Factors Influencing Optimal Policy Alternatives, Essay Example

Policy Process Model and Related Factors Influencing Optimal Policy Alternatives

It is apparent that many people, including politicians and policy makers, view policy analysis as a science. These people are known for utilizing technical techniques to develop the ideal policy. These techniques involve a rational-comprehensive model where the costs and benefits of each action are weighed and derived in an analytical fashion. Despite this, the policy process is influenced by other factors, such as politics. These factors are detrimental to the end result because these prohibiting factors detract from achieving optimal policy alternatives.

Significantly, the policy process is based on several different disciplines: political science, sociology, anthropology, international relations, and management. As a result of the inter-relationship of these disciplines, there are five key inter-related themes. These are: “(a) the dichotomy between policy-making and implementation; (b) the management of change; (c) the role of interest groups in the policy process; (d) ownership of the policy process; and (e) the narrowing of policy alternatives” (Sutton 5). The policy process itself has three separate phases: agenda, decision, and implementation. During the agenda phase, policy makers are involved in “recognizing and defining the nature of the issue to be dealt with; identifying possible courses of action to deal with the issue; [and] weighing up the advantages and disadvantages of each of these alternatives” (Sutton 9). During the decision phase, policy makers are involved in “choosing the option which offers the best solution” (Sutton 9). During the implementation stage, policy makers are involved in “implementing the policy [and] possibly evaluating the outcome” (Sutton 9). The phases are conducted through the rational-comprehensive model.

The rational-comprehensive model of policy makes several assumptions. For instance, the model assumes that policy makers always act rationally. This is amplified by the assumption that policy makers consider all relevant information regarding the issue at hand. However, “if policies do not achieve what they are intended to achieve, blame is often not laid on the policy itself, but rather on political or managerial failure in implementing it. Failure can be blamed on a lack of political will, poor management or shortage of resources, for example” (Juma and Clark; Sutton 9). Thus, this model is not always considered to be based in reality.

The remainder of this paper is designed to exploring the policy process detailed in the second paragraph. This will include a discussion of the different factors relating to each step in the process and how these factors prohibit optimal policy alternatives. This information is important because it can assist interested parties in developing new ways to create optimal policy alternatives.

As noted, the first phase in the policy making process is the agenda phase. Within this phase, the issue at hand is identified and information is obtained about the issue. This allows policy makers to ascertain what changes, if any, need to be made. These decisions can also influence policy alternatives. The major factors that influence policy making are contextual factors, political factors, and societal response factors. Contextual factors can be cultural, economic, institutional, social, sequencing of events, or legal. Political factors can be based on public obligation. Societal response factors can be the potential effect on the population and morality (Jansson). These factors influence the agenda phase because they mold the issue at hand to fit separate categories. For instance, contextual and societal response factors can influence policy alternatives through societal expectations. These expectations can be measured through cultural and public obligation factors. When considering political science and sociology, development narratives are useful when helping policy makers work towards the decision phase. In fact, when considering political science and sociology aspects, policy is considered to be arguments, social experiments, and/or interactive learning (Sutton 10-11). Furthermore, narratives “are an attempt to bring order to the complex multitude of interactions and processes which characterize development situations. They function to simplify situations, to bring clarity” (Sutton 11). This clarification can be beneficial in ascertaining policy alternatives. However, clarification of the wrong details, or of insignificant details, can cloud judgement, causing inaccurate alternatives from being developed. Furthermore, these clarifications can prevent policy alternatives from being developed at all. When considering anthropology, development discourses affects the agenda phase. This is because development discourses are defined as “a particular way of thinking and arguing which involves the political activity of naming and classifying, and which excludes other ways of thinking” (Sutton 13). As a result, it is highly possible for viable policy alternatives to be overlooked or dismissed from thought. Thus, narratives and development discourses can prevent optimal policy alternatives from being analyzed and/or considered. When considering international relations, various international regimes affect the agenda phase. This is because “regimes function to enhance the ability of nation states to co-operate on a given issue-area. A variety of norms serve to guide the behavior of regime members in such a way as to produce collective outcomes which are in harmony with the goals and shared convictions specified in the regime principles” (Sutton 15). Since the policy alternatives may go against the norms of the region, they may be overlooked.

The decision phase involves the actual decision of policy makers regarding a particular issue. This can be influenced significantly by contextual factors. For instance, it is possible that the most influential factors within the decision phase include sequencing of events. This can be highlighted by landmark cases that pave the way for new policies. As a result, decisions can be altered based on these landmark cases and events. For example, terrorism may have an effect on policies being developed regarding national security. In other situations, the financial recession of 2008 may have influenced economic policies.

The implementation phase is largely influenced by management. This component involves barriers to change, the skills required of managers, power and influence, and an open system approach (Sutton 18-19). Significantly, barriers to change can majorly impact policy alternatives. For example, if the policy is not accepted by the population, it will be hard for the government to enforce. The reverse can also be somewhat true. If a policy is supported by the population, yet not by the government, there may be some resistance to other policies that the government develops. Furthermore, within the rational-comprehensive model, although it is theoretically possible for all alternatives to be considered, this is not often the case. Rather, limited alternatives are considered. This is because “it is unrealistic to think policy makers have the time, imagination and information required to make comprehensive predictions about the costs and benefits of each possible alternative option, the complexity of this task is too great” (Sutton 30). As a result, it is impossible for the optimal policy alternative to be determined.

Overall, it has been stated that “the policy making process is by no means the rational activity that it is often held up to be in much of the standard literature. Indeed, the metaphors that have guided policy research over recent years suggest that it is actually rather messy, with outcomes occurring as a result of complicated political, social and institutional processes which are best described as ‘evolutionary’” (Juma and Clark). As a result of these processes, optimal policy alternatives may not be determined.

For the best policies to be developed, it is crucial for policy makers to consider all the alternatives. However, it is known that this is not possible. Therefore, it is important for policy makers to consider all applicable policy alternatives. This will involve considering different aspects, such as political, cultural, institutional, and economic factors. As a result of these considerations, it may be possible to develop the most optimal policy alternative.  However, at the same time, these considerations may prohibit the most optimal policy alternative from being developed, particularly due to time, financial, and resources constraints.

When acknowledging the various constraints that exist when determining alternative policies, policy makers enable themselves to create the most optimal alternative. This is because alternative policies must consider a wider range of components, not just the issue at hand. As a result, policy makers are afforded a well-rounded set of options that can help develop the best policy for the situation. Finally, through the most effective alternative policy option, policy makers can be more assured that they have addressed all underlying factors and issues that may influence the resultant policy.

Works Cited

Jansson, Bruce S. The Reluctant Welfare State: American Social Welfare Policies: Past, Present, and Future. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning, 1997.

Juma, C. and N. Clark. “Policy research in sub-Saharan Africa: An Emploration.” Public Administration and Development (1995): 121-137.

Sutton, Rebecca. The Policy Process: An Overview. Working paper. London: Overseas Development Institute, 1999.