Transfers on Saving a and Grow
in Less Developed Countries”EJ September 1972.)
Griffin
and Enos (KB. Griffin and JL. Enos,” Foreign assistance: objectives and
consequence, “Economic Development and Cultural change, April 1970.)
Data
Sources: IMF, World Bank, UN, OECD, CIA World Factbook
Brown,
Chris with Kirsten Ainley. 2005. Understanding International Relations, 3rd ed.
Palgrave Macmillan. New York. Coulumbis, A.,
Theodore,
James H., Wolfe. 1986. Introduction to International Relations: Power and
Justice.
Prentice-Hall
of India,New D. Eaton, Kent (2004) “Designing Subnational Institutions:
Regional and Municipal Reforms in Post Authoritarian Chile”, in Comparative
Political Studies, Vol.3.
Nacos L.
Brigitte.1994. Terrorism and the Media: From the Iran Hostage Crisis to The
World Trade Centre Bombing. Columbia University Press, New York.
Nye S.
Joseph Jr. 2005. Understanding International Conflicts: An Introduction to Theory and Practice. 5th ed. Pearson,
Longman, New York.
Williams
Phil, Donald M., Goldstein and Jay M., Shafritz (Eds). 1994. Classic International
Economics in the Age of Globalization Wilson B. Brown& Jan S. Hogndorn
2000.
Haas E. B.
(1953). The balance of power, prescription, concept, or propaganda? World
Politics.
Kaplan M.
A. (1957). System and Process in International Politics, 242 pp. Howard, Sir
Esme (May 1925), "British Policy and the Balance of Power", The
American Political Science Review19
Syllabus and Notes
Aimé
MUYOMBANO (PhD Scholar), Syllabus of Mechanism of International Communications
and Policy, Masters JKUAT
Aimé
MUYOMBANO (PhD Scholar), Syllabus of Policy, Objects and Principles of
Devolution, Masters JKUAT
Aimé
MUYOMBANO (PhD Scholar), Syllabus of Project appraisal and impact assessment.
Masters JKUAT
Aimé
MUYOMBANO (PhD Scholar), Syllabus of Employees resourcing. Masters JKUAT
Aimé
MUYOMBANO (PhD Scholar), Syllabus of Policy, objects and Principles of
Devolution. Masters JKUAT
Aimé
MUYOMBANO (PhD Scholar), Syllabus of Strategies and policies of Development, UR
Aimé
MUYOMBANO (PhD Scholar), Syllabus of Strategies and policies of Development, UR
Aimé
MUYOMBANO (PhD Scholar), Syllabus of Industrial Economics, INILAK.
Aimé
MUYOMBANO (PhD Scholar), Syllabus of Organization and Society Development, INILAK.
- Aimé
MUYOMBANO (PhD Scholar), Syllabus of
organization and Society Development Perspective, INILAK
- Aimé
MUYOMBANO (PhD Scholar), Syllabus of Development Economics, INILAK.
- Aimé
MUYOMBANO (PhD Scholar), Syllabus of Key issues of International
Relations, ULK.
- Aimé
MUYOMBANO (PhD Scholar), Syllabus of Key issues of International
Relations, ULK.
- Aimé
MUYOMBANO (PhD Scholar), Syllabus of Contemporary Political System
Analysis ULK.
- Aimé
MUYOMBANO (PhD Scholar), Syllabus Rwanda Economy INES Ruhengeri
- Aimé
MUYOMBANO (PhD Scholar), Entrepreneurship Development and managment INES
Ruhengeri
Course
Journals
- Public
Policy Journal
- Foreign
Policy Journal
- International
Journal of applied PP
- International
Journal of Public Policy
Reference
Journals
·
Smart Development Research
Institute (SDRInstitute.blogspot.com)
- International
Journal of Inter-cultural Relations
- Journal
of Management
- International
Perspectives of Organizational Behavior and Human
- Resource
Management.
- International
Journal of Intercultural Relations
Author Prof. Dr. Rugema D. Muyombano
0Awesome Comments!