What Strategies Can Policymakers Use Employ to Promote Successful Policy Implementation - Essay Example

? Policy Implementation What strategies can policymakers use employ to promote successfulpolicy implementation? Introduction Policies, policy makers and connection with history A policy is a guideline or a rule against which policy makers make policies in order to achieve an outcome that is good for social welfare (Gowing & Arnold, 1974) Policy implementation is the part of policy process between establishment and evaluating the policy and seeing its impact on people. This process actually involves the translation of the objectives of the policy into the system. It has three basic elements which include creating responsibility or an agency who would handle this new responsibility. Secondly, there needs to be operational rules and guidelines for the policy program and personnel and resources need to be coordinated so that the intent of the policy is achieved. Thesis statement Policy implementation is the next step after adoption of a policy and they make or break the policy. There will be no effect on society if the policy is never implemented; however this is a complex procedure that has many facets and ingredients for success. Policy implementation Policies also have certain intended and unintended effects. Intended effects are those that aim to seek out a positive benefit from a policy and this could also be one of the ways that policies actually avoid the negative effects. That is why there is a standard and policy makers will always compare their policy against the standard to see whether it is above or below the par. An example could include the policy the State of California implemented which led to the increase in use of hybrid cars. The Federal Law provided tax cuts worth $1500 as well as special lanes to hybrid vehicles which led to an increase in the use of hybrid cars and this led to a positive effect or an intended effect. The government created an effect by taking an action which was the policy even though the option of ‘high-occupancy vehicle lanes’ is not available for new hybrid vehicles. (Suleiman, 1984) Negative side effects that are not intended are called ‘unintended’ and they are usually because policy making systems are usually complex. They may set the tax rate so high or so low that this deters money from the economy. Therefore the policy implementation fine combs the policy actions so that these unintended effects are taken care of; however it is impossible to remove the entire negative effects while implementation. (Yates, 1977) Policy making as aforementioned is the part where the government actually carries out and executes a particular policy that is adopted when it is required by the law or otherwise. The different agencies that are responsible for the respective policy areas come together and are given the formal responsibility for implementing the policy and this is usually the stage when the bill is no longer a bill but becomes a law. Once the government has made a public policy such as a rule, law, edict, statute or any regulation, the policy must be executed and monitored, administered and then it should be forced upon society so that it brings about the change that policy makers desire it to. The agency that is responsible for implementation is given the desired resources and the power to allow the new policy to be implemented smoothly, however this is usually not the case. But why is public policy implemented in the first place? Public policies are implemented so that there is some change in the population so that a certain public problem is resolved or at least ameliorated at the very least. The problem will continue to exist until the policy is carried out and once the policy is implemented, it will be evaluated to see if the results that were desired are being obtained and further revision and implantation can take place. Agencies of administration will carry out most of the work of the government and so they have an impact on the citizens of the county and are involved in policy implementation. They also create new agencies and bureaus etc. to assign the responsibility of implementation and they must put the laws in to action and into the system of organizations in the form of rules. They are the ones who spend money, perform actions and draw up contracts. One main element of policy implementation is the power and clout given to bureaucrats and the agency to transform the policy into action and the implementation decides who will receive benefits from the policy and those who will not. It will have a result on the entire society and includes licensing, contracting, regulating, enforcement etc. There are several steps to undertake while implementing a policy. Firstly, the requirements need to be studied such as the laws and regulations related to the particular policy or that policy area and other policies of a higher level that are already there and other standards of law that need to be followed. Then the policy makers must take into account the risk that will have to be taken and the issues of the policy will need to be addressed in a document and the degree of confidentiality such as the levels of confidentiality that will be needed for your information. (Baldridge & al, 1978) Risk is inherent in everything and therefore it needs to be accounted for and mentioned in the policy document. Policy makers also need to organize the policy document and align it so that it is as comprehensive as possible. After following all the technicalities, the policy needs to be approved by higher authorities and the entire organization needs to be in sync and everyone should understand the policies. In most cases training of employees will be necessary. This is a continuous cycle however; training and awareness is never a complete job and the policy is analyzed by many members of society. Implementation also involves gaining support from the political body in ruling and the organization framing the policy. The core values of the policy should be transparent and they should be included in a statement related to the policy such as the Renewable Energy policy’s core value of including more renewable energy which is better for the environment in the long run. Employees should also be on board and it should be beneficial to society as a whole. The responsibilities of the government and the political party as well as managers should also be outlines and they should act in accordance with the human rights law and policies of the organizations as well. Specialized training should be given to those who are responsible for giving advice on policy matters and resolving complaints about policies. As aforementioned, the policy document should be simple and transparent and so that it is understandable it is to be in plain language. Transparency means that the policies should also be easily available and accessible for review by those who it targets and people shouldn’t have to ask for it. The policy implementation procedure means that the policy exchanges a great deal of hands and therefore it needs to be signed and passed on for verification. The outdated material should also be pulled out of the circulation so that people have up to date information and don’t follow the wrong policies. Policies should also be accessible online to cater to the modern world developments. It should be communicated effectively both online and offline and in a consistent manner without bias. It should also be discussed and revised so that it has the maximum beneficial impact. It should also be discussed by various committees such as health and safety committee etc. Revisions should also be known to the public as soon as they are made and there should be a period after which the policy is reviewed, in order to check its efficiency. Financial costs, social utility, spillovers etc. are all considered and the level of trust is also checked. This system can only work if it is based on a strong civil service ethos which means that civil servants actually feel a commitment and loyalty in their work and they can give their impartial opinions without any fear and their opinion might even be considered. Politicians and civil servants can have conflicting goals and that can be one of the reasons why such a model doesn’t always work out. This is called the ‘principle-agent problem.’ (Kjell A Eliassen, 2008) Post empiricist methods of framing a public policy have emerged which have included more participatory methods of framing a public policy and this another new viewpoint in public policies. (Fischer, 2003) The 2009 Renewable Energy Directive for European Union member states is one of the successful policies even though it has some doubts and concerns surrounding it. (Sharman, 2010) Greenhouse gas is one of the concerns of policy makers for energy since it harmful for the environment and energy policies are backed by concerns of environmental sustainability. All member countries of the European Union as per the Kyoto Protocol in 1997 agreed to reduce the amount of Greenhouse gas they emit and to include this as a core element of their energy policy. Transport was one of the major sources for carbon dioxide emissions globally according to 2006 reports and it accounted for at least a quarter of the emissions and 90% was solely due to road transport. There are many ways to reduce the emissions especially by making public transport more attractive to use and making vehicles with engines that are cleaner and changing the resources used to create energy such as using bio-energy and bio fuels instead of fossil fuels which are depleting and also emit harmful chemicals that pollute the environment. Bio fuels can not only be used for transport but also for electricity and heat generation and there are two categories of them either: first or second generation which is a term that is used to refer to their technological and commercial maturity. The use of bio fuels is expected to rise but by a minimum level and to account for about 6% use in transportation especially on roads, but in 2030. However even though some research indicates that bio fuels are renewable sources however their use is questionable for several reasons. The major concern is that bio fuels may actually lead to an increase in greenhouse gas emission when other factors are considered such as land usage. These are the direct concerns but some indirect concerns would include the social impact of bio fuels. Some research indicates that bio fuels would actually lead to increase in the prices of food all over the world and this is detrimental to the economy. (Gerston, 1997) However, the policy was implemented and it mandated European Union member states to use 10% renewable energy content by 2020 in their road transport fuel. The target was to be met primarily from bio fuels but questions are raised about their efficiency in reducing green house gases and the 10% target is questioned in terms of political aspects as well scientific proof and the course of the entrepreneur who played a main role in this policy implementation. European Union was also questioned and their internal structure as well and there is doubt in the minds of people whether a policy is implemented first and then evidence gathered or is the evidence regarding its benefits evaluated and then the policy implemented. These debate circumferences the topic of direct and indirect costs as well. (Birkland, 2001) The main reasons as to why the ‘Renewable Energy Directive’ was implemented are: Economic development in the region Environmental sustainability Security of supply This goes hand in hand with the EU’s strategy of focus on energy and climate and which aims at reducing the greenhouse emissions by 20% when compared to 1990. They want to reduce 20% in energy consumed by making consumption more efficient, 20% increase in renewable energy use and overall reduce 20% of emission of greenhouse gas. (Sharman, 2010) This proves that while considering a public policy, the implementation is what makes a policy successful or unsuccessful. The mix of political and scientific elements is considered and then the policy is brought into the limelight and possibly revised if the economy has changed. Thus it is a complex process and subject to change. (Hanberger, 2001) Policy makers, and in the case of policy implementation, primarily beauracracies can ask some thoughtful questions in the procedure to better implementation of a policy such as questioning the design of the policy considering the problem at hand, and whether the design would enhance policy implementation or hinder it. The agency should also be reviewed in accordance with its capabilities of administering the policy and also the plausibility and the rationale behind the policy needs to be understood to be in sync with the policy while implementing. Political obstacles and effect on target population need also be considered as well the factors that hinder policy implementation. Implementation problems and strategies Policies can also fail due to implementation problems and sometimes they are not implemented such as the case of the health strategy in England in 1992-1997. However a policy is truly unsuccessful if it is implemented and has unsuccessful outcomes. It can also fail due to bad luck or bad execution and therefore it can also rest on the shoulders of the policy makers. External conditions may also not be in favor of the policy and. Top down and bottom up perspectives also need to be considered in policy implementation. A gap can occur if there is a gap in perception and implementation and therefore a mix of the two is needed; a common ground. A reason why health problems and inequalities in society exist could be because policy makers don’t allow resource allocation where as those in the lower hierarchy may be for it. Implementation also involves groping about in the dark at times with little information or incomplete information etc. depending on the kind of policy and what it is related to. Policy implementation is a much more complex procedure than these steps and includes writing an official document, consulting, coordinating, and defines responsibilities and roles of managers etc. Then a policy statement is issues and these include the background and the reasons for implementing the specific strategy as well as defining some terms and conditions that may be ambiguous. (Baveye, et al., 2009) Policies will address and reflect the intention of the organization and there are many types of policies as well which are analyzed in different ways and this makes policy making a complex and multi-dimensional aspect. (Dorey, 2005) There are also three strategic designs for public agencies which can be used which are inspired by corporate environments and which will be discussed. As aforementioned, efficiency and value have become the highlighted changes in public policies. Public administration, now called management is not only the problem solver in society but also the means of causing problems and that is why their roles have changed as well. Populations are ageing as more people become baby boomers and many other societal factors become burdensome for policy makers. The traditional uniform policies don’t work everywhere due to changing consumption patterns and more individualistic societies. Globalization also leads fewer options in operations and it becomes difficult to manage a nation. Therefore a framework is needed for public agencies to plan their strategy and three distinct strategies are mentioned. The public sector has become diversified and thus the administration is no longer a single entity to run the nation. There are also levels above and below public administration and they have different roles. Thus policy making has been broken down. Agencies have been formed and they are part of the public admin. They help in the formation of strategies and they are made for law administration and therefore they are in the government therefore they are not private companies or NGOs. There are also different legal systems and every society has traditions which make it difficult to be accurate in all contexts with the same strategy. Agencies have worked particularly well in UK where as in some areas they are only used to execute public policy and not strategize. However all agencies have some amount of freedom from politics, their own strategies, their own budgets and financing strategies as well as their own assets and accountability. (O’Toole, 2011) Duties and roles are defined for each member who is part of the policy making process. They result in accountability particularly for those who have greater power like politicians and this can be horizontal or downward depending on the situation. The agencies aim is to create benefit for the public, those who pay and add private value and even those who don’t. Agencies also compete for resources from the government and this also decides the strategy that is chosen. Competition also increases efficiency. But this can be good or bad and therefore it is a double edged sword. Such as in US, a rival bureau by the name of CBO lead to bad quality projections made by the current bureaus who were doing better without competition. (Epstein & O'Halloran, 1990) Growth management and HR policies are also important to analyze in deciding strategies. But what exactly is a strategy useful for? Planning leads to better future conditions, especially important when the masses are considered and unknown factors always exist, however, one must always know their goals. (Parsons, 1995) The different roles outlined highlight the role of managers in particular. Manager’s role is the most important in strategy formulation and they are also majorly influenced by the economy. They also represent the organization be it the government or a corporation. Middle managers are also important to implement strategies and they also support the management as a whole. Pubic management means the delegation of control and authority and they look at the traits and personalities of managers and how they will pursue their goals. Mangers also manage stakeholder expectations and politics involved with and outside the organization. This is not the same for agencies, in which the top manager is the same as any employee. (Eliassen, 2008) One of the three strategies that can be used is the internal strategic scanning mode. Organizations such as those related to public policies don’t have a clear growth and death pattern and it depends on the capability of the manager to take advantage of the resources in the best way possible. The environment also constantly changes roles and decision making by bringing up new and challenging issues. Routine scanning allows for knowledge to stay within the organization and solve the internal problems of an organization. The ‘resource-based’ view has become important over the years and it believes that a firm cannot make much of its finances between industries because within industry competition is greater. One cannot simply adapt, but has to be unique in its resources. Therefore policy makers have to find strengths of their organization and their nation and even then this is one side they have to focus on. They still have to focus on the environment which is unpredictable usually and scanning it would be a waste of time and resources since it constantly changes. Therefore policy makers will focus on the internal scanning tools so that they focus more on the weaknesses and strengths of their nation rather than the external threats and opportunities. (Caputo, 1977) Therefore the policy will be easy to follow and adapt. This will also lead to better use of resources and also allows for adoption of strategies across borders. Different offices and a hierarchy will therefore decide the strategy and direction of the nation. Knowledge and intellectual capital are also analyzed in the internal scanning mode. Humans are the ones who bring or take away competencies and their qualifications as well their personalities and behavior determines strategies and their directions. Public policy makers can also use case studies to find out the challenges and the ways other managers have successfully managed to overcome those challenges. Usually in the public sector, the capabilities of managers, the capital and auditing as well as labor and culture of the organization are important factors that lead to better resource allocation. (Halliday, et al., 2009) Public managers exercise power over the other members and thus a balance of power comes about. Thus the manager can make or break a policy and so do the politicians. There are problems related to the balance of power and not all subordinates will accept it. Also it will open up the environment for different specializations and combining knowledge. This involves changing routines that employees may not be happy with. Another strategy is the strategic governance mode. This has come about due to the increasing interdependence in the world. Networking is thus important and soft methods of governing are highlighted as opposed to hard means of command which are more controlling methods. The public sector has taken measures to implement strategies to relate to this aspect. In UK, they are improving coordination within the government and stakeholders. This leads to more decentralization as well and leads to a more diversified government body. This also leads to a smaller size of governments. The aim of this strategy is to make principles which will lead to appropriate interaction between different members of society. This leads to a more stable environment locally as well globally since many partners of agencies may be in other countries or may be operation elsewhere. The environment is assumed to be even more unpredictable in this manner but the strategy aims to be stabilizing the economy because the strategy leads to cooperation. Thus the strategic governance model incorporates design as well as internal scanning and the environment. The network structure allows for flexibility as proven by a survey of policies in UK. And a changing environment is also a source of opportunities to draw on. Government actors will still always need to be protected from profit aims and other interests that corrupt them and financial gains will only be allowed if they have similar interest for other parties. (Chari & Kritzinger, 2006) The last strategy is strategic design which has been discussed above. (Johanson, 2009) Conclusion Policy implementation holds the agencies involved responsible for any outcome and as long as they have the desired effect on the target population they are considered successful, even if they are on the way to success. Bibliography Baldridge, J. V. & al, e., 1978. Policy making and effective leadership. s.l.:s.n. Baveye, P., Mysiak, J. & Laba, M., 2009. Uncertainties in environmental modelling and consequences for policy making. s.l.:s.n. Birkland, T. A., 2001. An introduction to the policy process : theories, concepts, and models of public policy making. s.l.:s.n. Caputo, D. A., 1977. The Politics of policy making in America : five case studies. s.l.:s.n. Chari, R. S. & Kritzinger, S., 2006. Understanding EU policy making. s.l.:s.n. Dorey, P., 2005. Policy Making in Britain. s.l.:SAGE. Eliassen, K. A. a. S., 2008. Understanding Public Management. s.l.:SAGE . Epstein, D. & O'Halloran, S., 1990. Delegating powers : a transaction cost politics approach to policy making under separate powers. s.l.:Cambridge University Press. Fischer, F., 2003. Reframing Public Policy: Discursive Politics and Deliberative Practices. s.l.:Oxford University Press. Geoffrey Vickers, S., 1995. The art of judgment : a study of policy making. s.l.:s.n. Gerston, L. N., 1997. Public policy making : process and principles. s.l.:s.n. Gowing, M. & Arnold, L., 1974. Policy making. s.l.:s.n. Halliday, S., Burns, N., Hutton, N. & McNeill, F. a. T. C., 2009. Street-level bureaucracy, inter-professional relations and coping mechanisms: A study of criminal justice workers in the sentencing process. Law and Policy, p. 406. Hamlett, M. a. R. M., 2003. Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles and Policy Sub-Systems. s.l.:OUP. Hanberger, A., 2001. What is the Policy Problem?. s.l.:Sage . Johanson, J. E., 2009. STRATEGY FORMATION IN PUBLIC AGENCIES. Public Administration, Volume 4, p. 87. John, P., 2010. Making policy work. s.l.:Routledge. Kinder, 2009. Strategic change management in the public sector: An EFMD European Case Book. Public Management Review, p. 11. Kjell A Eliassen, N. S., 2008. Understanding Public Management. s.l.:Sage. O’Toole, L. J. a. M. K. J., 2011. Public Management. s.l.:Cambridge University Press. Parsons, 1995. Public policy: An Introduction to the Theory and Practice of Policy Analysis. s.l.:s.n. Sharman, A. a. H. J., 2010. Evidence-based policy or policy-based evidence. Environmental Policy and Governance,, p. 309. Suleiman, E. N., 1984. Bureaucrats and policy making : a comparative overview. s.l.:s.n. Wasby, S. L., 1976. Civil liberties : policy and policy making. s.l.:s.n. Weiss, C., 1977. Using social research in public policy making. s.l.:s.n. Yates, D., 1977. The ungovernable city : the politics of urban problems and policy making. s.l.:MIT Press. Read More