POL317-Public Policy Analysis-Augustine Nduka Eneanya-2010

NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA
SCHOOL OF ARTS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES
COURSE CODE: POL 317
COURSE TITLE: PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS
Download more at Learnclax.com

1
MAIN
CONTENT
COURSE CODE :
COURSE CODE: POL. 317

COURSE TITLE: PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS (3-CREDIT)
Course Writer: DR. Augustine Nduka Eneanya

Department of Political Science
University of Lagos
Course Reviewer: Dr Rauf Tunde Sakariyau (JUNE 2020)

Nigerian Police Academy, Kano.
Content Editor: Dr Tem Alabi
National Open University of Nigeria

Headquarters
14/16 Ahmadu Bello Way
Victoria Island
Lagos

2
Abuja Annex
245 Samuel Adesujo Ademulegun Street
Central Business District
Opposite Arewa Suites
Abuja
Email: [email protected]
URL: www.nou.edu.ng
National Open University of Nigeria 2010

First Printed 2010
ISBN: 978-058-949-X
All Rights Reserved
Printed by ……………..
For
National Open University of Nigeria

3
COURSE DESCRIPTION
POL 317: Public Policy Analysis (3 Credit Units)
This course examines the foundation of policy analysis. It dwells into analytical tools
required in explaining decision making process. The policy makers that are known as
the actors are well analysed. The study exposes rudiment and criteria involved in public
policy making. The various frameworks that are necessary to the understanding of
public policy are given attention in this course while the models, approaches and
theoretical postulations in policy analysis reflect in the manual. It is a comprehensive
composition of the subject matter which gives an in-depth insight into the fundamental
knowledge of Public Policy Analysis

4
CONTENTS PAGE
Introduction ………………………………………………….....................................................
Course Aims …………………………………………………....................................................
Course Objectives ……………………………………………....................................................
Working through the Course …………………………………....................................................
Course Materials ………………………………………………..................................................
Study Units ……………………………………………………..................................................
Textbooks and References ……………………………………...................................................
Assessment Exercises …………………………………………..................................................
Tutor-Marked Assignment ……………………………………...................................................
Final Examination and Grading ………………………………...................................................
Course Marking Scheme ………………………………………..................................................
Course Overview/Presentation ………………………………….................................................
What you will Need in this Course ……………………………..................................................
Tutors and Tutorials …………………………………………….................................................
Assessment Exercises ..................................................................................................................
How to Get the Most from This Course ………………………..................................................
Conclusion ………………………………………………………...............................................
Summary ………………………………………………………..................................................

5
INTRODUCTION
POL317 Public Policy Analysis is a one semester course in the third year of B.sc (Hons.) degree
in Political Science. It is a three unit credit course designed to enable you have a comprehensive
understanding of relevant issues in Public Policy Analysis. This is imperative for students of
Political Science to be equipped with analytical tools on decision making process especially
in a political system. The course begins with a brief introductory module that will expose you
to basic foundational knowledge on Public Policy Analysis. The meaning and definition of
Public Policy, types of Public Policy, the importance of Public Policy Analysis and the nexus
between Public Policy Analysis and other Social Sciences Disciplines are addressed in the first
module to give a solid foundation on the subject matter. The st udy has five (5) modules. Each
of the modules is structured into at least four (4) units. A unit guide comprises of instructional
material. It gives you a brief of the course content, course guidelines and suggestions and steps
to take while studying. You can also find self-assessment exercises for your study.
COURSE AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
The primary aim of this course is to provide students of Political Science with a comprehensive
knowledge of Public Policy Analysis. However, the course specific objectives will enable you
to:
i. Have a bas ic kno w ledge o n P ublic P o li c y Ana l ys is by understanding how

policies are made, what makes public policy differs from individual policy and.;
ii. Familiarize with the key actors involved in decision making process.
iii. Have understanding on what prompts certain policies and why decisions are taken
The specific objectives of each study unit can be found at the beginning and you can make
references to it while studying. It is necessary and helpful for you to check at the end of the unit,
if your progress is consistent with the stated objectives and if you can conveniently answer the
self-assessment exercises. The overall objectives of the course will be achieved, if you diligently
study and complete all the units in this course.
WORKING THROUGH THE COURSE
To complete the course, you are required to read the study units and other related materials. You
will also need to undertake practical exercises for which you need a pen, a note-book, and other
materials that will be listed in this guide. The exercises are to aid you in understanding the
concepts being presented. At the end of each unit, you will be required to submit written
assignment for assessment purposes.
At the end of the course, you will be expected to write a final examination.

6
THE COURSE MATERIAL
In this course, as in all other courses, the major components you will find are as follows:
1. Course Guide
2. Study Units
3. Textbooks
4. Assignments
STUDY UNITS
There are 21 study units in this course. They are:
MODULE 1: FOUNDATION OF PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS
UNIT 1: MEANING AND DEFINITION OF PUBLIC POLICY

UNIT 2: TYPES OF PUBLIC POLICY
UNIT 3: T H E C O N C E P T O F P U B L I C P O L I C Y ANALYSIS
UNIT 4: PUBLIC POLICY AND SOCIAL SCIENCES: THE NEXUS
UNIT 5: SCOPE AND CHARACTERISTICS OF POLICY ANALYSIS
MODULE II: POLICY ANALYSIS AND POLICY MAKING

UNIT 1: BASIC TERMINOLOGIES IN PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS
UNIT 2: METHODS AND APPROACHES TO POLICY ANALYSIS
UNIT 3: THEORIES OF POLICY ANALYSIS
UNIT 4: POLICY MAKING CYCLE
MODULE III: KEY ELEMENTS OF PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS
UNIT 1: PUBLIC POLICY ACTORS

UNIT 2: POLICY MODELS
UNIT 3: TOOLS OF POLICY-MAKING ANALYSIS
UNIT 4: PHASES IN PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS
MODULE IV: PLANNING AND PUBLIC PLICY ANALYSIS
UNIT 1: CONCEPT AND STRATEGIES OF PLANNING

UNIT 2: PLANNING IN THE DEVELOPING WORLD
UNIT 3: PLANNING, PROGRAMMING AND BUDGETING SYSTEM
UNIT 4: NETWORKING IN POLICY ANALYSIS

7
MODULE V: DIMENSIONS FOR POLICY ANALYSIS
UNIT 1: POLICY ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK

UNIT 2: COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS
TECHNIQUES
UNIT 3: ANALYSIS OF SUBSTANTIVE POLICY ISSUES
UNIT 4: CONSTRAINTS OF POLICY ANALYSIS
As you can observe, the course begins with the basics and expands into a more elaborate,
complex and detailed form. All you need to do is to follow the instructions as provided in each
unit. In addition, some self-assessment exercises have been provided with which you can test
your progress with the text and determine if your study is fulfilling the stated objectives. Tutor-
marked assignments have also been provided to aid your study. All these will assist you to be
able to fully grasp knowledge of Public Policy Analysis.
TEXTBOOKS AND REFERENCES
At the end of each unit, you will find a list of relevant reference materials which you may
yourself wish to consult as the need arises, even though I have made efforts to provide you with
the most important information you need to pass this course. However, I would encourage you,
as a third year student to cultivate the habit of consulting as many relevant materials as you are
able to within the time available to you. In particular, be sure to consult whatever material you
are advised to consult before attempting any exercise.
ASSESSMENT
Two types of assessment are involved in the course: the Self-Assessment Exercises (SAEs), and
the Tutor-Marked Assessment (TMA) questions. Your answers to the SAEs are not meant to be
submitted, but they are also important since they give you an opportunity to assess your own
understanding of the course content. Tutor-Marked Assignments (TMAs) on the other hand are
to be carefully answered and kept in your assignment file for submission and marking. This will
count for 30% of your total score in the course.
TUTOR-MARKED ASSIGNMENT
At the end of each unit, you will find tutor-marked assignments. There is an average of two
tutor-marked assignments per unit. This will allow you to engage the course as robustly as
possible. You need to submit at least four assignments of which the three with the highest marks
will be recorded as part of your total course grade. This will account for 10 percent each, making
a total of 30 percent. When you complete your assignments, send them including your form to
your tutor for formal assessment on or before the deadline.
Self-assessment exercises are also provided in each unit. The exercises should help you to
evaluate your understanding of the material so far.
These are not to be submitted. You will find all answers to these within the units they are
intended for.

8
FINAL EXAMINATION AND GRADING
There will be a final examination at the end of the course. The examination carries a total of 70
percent of the total course grade. The examination will reflect the contents of what you have
learnt and the self-assessments and tutor-marked assignments. You therefore need to revise your
course materials beforehand.
COURSE MARKING SCHEME
The following table sets out how the actual course marking is broken down.
ASSESSMENT MARKS
Four assignments (the best four of all the Four assignments, each marked out of 10%, but
assignments submitted for marking) highest scoring three selected, thus totalling 30%
Final Examination 70% of overall course score
Total 100% of course score
COURSE OVERVIEW PRESENTATION SCHEME

Units Title of Work Week Assignment
Activity (End-of-Unit)
Course Public Policy Analysis
Guide
Module 1 Foundation of Public Policy Analysis
Unit 1 Meaning and Definition of Public Policy Week 1 Assignment 1
Unit 2 Types of Public Policy Week 2 Assignment 1
Unit 3 The Concept of Public Policy Analysis Week 3 Assignment 1
Unit 4 Public Policy and Social Sciences: The Nexus Week 4 Assignment 1
Unit 5 Scope and Characteristics of Policy Analysis m Week 5 Assignment 1

Module 2 Policy Analysis and Policy Making
Unit 1 Basic Terminologies in Public Policy Analysis Week 6 Assignment 1
Unit 2 Methods and Approaches to Policy Analysis Week 7 Assignment 1
Unit 3 Theories of Policy Analysis Week 8 Assignment 1
Unit 4 Policy Making Cycle Week 9 Assignment 1
Module 3 Key Elements of Public Policy Analysis
Unit 1 Public Policy Actors Week 10 Assignment 1

Unit 2 Policy Models Week 11 Assignment 1
Unit 3 Tools of Policy Making Analysis Week 12 Assignment 1

9
Unit 4 Phases in Public Policy Analysis Week 13 Assignment 1
Module 4 Planning and Public Policy Analysis
Unit 1 Concept and Strategies of Planning Week 14 Assignment 1
Unit 2 Planning in the Developing World Week 15 Assignment 1
Unit 3 Planning, Programming and Budgeting System Week 16 Assignment 1
Unit 4 SsSBUDGETING
Networking SYSTEM
in Policy Analysis Week 17 Assignment 1
Module 5 Dimensions for Policy Analysis
Unit 1 Policy Analysis Framework Week 18 Assignment 1
Unit 2 Cost-Benefit Analysis and Cost Effectiveness Week 19 Assignment 1
Unit 3 AAnalysis
Analysis of Substantive Policy Issues Week 20 Assignment 1
Unit 4 Constrains of Policy Analysis Week 21 Assignment 1
WHAT YOU WILL NEED FOR THE COURSE
This course builds on what you have learnt in the 100 Levels. It will be helpful if you try to
review what you studied earlier. Second, you may need to purchase one or two texts
recommended as important for your mastery of the course content. You need quality time in a
study friendly environment every week. If you are computer-literate (which ideally you should
be), you should be prepared to visit recommended websites. You should also cultivate the habit
of visiting reputable physical libraries accessible to you.
TUTORS AND TUTORIALS
There are 15 hours of tutorials provided in support of the course. You will be notified of the
dates and location of these tutorials, together with the name and phone number of your tutor as
soon as you are allocated a tutorial group. Your tutor will mark and comment on your
assignments, and keep a close watch on your progress. Be sure to send in your tutor marked
assignments promptly, and feel free to contact your tutor in case of any difficulty with your self-
assessment exercise, tutor-marked assignment or the grading of an assignment. In any case, you
are advised to attend the tutorials regularly and punctually. Always take a list of such prepared
questions to the tutorials and participate actively in the discussions.
ASSESSMENT EXERCISES
There are two aspects to the assessment of this course. First is the Tutor-Marked Assignments;
second is a written examination. In handling these assignments, you are expected to apply the
information, knowledge and experience acquired during the course. The tutor-marked
assignments are now being done online. Ensure that you register all your courses so that you can
have easy access to the online assignments. Your score in the online assignments will account for
30 per cent of your total coursework. At the end of the course, you will need to sit for a final
examination. This examination will account for the other 70 per cent of your total course mark.

10
TUTOR-MARKED ASSIGNMENTS (TMAs)
Usually, there are four online tutor-marked assignments in this course. Each assignment will be
marked over ten percent. The best three (that is the highest three of the 10 marks) will be
counted. This implies that the total mark for the best three assignments will constitute 30% of
your total course work. You will be able to complete your online assignments successfully from
the information and materials contained in your references, reading and study units.
FINAL EXAMINATION AND GRADING
The final examination for POL 217: Public Policy Analysis will be of two hours duration and have
a value of 70% of the total course grade. The examination will consist of multiple choice and fill-
in-the-gaps questions which will reflect the practice exercises and tutor- marked assignments you
have previously encountered. All areas of the course will be assessed. It is important that you use
adequate time to revise the entire course. You may find it useful to review your tutor-marked
assignments before the examination. The final examination covers information from all aspects of
the course.
HOW TO GET THE MOST FROM THIS COURSE
1. There are 21 units in this course. You are to spend one week in each unit. In distance
learning, the study units replace the university lecture. This is one of the great advantages of
distance learning; you can read and work through specially designed study materials at your
own pace, and at a time and place that suites you best. Think of it as reading the lecture
instead of listening to the lecturer. In the same way a lecturer might give you some
reading to do. The study units tell you when to read and which are your text materials or
recommended books. You are provided exercises to do at appropriate points, just as a
lecturer might give you in a class exercise.
2. Each of the study units follows a common format. The first item is an introduction to the
subject matter of the unit, and how a particular unit is integrated with other units and the
course as a whole. Next to this is a set of learning objectives. These objectives let you know
what you should be able to do, by the time you have completed the unit. These learning
objectives are meant to guide your study. The moment a unit is finished, you must go
back and check whether you have achieved the objectives. If this is made a habit, then you
will significantly improve your chance of passing the course.
3. The main body of the unit guides you through the required reading from other sources.
This will usually be either from your reference or from a reading section.
4. The following is a practical strategy for working through the course. If you run into any
trouble, telephone your tutor or visit the study centre nearest to you. Remember that your

11
tutor‟s job is to help you. When you need assistance, do not hesitate to call and ask your tutor to
provide it.
5. Read this course guide thoroughly. It is your first assignment.

6. Organise a study schedule – Design a „Course Overview‟ to guide you through the
course. Note the time you are expected to spend on each unit and how the assignments
relate to the units.
7. Important information; e.g. details of your tutorials and the date of the first day of the
semester is available at the study centre.
8. You need to gather all the information into one place, such as your diary or a wall
calendar. Whatever method you choose to use, you should decide on and write in your
own dates and schedule of work for each unit.
9. Once you have created your own study schedule, do everything to stay faithful to it.
10. The major reason that students fail is that they get behind in their coursework. If you get
into difficulties with your schedule, please let your tutor or course coordinator know
before it is too late for help.
11. Turn to Unit 1, and read the introduction and the objectives for the unit.
12. Assemble the study materials. You will need your references for the unit you are studying
at any point in time.
13. As you work through the unit, you will know what sources to consult for further
information.
14. Visit your study centre whenever you need up-to-date information.
15. Well before the relevant online TMA due dates, visit your study centre for relevant
information and updates. Keep in mind that you will learn a lot by doing the assignment
carefully. They have been designed to help you meet the objectives of the course and,
therefore, will help you pass the examination.
16. Review the objectives for each study unit to confirm that you have achieved them. If you
feel unsure about any of the objectives, review the study materials or consult your tutor.
When you are confident that you have achieved a unit‟s objectives, you can start on the
next unit. Proceed unit by unit through the course and try to space your study so that you
can keep yourself on schedule.
17. After completing the last unit, review the course and prepare yourself for the final
examination. Check that you have achieved the unit objectives (listed at the beginning of
each unit) and the course objectives (listed in the course guide).

12
CONCLUSION
This is a theory course but you will get the best out of it if you cultivate the habit of
relating it to political issues in domestic and international arenas.
SUMMARY
„Public Policy Analysis‟ introduces you to general understanding of the contemporary tools
in analysing public policy. It gives you a clue on the scientific approach to the
understanding and analysis of public policy. All the basic course materials that you need
to successfully complete the course are provided. At the end, you will be able to:
 Explain the concept of Public Policy Analysis;
 discuss the framework guiding policy analysis;
 have an understanding of the implication and consequences of public policy
List of
Acronyms
NHP- National Health Policy
ADP Agricultural Development Project
ASUU Academic Staff Union of Universities
CBA Cost Benefit Analysis
CEA Cost Effectiveness Analysis
CPM Critical Path Method
PERT Programme Evaluation and Review Technique
PPBS Planning, Programming and Budgeting System
WHO World Health Organisation
NCDC National Control of Disease Centre

13
REFERENCES
Behxhet, B.(2017) Public Policy Analysis and the Criteria for Evaluation of the Public
Policy European Journal of Economics, Law and Social Sciences Vol 1 No 2
Eneanya, A.N. (2010) . Policy Research, Analysis, and Effective Public Policy Making in
Nigeria. Lagos: Concept Publications Ltd.
Frank, F.(2007) Handbook of Public Policy Analysis: Theory, Politics and Methods Taylor
and Francis Group
Ikelegbe, A.O. (1996). Public Policy Making and Analysis. Benin-City: Uri Publishing
Ltd.
Korel, G. and Robin, L.(2018) Public Policy Making in a Globalized World Sabanci
University
Oshionebo, B.O. (1998). “Development Policy-making Management Skills and the
Public Sector Manager”. In NCEMA Policy Analysis Series, Vol. 4, No. 2.
Olaniyi, J.O. (2001). Foundations of Public Policy Analysis Ibadan: Sunad

Publishers Limited
Salamon, M.(2002) The New Governance and the tools of Public Action: An Introduction
in L. M Salamon(ed) The tools of Government : A Guide to the new Governance, New
York: Oxford University
Peters, B. (2002). The Politics of tool Choice in L. M Salamon(ed) The tools of
Government: A Guide to the new Governance, New York: Oxford University

14
15

TABLE OF CONTENTS
MODULE 1: FOUNDATION OF PUBLIC POLICY



<,,



UNIT 2: COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS
ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES

16
MODULE 1: FOUNDATION OF PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS
INTRODUCTION
This module gives background information on Public Policy Analysis. It looks at the
meaning and various scholarly definition of the concept of Public Policy. The
typology of public policy is given adequate analysis while the significant of the
subject matter is thoroughly examined in this module. The module concludes with
analysis of the nexus between public policy analysis and other fields in the social
sciences


17
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Contents
3.1 Meaning Public Policy
3.2 Definition of public policy
3.3 Characteristics of Public policy
3.4 Why we study Public Policy
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
6.0 Tutor-Marked Assignment
7.0 References/Further Reading
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Public Policy Analysis is one of the branches of Political Science. The evolution of the
subject to the study of politics became imperative after the second world. The
paradigm shift from the historical and descriptive method of studying political
phenomenon necessitated the decision making approach as an alternative in the study
of politics. The attention and focus on institutional and structural arrangement was
redirected towards understanding the decision making process that shape the
behaviours of government and political institutions. With the new thrust in research,
Public Policy Analysis became one of the vital subjects in the field of Political
Science. Several factors were responsible for this, namely:
1) Awareness that policies and government programmes need to be
understood by the citizens;
2) The roles of decision makers in the modern day government must be
comprehended and analysed
3) The study of institution and structural arrangement must reflect
understanding of the behavioural approach of policy makers;
4) The yearning of political scientists for scientific approach and analysis of
government policies and decision making process.
2.0 OBJECTIVES
At the end of this unit, students would be able to:
 understand the meaning of public policy
 define public policy analysis
 understand the characteristics and rational for the study of Public Policy
analysis
3.0 MAIN CONTENTS

18
3.1 MEANING OF PUBLIC POLICY
Prior to the i n t e l l e c t u a l revolution championed by the Behaviouralists, the
study of Political Science was largely dominated by the Traditionalists who
borrowed a lot from the historical method of analysis (descriptive method).
However, the emergence of Behaviouralism after the Second World War placed the
study of politics on scientific methodological approach. This paved way for decision
makers to be studied rather than institutional and governmental running. Invariably,
public policy became germane to the field of politics by opening scholars mind-sets
to decision making dynamics and actors in policy process. This therefore popularised
the study of public policy as a distinct field in Political Science (Ebenezer, 2011).
This increased interest has been accompanied both by grandiose claims for how
“policy science” can improve the decision-making capacity and the outputs of
government, and imitative relabeling as “public policy” of traditional courses in
government or public administration. A study of the origins of this interest can help
us to understand the current status of policy science and policy analysis. In brief,
past studies on public policy have been mainly dominated by scholars of
political science and public administration and have tended to concentrate more on
the content of policy, the process of its formulation and its implementation. The
study of public policy has evolved into what is virtually a new branch of the
social sciences- the so called policy sciences (Dror, 1968:8-9). This concept of
policy sciences was first formulated by Harold Lasswell in 1951. Today, the
policy sciences have gone far beyond new and naïve aspirations for societal relevant
knowledge. The policy science movement grew out of a quest for a science of
policy. Its key proponents among others were Yehezkel Dror and Harold
Lasswell. According to Dror (1971:3), “policy science is a new supra-discipline,
oriented towards the improvement of policy-making and characterized by a series of
paradigms different in important respects from contemporary normal science.
Policy Science is regarded as a higher transition from policy analysis. It believes
in the enhancement of methods, techniques and systematism (Ikelegbe, 1994:14).
However, the line delineating policy analysis from policy science is blurred.
Most advocates of policy sciences are policy analysts and the shift of emphasis to
policy science is nothing but to create identity as a discipline for solving social
problems.
However, the use of “public policy” as a label for a field of governmental activity and
involvement is both a common and an apparently common-sense one. It covers past,
current, and potential activities. It makes no distinction between policy as aspiration
and policy as achievement- and it does not readily distinguish between policy as
action and policy as inaction. On a more practical level, it will quickly become
evident that the everyday language of policy “fields” and “areas” suggests a degree of
boundary definition and self-containment which simply does not hold up when we
attempt, for example, to draw sharp dividing lines between economic, foreign, and
defence policies.
Other areas in which policy can be conceptualized are:

19
 POLICY AS AN EXPRESSION OF GENERAL PURPOSE OR
DESIRED STATE OF AFFAIRS. State of policy in this context expresses
the broad purposes (or “ends”) of governmental activity in one field and also
describes the state of affairs which would prevail on achievement of those
purpose;
 POLICY AS SPECIFIC PROPOSALS. In this context of policy, we often

see statements of specific actions which political organizations (interest
groups, parties, the Cabinet itself) would like to see undertaken by
government;
 POLICY AS DECISIONS OF GOVERNMENT. Most times Political

Scientists tend to focus on case study of government decisions, they may
take a larger view of policy-making, looking for broader patterns of related
decisions and taking into account ha longer time span which should certainly
extend to what happens after the moment of choice and to questions of
implementation and actual outcomes. However, policy is larger than decision
because it usually involves a series of more specific decisions. While one
decision in the sequence may be seen as crucial, an understanding of the larger
policy requires some study of decisions both preceding and following the so
called “crucial” episode;
 POLICY AS FORMAL AUTHORIZATION. When it is said of

government that it has a “policy” on a particular topic, the reference is
sometimes to the specific Act of Parliament or statutory instrument which
permits or requires an activity to take place. Or it may be said when legislation
is enacted that the policy is to be carried out or implemented;
 POLICY AS A PROGRAMME. Most American students refer to policy as

programmes. A programme is defined as relating to specific sphere of
government activity involving a particular package of legislation, organization
and resources. For example, government policy can be said to consist of a
number of programmes, such as: the provision of subsidized council houses, a
housing improvement programme, an option mortgage programme, and so on.
Programmes are usually seen as being the means by which governments
pursue their broader purposes or ends.
<<,
 POLICY AS OUTPUT. Here, policy is seen as what government actually

delivers as opposed to what it has promised or has authorized through
legislation. Such an outputs can take many forms – the delivery of goods or
services, the enforcement of rules, or the collection of taxes, the form of
outputs varies between policy areas. It is sometimes difficult to decide what
the final “output” of government policy is in a particular area. For example, in
the health service, there is a tendency to describe such items as more funds,
more trained staff, and more beds as the outputs of a policy intended to
improve the quality of medical care. In fact, these are necessary but not
sufficient conditions of improved medical care: they should be regarded as
important contributory factors to the desired output, but not the output itself.
They could perhaps be described as “intermediate outputs” rather than the

20
final or “ultimate” output. Outputs in practice may not conform to state
intentions;
 POLICY AS OUTCOME. Another way of looking at policy is in terms of
its outcome, that is, in terms of what is actually achieved. This distinction
between outputs (the activities of government at the point of delivery) and
outcomes (the impact of these activities) is often slurred over, and is
sometimes difficult to make in practice, but it is an important one. Thinking
of policy in terms of outcomes may enable us to make some assessment of
whether the stated purpose of a policy
 POLICY AS A THEORY OR MODEL. All policies involve assumptions
about what governments can do and what the consequences of their actions
will be. These assumptions are rarely spelt out, but policies nevertheless do
imply a theory (or model) of cause and effect. At its simplest explanation, this
type of theory takes the form “if X then Y will follow”. Therefore, we can see
that failure of a policy can arise either form the Government‟s failure to do X
in full or because X fails to have the consequences expected according to the
theory.
Policy can be regarded as a model. One of the tasks of the policy analysts is to
try to tease out the theories underlying policies and examine the internal
consistency of the resulting model and the apparent validity of its assumptions;
 POLICY AS A PROCESS. Policy involves a process over a much longer
period of time. It could begin from the statement of an objective, moment of
decision or approval, implementation and evaluation. Developing this process
approach to the study of public policy would enable us understand the
contributions which might be made by policy analysis.
Furthermore, a policy may be general or specific, broad or narrow, simple or
complex, public or private, written or unwritten, explicit or implicit,
discretionary or detailed, and qualitative or quantitative. Here, the
emphasis is on “public policy” which is what a government chooses as
guidance for action. From the viewpoint of public policy, activities of
government can be put into three categories:
First, activities that are attached to specific policies. Second, activities

which are general in nature; and third, activities which are based on vague
and inconsistent policies. However, in practice, a government rarely has a set
of guiding principles for all its activities. A public policy may cover a major
portion of its activities which are consistent with the development policy.
Socio-economic development, equality, or liberty or self-reliance or similar
broad principles of guidance for action may be adopted as a developmental
policy or national goal. A public policy may be narrow, covering a specific
activity, such as family planning. A public policy may also be applied to all
people in a country or it may be limited to a section of its people.
Besides, each level of government – central, state and local-may have its
specific or general policies. Then, there are “megapolicies”. General
guidelines to be followed by all specific policies are termed “megapolicy”.

21
According to Dror, (1968), “megapolicies” form a kind of master policy
as distinct from concrete, discrete policies, and involve the establishment of
overall goals to serve as guidelines for the larger sets of concrete and specific
policies. All policies generally contain definite goals or objectives in more
implicit or explicit terms. Policies have outcomes that may have been
foreseen.
Public policies in modern political systems are purposive or goal-oriented

statements. Public policy may be positive or negative in form. In its positive
form, it may involve some form of overt government action to deal with a
particular problem. On the other hand, in its negative form, it involves a
decision by public servants not to take action on some matter on which a
governmental order is sought. Public policy has a legally coercive quality that
citizens accept as legitimate. For example, taxes must be paid unless one
wants to run the risk of fines or jail sentences. This legally coercive
quality of public policies makes public organizations distinct from the private
organization (Sapru, 2010). Thus, the nature of “policy” as a purposive
course of action can be better or more fully understood if we relate it to the
concept of “public”.
3.1.1 DEFINITION OF PUBLIC POLICY

The convenient and simple method for a foundational student of Public Policy
Analysis is to have better understanding of peculiar terms since literature do not
agreed on a specific definition of „Public Policy‟. Barret and Fudge (1981) provide
explanation on what „Public‟ connotes when they identify that public policy
remains decisions emanating from the public institution or sector. This includes
decisions from national, state and local government created agencies. For instance,
any decision made by government owned agencies at various levels falls under
public policy. The Water Corporation (either at national, state or local level)
decisions are categorised as public policy. The term „Public‟ is basically an
expression to indicate government and its agencies. Individual decision which is
tagged „private‟ is not applicable to the general populace. Such decision is not the
concern of our discussion.
Put differently, Olaniyi (1998) in his reference to Roberts and Edwards (1991)
posits that any policy made by the political actors concerning a targeted goals and
methods of attaining them remains a public policy. The concern of policy is
towards achieving a particular goal in a specified situation. Basically, it might be
long term or short term goal but policies are made to attain targeted goals. Be that
as it may, public policy is a set of inter-related decisions by political actors or
group of actors concerning the selection of goals and the means of achieving them
with a specified situation.
Put differently, Roberts and Clark (1982) submit that public policy is a series of
government steps towards solving problems which require allocation of resources
in order to aid the implementation process of the policy. This implies government
decision making to suit the demands of the general public. In another way, it is not
only decision taken by government that can be categorised as public policy.

22
Thomas Dye (1972) believes that whatever government chooses to do and not to do
constitutes public policy. This connotes that inaction is also an action which can as
well formulate a public policy.
Nevertheless, public policies in modern political systems do not, by and large, just
happen. They are instead design to accomplish specified goals or product definite
results, although these are not always achieved. Second, policies consist of courses
or patterns of action taken over time by governmental officials rather than their
separate, discrete decisions. Third, public policies emerge in response to policy
demands, or those claims for action or inaction on some public issue made by other
actors – private citizens, group representatives, or legislators and other public
officials-upon government officials and agencies. In response to policy demands,
public officials make decisions that give content and direction to public policy.
These decision ns may enact statutes, issue executive orders or edicts, promulgate
administrative rules or make judicial interpretations of law.
3.3 CHARACTERISTICS OF PUBLIC POLICY
As rightly by Sambo (1999: 283), some basic elements differentiate public policy
from private policies and other forms of policy
(1) Public policy is a purposive course of action or goal- oriented action rather
than a random or chance behaviour.
(2) Public policy consists of courses or patterns of action by government
officials.
(3) Public policy is what governments actually do, not what they intend to do or
say they are going to do. However, this is still a subject of debate since
future plans of governments over certain matters of concern can be seen as a
commitment to resolving such issues within the set time. This also follows
from Sharkansky's position that a policy is a proposal (1978).
(4) Public policy involves some forms of overt government action to affect a
particular problem; it involves a decision by government officials not to take
action, to do nothing on some matter on which governmental involvement is
,
sought.
(5) Public policy is based on law and is authoritative. That means public policy
is legally binded with coercive while private policy does not. For instance,
the monthly sanitation in some states in Nigeria has a legal and authoritative
force which attracts punishment for anybody that breaches it.
3.4 WHY WE STUDY PUBLIC POLICY

The study of public policy which is believed to be fundamental to the study of politics
is guided by some rationalities. These inform its basis in the field of political science.
Globally, government of different countries (developed and developing) are engaged
in diverse tasks to expand socio-economic and political atmosphere. While the

23
developed countries are working to consolidate their socio-economic progress, the
developing states are struggling hard to develop their economy, to sustain
improvements in the social system and to increase the capacity of their political
system with a view to achieving national development. Give n t his, t he fo r mer
( deve lo ped co unt r ies) i mpr o ve o n p o lic ies t hat w ill e nha nce
sust a ina ble de ve lo p me nt whi le t he lat t er ( deve lo p ing st at es) keep
mak ing de c is io ns t hat wo uld a ss ist t o cro ss t o deve lo p me nt a l st age.
They seek to improve the relevant policies. The study of public policy represents a
powerful approach for this purpose. Public policy is an important mechanism for
moving a social system from the past to the future. It helps to shape the future.
In other words, the study of public policy helps the development of professional
advice about how to achieve particular goals.
Public policy can also be studied for political and administrative reasons in order to
ensure that governments select and adopt appropriate policies. The study of
public policy has much to offer to the development of administration in different
sectors of the economy. It will enable the administration to engage in such
issues as are of public importance and are concerned with the transformation of
values into public policy-making and demanding the meaningful actions of public
servants.
The social scientists, especially political scientists, manifest concern with what
governments should do with appropriate public policy. They contend that
political science cannot be “silent” or “impotent” on current social and political
problems and that political scientists and academics in public administration have a
moral obligation to put forward a particular policy on a particular problem. They
should advance the level of political knowledge and improve the quality of
public policy in whatever ways they think best, notwithstanding the fact that
substantial disagreement exists in society over what constitutes appropriate policies.
Public policy improves the democratic or political capacities of people, and not
simply the efficiency and effectiveness of delivery of goods and services.
Finally, the field of public policy has assumed considerable importance in response
to the increasing complexity of the society. It is not only concerned with the
description and explanation of the causes and consequences of government activity,
but also with the development of scientific knowledge about the forces shaping
public policy. The study of public policy helps to understand the social ills of the
subject under study.
SELF-ASSESSMENT EXERCISE
Describe the nature of Public Policy
4.0 CONCLUSION
The intellectual breakthrough in the field of politics led to the movement from

24
traditional approach as a mechanism of studying political phenomenon to
behaviouralism. With the aid of behavioural approach, the decision making process
complied with the understanding of decision makers rather than studying
government structures and institutions. This popularised the study of public policy
as an avenue to understand government decision making process. The rational for
studying public policy was the need to improve the quality of policy formulation
and implementation, especially in the developing countries of the world.
5.0 SUMMARY
This unit has been able to examine the meaning and definition of public policy
analysis. The unit also exposes students to the evolut ion of public policy
analysis and the paradig m shift from tradit ional and inst it ut ional
approach to a more scient ific met hodology as enunciat ed by t he
Behaviouralist s which invar iably enhanced better understanding of t he
behaviour of decision makers. This gives more holist ic analysis to public
policy. It is concluded wit h rat ional for the study of public policy
analysis
6.0 TUTOR-MARKED ASSIGNMENTS (TMAs)

(i) Explain the nature and meaning of public policy
(ii) Discuss why we study public policy
7.0 REFERENCES/ FURTHER READING

Barrett, S. and Fudge, C. (1981). “Examining the Policy-Action Relationship.” In
Barrett, S. and Fudge, C (eds). Policy and Action: Essays in the Implementation of
Public Policy. London and New York: Methuen.
Dror, Y (1968). Public policy-making Re-examined. San Franscisco: Chandler.

-----------. (1971). Design for Policy Science. New York:
Elsevier
Dye, T.(1976) Policy Analysis. Alabama
Ebenezer, O.(2011) Public Policy Analysis Academic.edu
Eneanya, A.N. (2010). Policy Research, Analysis and Effective Public Policy-
Making in Nigeria. Lagos: Concept Publications Ltd.
Chandler, R. C. and Plano, J. C. (1988) The Public Administration

25
Dictionary. England: ABC. CLIO.
Olaniyi, J.(1998) Foundation of Public Policy Analysis, SUNAD Publisher
Ikelegbe, A.O. (1994). Public Policy-making and Analysis. Benin-City: Uri

Publishing Ltd.
Lasswell, H. and Deiner, D. eds. (1951). The Policy Sciences. Standford: Universit y
Press.
Sapru, R.K. (2010). Public Policy: Formulation, Implementation and Evaluation, (2nd
edition). New Delhi: Sterling Publishers Private Limited

26
UNIT 2: TYPOLOGIES OF PUBLIC POLICY
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Contents
3.1 Classification of Policy
3.2 Policy Types
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Some social scientists and scholars have attempted to discuss typologies of policy
issues. These facilitate comparison between issues and policies. Governments at all
levels in the Nigeria – national, State, and Local- have increasingly active in
developing public policies. Every year, a large volume of laws and ordinances flow
from the nation, state, and local legislative bodies. That volume of laws in turn
is greatly exceeded by the quantity of rules and regulations produced by
administrative agencies acting on the basis of legislative authorizations. This
proliferation of public policies has occurred in such traditional areas of
governmental action as foreign policy, transportation, education, welfare, law
enforcement, business and labour regulation, and international trade. In this unit,
we shall discuss the classification and policy types.
2.0 OBJECTIVES
At the end of the unit, students would be able to:
 Identify the categories of public policy and
 Policy types
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 CLASSIFICATION OF PUBLIC POLICIES

Governments at all levels are involved in a large number and complexity of public
policies. These policies are classified by political scientists and others according to
various categories of policies. Although these categories are convenient for
designating various sets of policies and organizing discussions about them, they
are not helpful in developing generalizations, because they do not reflect the
basic characteristics and content of policies. Policies may be classified as either
substantive or procedural.

27
3.1.1 SUBSTANTIVE POLICIES
Substantive policies involve what government is going to do, such as constructing
highways, paying welfare benefits, acquiring bombers, or prohibiting the retail sale
of liquor. Substantive policies directly allocate advantages and disadvantages,
benefits and costs, to people.
3.1.2 PROCEDURAL POLICIES

Procedural policies, in contrast, pertain to how something is going to be done or
who is going to take action. So defined, procedural policies include laws providing
for the creation of administrative agencies, determining the matters over which they
have jurisdiction, specifying the processes and techniques that they can use in
carrying out their programmes, and providing for presidential, judicial and other
controls over their operations. However, procedural policies may have important
substantive consequences. That is, how something is done or who takes the action
may help determine what is actually done. Frequently, efforts are made to use
procedural issues to delay or prevent adoption of substantive decisions and policies.
For example, an agency‟s action may be challenged on the ground that improper
procedures were followed.
3.2 POLICY TYPES

Differentiating policy according to its types explains the effect of such policy on
the society and the relationships among those involved in policy formation. Lowi
(1972:298-310) suggests a classification of policy issues in terms of being:
(i) Distributive
(ii) Regulatory
(iii) Redistributive and
(iv) Constituent policy issues.
2.1. DISTRIBUTIVE POLICY

Policy issues concerned with distribution of new resources are distributive policies.
Distributive policies involve allocation of services or benefits to particular
segments of the population – individuals, groups, corporations, and communities.
Some distributive policies may provide benefits to one or a few beneficiaries. The
policies involve using public funds to assist particular groups, communities, or
industries. Those who seek benefits usually do not compete directly with one
another.
3.2.2 REDISTRIBUTIVE POLICY

Redistributive policy issues are those which are concerned with changing the
distribution of existing resources. Redistributive policies involve deliberate efforts

28
by the government to shift the allocation of wealth, income, property, or rights
among broad classes or groups of the population, such as: haves and have-nots,
proletariat and bourgeoisie. Redistributive policies are difficult to enact because they
involve the reallocation of money, rights, or power. Those who possess money or
power rarely yield them willingly, regardless of how strenuously some may
discourse upon the “burdens” and heavy responsibility attending their possession.
Example of redistributive policy is graduated income tax or taxing the wealthy to
allocate resources to the poor.
3.2.3 REGULATORY POLICY

Regulatory policy issues are those which are concerned with regulation and control
of activities. Regulatory policies impose restrictions or limitations on the
behaviour of individuals and groups. That is, they reduce the freedom or discretion
to act of those regulated, whether utility companies, or agencies. When we think
of regulatory policies, we usually focus on business regulatory policies, such as
those pertaining to control of pollution or regulation of transportation industries.
Among others, these sorts of policies were the focus of the movement for
deregulation. The most extensive variety of regulatory policies, however, is that
which deals with criminal behaviour against persons and property. Examples of
regulatory policies are: consumer protection policies, NAFDAC, SON, NDLEA,
policies that regulate entry into businesses-National Communication Commission,
Federal Character Commission, PHCN regulatory policies etc.
3.2.4 CONSTITUENT POLICY

Constituent policy issues are those which are concerned with the setting-up or re-
organisation of institutions. Each of these policy issues forms a different power
arena. However, it may be mentioned here that Lowi‟s view of politics as a function
of policies has been criticized as over-simplistic, methodologically suspect, and
testability.
3.2.5 MATERIAL AND SYMBOLIC POLICY

Public policies may also be described as either material or symbolic, depending
upon the kind of benefits they allocate. Material policies actually either provide
tangible resources or substantive power to their beneficiaries, or impose real
disadvantages on those who are adversely affected. Legislation requiring employers
to pay a prescribed minimum wage, appropriating money for a public-housing
programme, or providing income-support payments to farmers is material in content
and effect.
Symbolic policies, in contrast, have little real material impact on people. They do
not deliver what they appear to deliver; they allocate no tangible advantages and
disadvantages. Rather, they appeal to people‟s cherished values, such as: peace,
patriotism and social justice. The material – symbolic typology is especially useful

29
to keep in mind when analysing effects of policy because it directs attention beyond
formal policy statements. It also alerts us to the important role of symbols in
political behaviour
3.3 THE IMPORTANCE OF PUBLIC POLICY

The relevance of public policy in the administration of state can be summed up in the
following terms:
(1) It is a mirror that guides government in its actions. This is because a
government without a definite plan of actions is like a traveller
without a destination (Chijioke, 1987:5). He may cover many
kilometres and yet not be able to say where he is going or how far he
has gone. Public policy thus helps government to reconcile the
numerous public demands and scarce resources based on priority.
(2) It arouses in citizens public consciousness and critical minds to
take up the challenge of assessing government- planned activities and
performance over time.
(3) It p r o v i d e s t h e p l a t f o r m s to question the w h y o f government,
i.e. why do governments do what they do? It seeks an understanding
of the causes or determinants of political/policy actions.
(4) It provides the opportunity for various interest groups and the
general public to know government's responses and reactions to their
demands. Such reactions show the pattern of action government
adopts or intends to adopt.
(5) It promotes professionalism in the art and science of policy-
making. Applying the knowledge of social science
Highlight the importance of public policy
3.0 CONCLUSION
In this unit, we have been able to examine the classifications of public policy issues.
Given the large number and complexity of public policies, the task of trying to
make sense of them is enormous. This unit summarizes number of general
typologies that political scientists and others have developed for categorizing public
policies. Although, these categories are convenient for designating various sets of
policies and organizing discussions about them, they are not helpful in developing
generalizations, because they do not reflect the basic characteristics and content of
policies. The discussion of typologies will also provide the reader with a
notion of the scope, diversity, and different purposes of public policies.

30
4.0 SUMMARY
Policies have been classified into categories as: substantive and procedural policies.
Substantive policies involve what government is going to do, such as constructing
highways, paying welfare benefits. On the other hand, procedural policies pertain to
how something is going to be done or who is going to take action. Moreover, some
social scientists and scholars have attempted to discuss the typologies of policy
issues. This typology differentiates policies by their effect on society and the
relationships among those involved in policy formation. The policy types include:
distributive policy, redistributive policy, regulatory policy, constituent policy,
material and symbolic policies. These categories are convenient for designating
various sets of policies and provide reader with a notion of the scope, diversity and
different purposes of public policies.
6.0 TUTOR-MARKED ASSIGNMENTS (TMAS)

(1) Discuss the arguments that public policies could be categorized into
substantive and procedural.
(2) Comment with examples on:
i) Distributive policies;
ii) Re-distributive policies;
iii) Regulatory policies; and
iv) Symbolic policies
7.0 REFERENCES/ FURTHER READING

Anderson, J.E. (2003). Public Policy-Making, 5th Edition. New York:
Houghton
Mifflin Company.
Dror, Y. (1968). Public policy-making Re-examined. San Franscisco: Chandler.
-----------. (1971). Design for Policy Science. New York: Elsevier
Eneanya, A.N. (2010). Policy Research, Analysis and Effective Public
Policy- Making in Nigeria. Lagos: Concept Publications Ltd.
Publishing Ltd.
Lasswell, H. and Deiner, D. eds. (1951). The Policy Sciences. Standford:
Universit y Press.
Lowi, T. (1972) „Four System of Policy, Politics and Choice‟ Public
Administration Review 298-310
Sapru, R.K. (2010). Public Policy: Formulation, Implementation and
nd
Evaluation, (2 edition). New Delhi: Sterling Publishers Private Limited

31
UNIT 3: CONCEPTUALISNG PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Contents
3.1 The Conceptualization of Public Policy Analysis
3.2 Elements of good policy analysis
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Public Policy analysis involves the study of the causes, processes, formation,
implementation and consequences of public policy. It entails the description,
explanation and prescription of particular policy choices and content, the
determination of strategies or techniques for optimal policy-making. It uses
collected data to systematically explain, describe and prescribe public policies with
the aid of social science methods, theories and approaches. The study of public
policy prepares and helps us to cope better with the future. It improves our
knowledge about the society. An important part of the study of public policy is
concerned with society‟s future. In this unit, we shall examine the meaning of
Public Policy Analysis and the common denominator of various definitions.
2.0 OBECTIVES
 Conceptualize public policy analysis and
 Understand the elements of good Policy Analysis
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 T H E CONCEPT OF PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS

The understanding of the term “Public” in policy analysis distinct decision making
emanating from the government and its agencies from individual‟s private policy.
This places public policy to be vital in assessing government decision making
process. However, as it is known that public policy affects a larger society or
community, there is need to basically understand certain predisposing factors
guiding different public policies. This makes the idea of „analysis‟ to surface in
comprehending public policy in any polity.

32
Meanwhile, like the idea of “public”, the term “policy” does not have a precise
explanation. For clarification, „ policy‟ denotes, among other elements, guidance
for action. It may take the form of:

 A declaration of goals;
 A declaration of course of action;
 A declaration of general purpose; and
 An authoritative decision
However, policy takes different forms. There is thrust to designate policy as the
“outputs” of the political system, and in a lesser degree to define public policy as
“more or less interdependent policies dealing with many different activities. Dror,
(1968) defines policies as “general directives on the main lines of action to
be followed”. Peter Self defines policies as “changing directives as to how tasks
should be interpreted and performed”
Public Policy analysis, therefore, has been variously defined by scholars. Public
policy analysis is a set of techniques and criteria applies in evaluating public policy
options and to rationalize the selection among the development and implementation
of the policy. According to George Kent, Public Policy Analysis is a systemic
analytical and creative way to study the purpose of an action from the government
and its agencies. Given this, it indicates that Policy Analysis is an enquiry towards
understanding the purpose of decision taken by the authority. On the other hand, it is
an expository mechanism to understand decision making process.
However, Quade (1975), views Public Policy Analysis as “any type of analysis that
generates and presents information in such a way as to improve the basis for policy-
makers to exercise their judgment”. On his part Chandler and Plano, (1988:96)
posit that policy analysis involves “systematic and data-based alternative to intuitive
judgments about the effects of policy or policy options”. Ikelegbe (1994:5), defines
it as the study of the causes, processes, formation, implementation and consequences
of public policy.
Dye (1976) defines policy analysis “as finding out what governments do, why they
do it and what difference it makes”. He labels policy analysis as the “thinking
man,s response” to demands. He observes that specifically public analysis involves:
1. A primary concern with explanations rather than prescription;
2. A rigorous search for the causes and consequences of public policies; and
3. An effort to develop and test general propositions about the causes and
consequences of public policy and to accumulate reliable research findings
of general relevance.
Policy analysis as a technique puts data to use in, or deciding about, estimating and
measuring the consequences of public policy. Its purpose is twofold. It provides
maximum information with minimal cost about:
(i) The likely consequences of proposed policies, and
(ii) The actual consequences of the policies already adopted.

33
To achieve these two purposes, various methods or approaches are applied.
Among the principal methodologies are:
(a) Systems analysis and simulation;
(b) Cost benefit analysis;
(c) New approaches to budgeting;
(d) Policy experimentation and
(e) Policy evaluation
Policy analysis is thus an inter-discipline drawing upon data from other

discipline. The common denominators in these definitions are:
 Policy analysis involves the application of systematic research and process;
 It is data-base alternative to intuitive judgments;
 Policy analysis is problem-oriented and analytical in nature;
 Policy analysis is inter-disciplinary and an academic discipline that draws on
the knowledge, methods, theories, and models developed in political science,
economics, psychology, sociology, law and philosophy. It is descriptive and
prescriptive in nature, especially as it attempts to proffer solut ions to social
problems.
For our purpose, policy analysis can be conceptualized as the study of the
formation, implementation and evaluation of public policy, the values of policy-
makers, the environment of the policy-making system, the cost of policy alternatives
and the study of policies for improving policy-making (meta-policy). Its goal is
to improve the basis of policy-making and generate relevant information needed to
resolve social problems. Public policy analysis is aimed at improving the basis
for public policy making.
3.2 ELEMENTS OF GOOD POLICY ANALYSIS

The key elements of good policy analysis include the following (Nagel, 1984):
(i) VALIDITY
Validity, in general, refers to being accurate. In the context of policy
analysis, validity refers to the internal consistency of logically drawing
a conclusion that follows from the goals, policies, and relations, the
external consistency with empirical reality in describing the relations
between the alternative policies and the goals; the policies being
considered encompass the total set of feasible alternatives (feasibility in
this context refers to being capable of being adopted and implemented by
the relevant policy makers and policy appliers); and the listed goals
include all the major goals and only the goals of the relevant policy makers
in this context.

34
(ii) IMPORTANCE
The concept of importance can be defined in two ways. First, does the
research deal with issues on which there are big societal benefits and/or big
societal costs being analysed? Second, does the research deal with a
subject matter or a set of causal hypotheses that potentially have broad
explanatory power? This is theoretical importance, as contrasted to policy
importance.
(iii) USEFULNESS
Usefulness as its lowest level involves doing policy research that is not
referred to by the people who make policy in the subject-matter area. At
the next level is research referred to by policy makers orally or in a
citation, even if the research cited is not on the winning side. At a higher
level is research that reinforces pre-conceived decisions. Policy
researchers should be pleased if their research accelerates a worthwhile
decision that otherwise might be delayed. At the highest level is the rare
case of policy research that converts decision makers from being negative
to being sensitive, or vice versa, on an issue.
(iv) ORIGINALITY
Originality refers to the extent to which policy research differs from
previous research, although even highly original research builds and
synthesizes prior research.
,
(v) FEASIBILITY
Feasibility is an additional criterion for judging proposed policy research,
as contrasted to completed policy research. Feasibility is concerned with
how easily research can be implemented given the limited time, expertise,
interest, funds, and other resources of the researcher.
SELF-ASSESSMENT ASSIGNMENT
Discuss the term Public policy analysis
4.0 CONCLUSION
We have been able to discuss the meaning of Public policy analysis in this unit. A
Public policy analysis is a set of techniques that seeks to answer the question of
what the probable effects of a policy will be before they actually occur. Thus,
Public policy analysis is aimed at improving the basis for public policy making, the
content, the knowledge about the outcomes and impact of public policy and ways
and means of improving public policy performances
5.0 SUMMARY
Public policy analysis is a multi-disciplinary and systematic investigation aimed at

35
gathering and analyzing information about the likely consequences of public
policies both before and after they occur. It involves collection and interpretation
of information in order to predict the consequences of alternative course of action. It
entails the application of social science research techniques to formulate, execute
and evaluate public policy in order make effective decision. Public policy
analysis is aimed at improving the basis for policy making. It helps to facilitate
sound decision making and contributes to better policy implementation and
performance.

(i) Explain the key elements in public policy analysis
(ii) Evaluate the relationship between policy-making and policy-analysis
7.0 REFERENCES/FURTHER READING

Chandler, R.C., Plano, J.C. (1988). The Public Administration Dictionary.
England: ABC-CLIO.
Dror, Y. (1968). Public Policy Making Re-examined. San Fransisco: Chandler.
Dye, T.R. (1976). Policy Analysis: What Governments Do, Why They Do It
and
What Differences It Makes. Alabama: University of Alabama Press
Eneanya, A.N. (2010). Policy Research, Analysis and Effective Public
Policy- Making in Nigeria. Lagos: Concept Publications Ltd.
Ikelegbe, A.O. (1994). Public Policy-making and Analysis. Benin-City:

Uri
Publishing Ltd
.Lasswell, H. and Deiner, D. eds. (1951). The Policy Sciences. Standford:
Universit y
Press.
Peter Self (1972). Administrative Theories and Politics: An inquiry into the
Structure and processes of Modern Government. London: George Allen &
Unwin.

36
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Contents
3.1 Relationship between Social Science and Policy Analysis
3.2 Relationship between Politics and Policy Analysis
3.3 Relationship between Public Administration and Policy Analysis
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Public policy is inter-disciplinary in nature. It borrows methods, theories, and
techniques from other disciplines, such as Economics, Psychology, Sociology, Law,
Political science and Public Administration. As a policy analyst, there is the need
to borrow certain skills and knowledge that are needed to solve social problems. In
this unit, we shall examine the relationship between Social Science, political Science
and public Administration on one hand and Public Policy analysis on the other.
2.0 OBJECTIVES
 Describe the relationship between Social Science and Public Policy Analysis
 Explain the relationship between politics and public policy and
 Explain the relationship between Public Administration and Public Policy
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SOCIAL SCIENCE AND PUBLIC ANALYSIS
Policy analysis is inter-disciplinary in nature. It adopts social science techniques

to resolve social problems. For a policy analyst to be effective, he requires
knowledge of social science disciplines, such as: Political Science, Sociology,
Economics, Psychology, Statistics, Philosophy and even Law. In short, policy
analysis is an applied social science discipline. Its methods, study and training is
inter-disciplinary, particularly within the social science and humanities.

37
However, Moore (1983) argued that both social science and policy analysis are
different in orientation. According to him, the social sciences address broad
problems of understanding in terms of a tradition of discourse within given
academic disciplines, while policy analysis seeks to advise on likely consequences
of alternative policies. Social science seeks to maximize internal logical consistency
and empirical rigour, while policy analysis seeks to be useful and relevant to a
specific problem. Social science claims a special access to truth because of its
methods, but policy analysis is more limited in its claim. Prewitt (1983), while
acknowledging that Moore‟s argument expresses a theme “which most
observers generally share”, suggests that social science makes profound
contributions to policy-making in the course of normal research, but does so
through subverting pre-existing policy premises.
Prewitt (1983) supports the venerable view that the social sciences have a mission in
“debunking” societal myths and practices. Social science research is only one
source of information used in the policy process and often its impact may amount to
no more than confirming pre-existing suspicions. It is sometimes useful in re-
defining a policy problem, offering a fresh perspective or filling gaps in what people
know. Some have suggested that this should become the goal of social
science policy research. Lindblom and Cohen (1979) suggest that providing
organizing frameworks or perspectives is “sometimes the major contribution” of
professional social inquiry to social problem-solving. Weiss (1983) suggests that the
current literature on evaluation shows that “research does seem to contribute a series
of concepts, generalizations and ideas that often come to permeate policy
discussion”. Sharpe (1977:50) sees a considerable, but indirect role for social
scientists in “changing the climate of ideas about how a policy problem is viewed”.
While there are still those who argue for greater “relevance” in the social sciences
(Lapalombara, 1982), the literature review in Glaser et al (1983), suggests that the
prevailing view is closer to Moore‟s. It stresses the distance between social
science and policy analysis and suggests that the usefulness of social science to
practical policy problems will either be slight or exceedingly general.
This portrait is, however, both inaccurate and inappropriate. It is inaccurate because
academic social scientists still train most of those who go on to do applied,
professional policy analysis. Academic social scientists routinely serve on
commissions and do applied policy research, professional policy analysis.
Academic social scientists routinely serve on commissions and do applied policies
research on a consulting basis. Academics write articles and books reflecting on
and assessing public policies and social science methods are at the core of policy
analysis. In fact, a considerable portion of research, investigations and the
development of rigorous methodologies, in policy studies have been undertaken by
Economists, Psychologists, Sociologists and other disciplines.
From this collection of social sciences, one can readily perceive that the study of
governmental policy problems is clearly an inter-disciplinary activity, since many
disciplines have something to contribute. For any social scientist, it would be too
much to acquire expertise in all the perspectives relevant to public policy study.
Indeed, it would simply be unrealistic to expect every policy analyst to become an

38
expert in all the subfields within his or her own social science or discipline.
Nevertheless, there probably is a consensus that if one is interested in developing
competence in policy analysis, he or she should be familiar in a general way with
the potential contributions and drawbacks of various social sciences. Such
familiarit y will at least enable one to know when to call on a fellow social scientist.
3.2 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN POLITICS AND POLICY ANALYSIS
Political Science as a field of study can be described as the systematic study

of politics. The subject assists people in the understanding of human relationships.
But, more importantly, political studies always focus on individual behaviour as a
unit of polit ical analysis on one hand and relationships between the individual
and other members of the society. The interaction calls for decision-making.
Politics is the means by which values or objectives can be injected into analysis at
the beginning of the policy process, with the decision naturally emerging from the
analysis. That is, a piece of analysis once completed is consumed and (if utilized at
all) injected into the political process, from which a decision will then emerge.
The relationship between politics and analysis at its best is iterative (repetitious).
The importance of the political setting and the consumption of analysis at all stages
of the policy process from agenda setting onwards. Even after an option has been
selected, the role of policy analysis - and politics – is far from over. Analysis
is seen, therefore, gas supplementing the more overtly political aspects of the
policy process rather than replacing them. There is no such thing as totally
“neutral” analysis. Values are at the centre of policy-making.
3.3 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND

POLICY ANALYSIS
Policy analysis emerged as an activity in Public Administration for its
perceived contribution to the improvement of the quality of administration and
management of state affairs. Policy analysis has become very crucial with the
advent of systematic planning for economics, social and technological
development. Development planning has generated a new and special interest
among policy-makers with respect to systematic analysis of public policy issues as
well as orderly and coordinated inter- relationships among different policies. At
the highest level of decision-making, policy analysis can better guide political
decision-makers to make appropriate choices among different alternatives.
At the operational level, policy analysis tools and techniques can equally facilitate
the translation of overall policy objectives into workable action programmes. For
these reasons, public policy has become an important sub-unit of public
administration.

39
SELF-ASSESSMENT EXERCISES
Describe the relationship between Social Science and Public Policy Analysis
4.0 CONCLUSION
Policy-making and social sciences are related because of long-standing and
continuing inquiry into the political, economic, social, scientific, technological
administrative and environmental issues and problems pertaining to state
administration. Its scope and perspectives have become broader and more crucial
following the rapidly expanding responsibilities of governments, generated, in
turn, by the challenging and complex demands of economic and social development
of the nation. The activity has, therefore, embraced participants from different
disciplines and specialization, including politicians, administrators, social scientists,
physical and natural scientists, technologists and citizens at large.
5.0 SUMMARY
Policy analysis is related to Social Sciences, Politics and Public Administration.
It adopts social science techniques to resolve social problems. For a policy analyst
to be effective, he requires knowledge of social science disciplines, such as:
Political Science, Sociology, Economics, Psychology, Statistics, Philosophy and
even Law. In short, policy analysis is an applied social science discipline. Its
methods, study and training is inter-disciplinary, particularly within the social
science and humanities. In particular, administrators have become more involved in
analysis because of their direct responsibility to make the system of public
administration more effective, efficient and responsive to the needs of economic and
social development. Thus, policy analysis is an applied social science discipline.
Its method, study and training are inter-disciplinary particularly within the
social sciences and humanities. Moreover, Policy analysis is a sub-field
within Political Science and Public Administration. This explains the reason it
is studied in the departments of Political Science and Public Administration.
Public analysis is, therefore, aimed at improving the basis for public policy-
making, the context, the knowledge about the outcomes and impact of public policy
and ways and means of improving public policy performance. Public policy
analysis is entirely problem-centred. Its object, especially at its prescriptive body is
to ameliorate current societal problems that require governmental or public action.
It is involved on the prescription of policies and strategies for tackling social
problems. In policy advocacy, it helps to influence future policy choices. Finally,
policy analysis encapsulates analysis of policy content, process output and policy
evaluation as well as process advocacy and policy advocacy.

40
6.0 TUTOR-MARKED ASSIGNMENT
1. Critically assess the statement that Public Policy Analysis could be
described as inter-disciplinary in nature.
2. Explain how Politics influences Policy Analysis.
3. Evaluate the relationship between Public Administration and public
policy analysis.

Almond, G.A. and Powell, G.B. (1966). Comparative Politics: A
Developmental
Approach. Boston: Little, Brown and Co.
Glaser, E, Abelson, H. and Garrison, K. (1983). Putting knowledge to
use: Facilitating the Diffusion of knowledge and implementation of
planned
change. San Franscisco: Jossey-Bass.
Uri
Publishing Ltd
Lapalombara, J. (1987). Bureaucracy and Political Development . Princeton,
New
Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Limblom, C. and Cohen, D. (1979). Usable Knowledge : Social Science and
social problem-solving. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Moore, M.H. (1995). Creating Public Value : Strategic Management in
Government.
Cambridge M.A.: Harvard University Press.
Weiss, C.H. and Bucuvalas, M. (1980). Using Social research in public
policy-
making. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington –Heath

41
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Contents
3.1 Scope of Public Policy Analysis
3.2 Characteristics of Public Policy Analysis
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Public policy is what government chooses to do or not to do. It is government actions
or proposed course of action directed at achieving certain goals. Its scope includes
variety of areas and issues, such as: economy, education, health, defence, social
welfare, foreign affairs, transportation and housing. Policy analysis is the study of
public policy. It is the study of the causes, processes, formation, implementation and
consequences of public policy. In this unit, we shall examine the scope and
characteristics of Public Policy Analysis.
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 SCOPE OF PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS
Policy analysis can be delineated into two broad areas:
(1) It involves policy research and analysis and is directed at better policy-
making. Generally, it involves marshalling techniques, models, policy
choices and strategies;
(2) Policy analysis involves impact evaluation research. This research is aim at
improving the performance of existing policies. This is mainly programme
evaluation studies. The programme evaluation could be prospective or
retrospective. Prospective evaluation assesses the programme alternatives in
terms of feasibility, capability and prospects, prior to implementation. The

42
goal is to determine which policy alternative could be better implemented or
would achieve higher performance. Programme evaluation can be
retrospective if it concerns the evaluation of on-going or completed
programmes. The goal is the collection of programme data, which will help
managers and others to decide on issues of improved performance and
modifications.
However, the scope and sheer size of the public sector has grown enormously is all
the developing countries in response to the increasing complexity of technology,
social organization, industrialization and urbanization. At present, the functions of
practically all governments, especially of the developing countries, have significantly
increased. They are now concerned with the more complex functions of nation-
building and socio-economic progress. Today, the government is not merely the
keeper of peace, the arbiter of disputes, and the provider of common goods and day-
to-day services. It has, directly or indirectly, become the principal innovator, the
major determiner of social and economic programmes and the main financier as well
as the main guarantor of large-scale enterprises.
In many developing countries, there is great pressure on government to accelerate
national development, make use of up-to-date and relevant technological innovations,
adopt and facilitate necessary institutional changes, increase national production, make
full use of human and other resources, and improve the level of living. These trends
and developments have, therefore, enhanced both the size and scope of public policy.
In our everyday life, we are affected by myriad of public policies. The range of
public policy is vast: from the vital to the trivial. Today, public policies may deal
with such substantive areas as defence, environmental protection, medical care and
health, education, housing, transportation, taxation, inflation, science and technology,
and so on.
3.2 CHARACTERISTICS OF POLICY ANALYSIS
Many scholars have outlined certain characteristics of policy analysis, as follows
(Rhodes, 1979a:27; Dror, 1968:241-4; Spring, 1970):

43
(1) Policy analysis is applied scientific research rather than prom-blind,
prescriptive as well as descriptive;
(2) Inter-disciplinary as well as multi-disciplinary. Policy analysis is no single
discipline but inter-discipline, which combines in a synergistic manner
elements from many disciplines;
(3) Politically-sensitive p la nn ing . There is concern with developing some
sophisticated indicators of social conditions and problems, better forecasts,
hierarchies of objectives, improved definition and appraisal of options and so
on. To this extent, there is an obvious overlap between policy analysis and
policy planning. However, there is an awareness that policy analysts should
be trained with political skills as well as planning techniques to understand the
political nature of the policy process. This is intellectual necessity since any
analyst must understand the complexities and constraints of the political
system if his recommendations are to have any impact.
(4) Client-Oriented. Policy analysts are often hired by government or other
agencies. Some operate as academic analysts, which often place them as agent
of social change with a commitment to the amelioration of society.
SELF-ASSESSMENT EXECISE
Examine the scope of Public Policy Analysis
4.0 CONCLUSION
In this unit, we examined the scope and characteristics of Public Policy Analysis.
Public policy analysis is aimed at improving the basis for public policy making, the
content, the knowledge about their outcomes and impact of public policy and means
of improving public policy performance. Public policy analysis is entirely problem-
centred. Its object, especially at its prescriptive context is to ameliorate current
societal problems that require governmental or public action. It attempts to
systematically gather data to describe or explain public policies with the aid of social
science methods and techniques for policy makers or decision makers.

44
5.0 SUMMARY
The scope of policy analysis can be classified into two broad areas: policy
determination and policy impact evaluation. Policy analysis is client -oriented,
politically sensitive, and inter-disciplinary and adopts scientific methods in its
analysis. Aside, policy analysis is involved in prescription of policies and strategies
for tackling social problems. In policy advocacy, it helps to influence future policy
choices. It focuses on the study of the causes, processes, formation, implementation
and consequences of public policy. Finally, policy analysis encapsulates analysis of
policy content, process, output and policy evaluation as well as process advocacy and
policy advocacy.
(i) Describe the characteristics of public policy analysis:
(ii) Explain the scope of public policy analysis
(iii) Discuss how Public Policy Analysis is multi-disciplinary in character.

Eneanya, A.N. (2010). Policy Research, Analysis and Effective Public Policy-Making
in Nigeria. Lagos: Concept Publications Ltd.
Eneanya, A.N. (2010). Comparative Public Administration and Public Policy.

Lagos: University of Lagos Press Ltd
Korel, G and Robin, L (2018) Policy Making in a Globalized World S aba nc i

Univer s it y
York: Oxford University Press Inc.
Rhodes, A.(1979) Public Administration and Policy Analysis: Recent Development in

Britain and America Farnborough: Saxox

45
46
INTRODUCTION
This module captures some basic terminologies in policy analysis. These terms would assist
your understanding of relevant points in explaining the functionality of decision making
process. This is followed with the approaches in the study of Public Policy Analysis. The
theoretical postulations will assist you in understanding diverse views and lens in assessing
public policies. The last unit of the module reflects the decision making process using policy
cycle to indicate how public policies are developed.

1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Contents
3.1 Basic Terminologies in Policy Analysis
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
6.0 Tutor-Marked Assignments
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The understanding of public policy analysis requires basic knowledge of some
relevant terminologies. This will enhance student analytical strength in
classification and clarification of policy process and decision making. Those
terminologies are constantly used in the public policy discourse. In essence, the
terminologies simplify our understanding of public policy analysis.
2.0 OBJECTIVES
 Understand the underlying terminologies in public policy analysis;
  Identify the relevance of those terminologies to policy analysis
3.0 MAIN CONTENT

47
The terminologies in policy analysis require better understanding for us to be
versatile with the nature and dynamics of policy analysis and decision making
process. The terminologies are policy demands, policy decisions, policy statement,
policy output, policy outcomes, policy studies and policy science. Let us examine
each of the terms
1. Policy Demands: In Public policy analysis, demands often emanate
from the populace based on their interests on areas they want policy
makers to look into. These demands are request that can guide
decision making process by the key actors in policy formulation.
Basically, policy demands are usually the values, claims and interests
from the people for policy actions or inactions in order to solve
specific social problem. This conforms to the argument of Chandler and
Plano's (1988) view that public policy is the strategic allocation of resources
to alleviate national problems or government concerns. The important clause
of policy demand is that responses from policy makers should be designed to
meet the yearnings and demands of the people. Invariably, public policies
should respond to the need of the people that demand for satisfactory policy
response from the policy formulators. The demands represent the input from
the people.
2. Policy Decisions: Policy demands need to be transformed for authoritative
decision. This policy taken by the authority represents policy decisions that
imply government direction. The import of policy decisions is to give
authoritative direction to policy actions. Policy demand can only receive action
for implementation when public officials/policy-makers has given
authoritative approval to its contents and direction. Policy decisions include
the decisions to enact statutes, make judicial interpretation of laws on
conflicting matters, issue executive orders, issue administrative rules, and so on.
3. Policy Statements: Generally, the official or formal expression of
public policy by institutions of government, including legislative
statutes, presidential orders, decrees, regulations and
administrative rules fall under policy statement. Policy statement is
largely associated with a democratic government to carry the people
along. This view is supported by Dye (1978) in his assertion that policy
statement indicates the measures that would be put in place by the
authority for improvement of citizens’ life. Put differently, policy statements
also include speeches made by public officials indicating the position
of government on a particular issue as well as when and how it will
be achieved. Policy statements are often laced with ambiguity arising
from the conflicting interests and competency of public officials
making such statements.
3. Policy Outputs: This is simply the manifestation of public policy
in accordance with the actual government execution of policies. It
is a stage of realistic based on the policy statement. Also policy
outputs are described as the concrete, sure able and identifiable
projects or policies implemented by the government. A policy is
simply what government has actually done as against what it
proposes to do. For instance, the number of roads constructed by

48
government as distinct from the number projected, the number of
schools built by government as distinct from the number proposed,
etc.
4. Policy Outcomes: The overall manifestation of public policies with
particular reference to attainment of goals. This could be intended or
unintended consequences of policy for the society where the policy
is implemented and this could be as a result of the action or
inaction of government. Policy outcomes involve appraising
whether public policies achieve their set goals in terms of the
successes recorded. This can also be referred to as policy
evaluation. It indicates the perception and assessment of the
government policy by the beneficiaries or the general populace.
5. Policy targeted population: This indicates the main beneficiaries of a
policy. Not all government policies are beneficial to everybody and
such is the essence of understanding the people specific policy is
targeted at. For instance, the immunization policy is usually targeted at
children and they remain the targeted population as far as the policy is
concerned. In public policy analysis, we need to understand what
informs some policies and who the real targeted audience to benefit
from it are.
6. Policy Studies: In simple terms, this entails the analysis of the
policy process by placing emphasis on the policy formulation. They
could be normative or analytical. A policy environment is
normative when it critically studies how policy is made and how
the processes could be improved. It is therefore the study of the
interdisciplinary nature of public policy: politics, economic,
operational research, organisational theory and public
administration. It is analytical when it deals with developing the
models and explanation of the policy process specific target of
people.
7. Policy Science: This is the method of investigating the policy
process with the view to making the study of decision-making
process scientific. It is particularly a problem-solving approach
that cuts across many disciplines to deal with the most important
social decisions.
What do you understand by Policy Statement?
4.0 CONCLUSION
In this unit, we have been able to explain the relevant terminologies in public
policy analysis. The importance of those terms is that it assists our
understanding and assessment of different government approaches to issues

49
arising. It also enhances our comprehension on how polices are drafted.
5.0 SUMMARY
The understanding of those terminologies is vital in making valid analysis of any

public policy. The terms make a better clarification of relevant keywords in the public
policy analysis. This will expose students to have better outlook on different
government policies and major factors guiding government actions and inactions.

(i) Differentiate policy demands and policy output?
(ii) What is your understanding of policy targeted population?
Chandler, R. C. and Plano, J. C. (1988) The Public Administration

Dictionary. England: ABC. CLIO.
Dye, T. R. (1976). Policy Analysis. Alabama.
Ebenezer, O (2011) Public Policy Analysis. Academia.edu

50
UNIT 2: APPROACHES TO THE STUDY OF PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS
CONTENT
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Contents
3.1 Descriptive Approach
3.2 Prescriptive Approach
3.3 Qualitative Approach
3.4 Quantitative Approach
3.5 Micro-analytic Approach
3.6 Macro-analytic Approach
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
There are several approaches and methods of studying public policy analysis.
However, two major schools of thought emerged as to what should be the approach
to study policy analysis. One school of thought holds on to the view that policy
analysis could be studied using the descriptive approach, while the other school of
thought argues in favour of the prescriptive paradigm. In this unit, we shall
examine the two schools of thought.
2.0 OBJECTIVES
 Describe the descriptive approach to the study of policy analysis and
 Explain the prescriptive approach to the study of policy analysis
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 THE DESCRIPTIVE APPROACH

This school of thought seeks understanding of public policy at the level of
descriptions and explanation of government activities and policies. This approach
makes use of historical analysis of past policies. It dwells on the causes and factors
that necessitated previous government decisions process and policy making. By and
large, it considers the evolution of past policies, the strength and weaknesses via a
vis general analysis of problems associated with public policy. Not only that,
descriptive approach also includes analysing the level of implementation of policies.

51
It considers if public policy is implemented by studying the facts and figures of the
policy. Descriptive studies in public policy analysis are guided by some attributes.
These characteristics as highlighted by Ikelegbe (1996:24) clarify that:
(1) Descr ipt ive st ud ie s are more of academic exercise geared towards the
needs of policy actors;
(2) The studies seek the understanding of policy processes, policy problem and
situations;
(3) They are more concerned with the investigations of policy contents,
implementation, output and impact of particular policies. Thus, many
descriptive studies are at the micro-level;
(4) Many descriptive studies are evaluator. However, many of the evaluator
studies are retrospective and relate to studies of on-going or completed
programmes.
,
In summary, this school of thought believes that public policy in this paradigm
should be described and explained. The approach investigates and reports on the
typical behaviour of policy makers. We can explain the approach as follows:
 Consider a behavioural perspective

 Pick a policy-making territory
 Study particular cases
 Categorize observations
 Report on cases and generalize observations, identifying methodologies in use
3.2 PRESCRIPTIVE APPROACH

The focus of prescriptive approach is to provide analysis for future forecasting
and states the implementation of the policies. The approach is more of
projection method that allows prediction of future policies. In another
perspective, proponents of this paradigm believe that public policy should focus
on the fundamental problems affecting society. This should be done towards
realization of human dignity. Scholars that originated such idea include Harrold
Laawell, Yehezkel Dror and Hald Wildavsky. As suggested by Lasswell (1951),
public policy analysis perspective is expected to concentrate more on fundamental
challenges of man in the society.
The idea of prescriptive approach is the need to add value to the study of public
policy beyond descriptive perspective. However, the prescriptive approach is
typically dependent on the nature, beliefs and perception of the policy makers. The
policy makers make initiation on policy to be formulated and which sometimes
might not suit or solve the fundamental problem of a man in the society.
However, Wildavsky (1979) in his “politics of thee budgetary process” contends

that policy analysis is a problem-centred activity. This implies that policy analysis
must be concerned with the problems facing policy-makers and should aim at
ameliorating these problems through creativity, imagination and craftsmanship.

52
He believes that policy-maker should engage himself in action if he is to solve
social problem. This action involves a combination of what he calls intellectual
capitation (thinking how is seeking) solutions to problems) and social interaction.
Therefore, he calls for an intellectual perspective that combines understanding with
advocacy which should be the point of analysis, rather than looking at the
two perspectives as mutually exclusive. They should be looked at in terms of
their complimenting one another. The advocate of Wildavsky centres on the need to
combine the two approaches in order to arrive at optimum benefits of analysis.
The prescriptive approach according to Ikelegbe (1996:23) has the following

attributes:
 It is analytical, emphasizing the generation of data analyzed with

social science techniques or methodologies;
 The studies are goal and problem-oriented; they are directed at
specific problems. The goal is to proffer solutions and advice;
 It advocates policy options. This is done as a solution to policy
problem addressed and is directed to improve social and societal well-
being;
 Prescriptive studies tend to be more client-oriented, as they tend to
addresses issues relevant to policy actors or that have been suggested by
such actors
3.3 QUALITATIVE APPROACH

The qualitative approach is an in-depth analysis of a policy using various methods
to gather and analyse data. The approach is not new policy analysis as it allows
observation (participant/non participant) and the conduct of in-depth interview to
obtain information from policy makers and the targeted population benefiting from
a policy. Qualitative approach makes policy analysts to view public policy from
diverse perspectives. It is assumed that social problem requires different ways and
this gives room for issues emanating from policy to be viewed from various
dimension. The policy analyst using qualitative approach can come up with
relevant themes associated with policy and break its pros and cons for better
understanding by the policy makers and the people such policy is directed at.
Asides the thematic analytical way of expressing and analysis public policy,
modern software such and NVIVO and ATLAS are adopted in qualitative method
of analysis
3.4 QUANTITATIVE APPROACH

Policy analysis adopts quantitative techniques to define a policy problem,
demonstrates its impact and possibly proffers solution. This approach requires
sophisticated method to identify policy problem and its impact using numerous
variables. As pointed out by Wagle (2000), development of more sophisticated
quantitative techniques is crucial to aid policy direction and decision making
process. Quantitative method helps to demonstrate whether there is a relationship

53
between policy proposal and policy outcome. This will determine if there might be
need to generalise or limit the findings to a specific policy and environment. With
the aid of quantitative approach, policy can be evaluated to examine the socio-
economic and political impact it has in the society. The advantage of quantitative
approach is to assist policy makers towards designing better policies with positive
impact on the people. Largely it involves statistical data analysis of policy
influence, impacts and implications. This approach has its intellectual root with the
work of Harold Lasswell (1951, 1970; 1971). Since the emergence of quantitative
approach in policy analysis, series of software packages have been designed ranging
for histogram, bar chat, inferential equation, multiple regression analysis, time
series analysis and modern application of PLS and AMOS.
3.5 MICRO CASE APPROACH

The micro or case study approach concentrates on the study of the analysis of
specific policies. It does not attempt to consider general patterns of policy
behaviour but makes a case-by-case study of public policy analysis. For each
particular policy a thorough investigation is made into the process of generating
options, evaluating the options, selecting, implement ing and assessing an
option. The approach is basically descriptive but it can, as well, be used to
prescribe in a specified policy analysis territory. The prescription cannot,
however, be generalized. The advantage of this approach is that detailed
examination and provision of exhaustive information is clearly understood. The
disadvantage is that it has a narrow focus of the analysis.
3.6 MACRO-ANALYTIC APPROACH
Macro studies focus on general aspects of policy analysis. The approach takes
a global view of policy making and analysis and emphasizes the development of
broad knowledge and understanding of the nature of public policies. The objective
of macro studies is to provide an insight into the nature of public policies and
prepare analysts for operating effectively in any policy analysis territory. Macro
studies provide broad concepts, theories, tools and models for policy making and
analysis in a broad range of policy environments. The approach repudiates the
narrow focus and specificity of case studies with all its deficiencies.
Some macro studies concentrate on describing the dynamics of policy making and
analysis, actions and inter-actions between groups, individuals and institutional
structures. Some narrow their focus on theories and models to explain and interpret
policy issues. Other groups of macro studies direct attention to different policy
areas. Policy area study is different from cases studies in that there are myriad of
cases in a policy area, for example, Economic, Education, Agriculture, Health,
Foreign policies and so on. The study of these areas permits in-depth studies of
policy analysis in the policy areas.

54
Describe descriptive approach to the study of policy analysis
4.0 CONCLUSION
In this unit, we have been able to explain the descriptive, prescriptive, qualitative,
quantitative, micro-analytical and macro-analytic approaches to the study of
policy analysis. The approaches relate to the study of policy research.
Descriptive studies are usually qualitative with some mix of quantification.
Prescriptive studies, on the other hand, could also use qualitative or quantitative
methods, but are largely quantitative. However, combination of qualitative and
quantitative approaches which can be referred to as mixed mode of analysis
can be applied.
5.0 SUMMARY
The essence of applying approaches to the study of public policy analysis is to

enhance a better assessment of policy in order to have a reliable findings on impacts
of authoritative decisions. These approaches have divergent methods that can be
applied to represent and evaluate public policy in the society.
6.0 TUTOR-MARKED ASSIGNMENTS

1. Explain qualitative and quantitative approaches as tools of policy analysis
2. Analyse prescriptive approach

Dror, Y. (1971). Venture in Policy Sciences. New York: Eisenhower
Uri
Publishing Ltd.
Owolabi, J. (2005). Policy making and Educational Policy Analysis.
Uganda: Makerere University Printery.
Wildavsky, A. (1979). “Policy As Its Own Cause”. In Wildavsky, A. Speaking
Truth to Power. Boston: Little Brown.
Yanow, D (2000) Conducting Interpretative Policy Analysis Newbury Park CA: Sage

55
UNIT 3: THEORIES OF PUBLIC POLICY
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Contents
3.1 System theory
3.2 Group theory
3.3 Elite Theory
3.4 Institutional theory
3.5 Widow Theory
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
7.0 References/Further Studies
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Adopting theories to explain public policy has provided a deep and better
understanding of policy process. Theorising public policy has also assisted us to
see the linkage between politics and policy making. The application of theories in
policy analysis is to appropriately comprehend government and political actions.
This will make us to appreciate what informs a policy and the consequence of the
policy. Generally, theories provide explanation for social phenomenon
2.0 OBJECTIVES
 Analyse the importance of theory in policy analysis
 Explain various theoretical approaches to the study of policy analysis
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 THE SYSTEM THEORY
This theory is borrowed from the Biological Science in explaining life processes
considering the contribution of each other towards the stability of the environment
(Ham and Hill, 1985; Ebenezer, 2011). However, the theory was adopted and
popularized by David Easton to the study of political system. This informs the basis
to view public policy from the response of a political system as a result of the
demands arising from its environment. Public policy simply indicates an
interaction of the political system with environment forces brought to bear
on it. According to Easton (cited in Sambo, 1999:290) a political system is that
“system of interaction in any society through which binding and authoritative

56
allocations are made.” Given this, public policy according to system theory is an
output of the political system. This makes the political system formation to be based
on input and output.
The input into the political system from the environment consists of demands and
supports. The environment consists of all those conditions and events external to the
boundaries of the political system. Demands are the claims made by individuals and
groups on the polit ical system for action to satisfy their interests. This generally
revolves around request from the people on what action government is expected to
take
These authoritative allocations of values constitute public policy. The concept

of feedback indicates that public policies (or outputs) may subsequently alter the
environment and the demands generated therein, as well as the character of
the political system itself. Policy outputs may produce new demands, which lead
to further policy outputs, and so on in a continuing, and never ending flow of public
policy. To simplify this, the above diagram represents the input and output syndrome
of David Easton system theory in a polity
Demand G Political Authoritative
support a system decision
t
e
k
e
e
p
e
r
Feedback or evaluation
Source: Olaniyi(1998:58)
The usefulness of systems theory for the study of public policy analysis is limited
by its highly general nature. It does not say much concerning how decisions are
made and policy is developed within the “black box” called that political system.
Nonetheless, systems theory is a useful aid in organizing inquiry into policy
formation. However, the usefulness of the system model is limited due to several
factors. First, this model is criticized for employing the value-laden techniques of
welfare economics, which are based on the maximization of a clearly defined
“social welfare function”. The missing ingredients in the systems approach are the
“power, personnel and institutions” of policy making.
In examining these, there is need to note that decision-makers are strongly

constrained by economic factors in the environment of the political system.
Secondly, the model also ignores an important element of the policy process,
namely, that the policy makers (including institutions) have also a considerable

57
potential in influencing the environment within which they operate. The traditional
input-output model would see the decision-making system as “facilitative” and
value-free rather than “causative” that is as a completely neutral structure. In
other words, structure variations in the systems are found to have no direct casual
effect on public policy.
Finally, the extent to which the environment, both internal and external is said to
have an influence on the policy-making process is determined by the values and
ideologies held by the decision-makers in the system. It suggests that policy-
making involves not only the policy content but also the policy-makers perceptions
and values. The values held by the policy-makers are fundamentally assumed to be
crucial in understanding the policy alternatives that are made (Basu, 2004:443).
3.2 GROUP THEORY

According to the group theory of politics, public policy is the product of the
group struggle and a negotiated agreement between government and pressure groups
organised in a political community (Ham and Hill, 1985). This concurs with the
perception of Dye (1976) that believes that interaction and struggle among group
remains the central fact of political life. As one writer states: “what may be called
public policy is the equilibrium research in this (group) struggle at any given
moment, and it represents a balance which the contending factors or groups
constantly strive to weight in their favor”. A group is a collection of individuals
that may, on the basis of shared attitudes or interests, make claims upon other
groups in society. It becomes a political interest group “when it makes a claim
through or upon any of the institutions of government. And of course, many groups
do just that. The individual is significant in politics only as he is a participant in, or
a representative of groups. It is through groups that individuals seek to secure their
political preferences.
Public policy, at any given time, will reflect the interest of dominant groups.
As groups gain and lose power and influence, public policy will be altered in
favour of the interests of those losing influence. Group theory, while focusing
attention on one of the major dynamic elements in policy formation, especially in
pluralist societies, such as the United States, seems both to overstate the importance
of groups and to understate the independent and creative role that public officials
play in the policy process. Indeed, many groups have been generated by public
policy. Therefore, the concern of the political system, according to Thomas
Dye (1976: 20), is to resolve group conflict by:
(a) Establishing the rules of the game in the group struggle;
(b) Arranging compromises and balancing interests;
(c) Enacting compromises in the form of public policy; and
(d) Enforcing these compromises

58
3.3 ELITE THEORY
This theory sees policy making as a top bottom approach where power is
concentrated in the hand of the powerful minority group known as elites that control
the political space of the society. In this approach, public policy can be regarded as
the values and preferences of the governing elites. The essential argument of the
elite theory is that it is not the people or the “masses” who determine public
policy through their demands and action, rather, public policy is decided by
ruling elite and effected by public officials and agencies. Dye and Zeigler,
(1981) in the “Irony of Democracy” provide a summary of the elite theory:
(i) Society is divided into the few who have power and the many that do
not. Only this small number of privileged persons allocate values for
society, the masses do no decide public policy;
(ii) The few who govern are typical of the masses who are governed. The
elites are drawn disproportionately from the upper socio-economic strata
of society;
(iii) Movement of the non-elite to elite positions must be slow and continuous
to maintain stability and avoid revolution. Only the non-elite who have
accepted the basic elite consensus can be admitted to governing circles;
(iv) The elites share a consensus on the basic values of the social system and
the preservation of the system;
(v) Public policy does not reflect demands of the masses but rather the
prevailing values of the elite. Changes in public policy will be
incremental changes permit responses to events that threaten a social
system with a minimum of alteration or dislocation of the system;
(vi) Active members of the elites are subject to relatively little direct
influence from apathetic masses. The elites influence the masses more
than masses influence the elite.
So state, the elite theory is a rather provocative theory of policy formation. Policy is
the product of the elite, reflecting their values and serving their ends, one of which
may be a desire to provide for the welfare of the masses. Thus, elite theory does
focus our attention on the role of leadership in policy formation and on the fact that,
in any political system, a few govern the many. However, whether the elite rule,
and determine policy, with little influence by the masses is a difficult proposition to
handle.
3.4 INSTITUTIONAL THEORY

The study of government institutions is one of the oldest of political science. The
approach focuses on the formal or structural aspects of an institution and can be
adopted in policy analysis. An institution is a set of regularized patterns of human
behaviour that persist over time. Some people, unsophisticated, of-course, seem to
equate institutions with the physical structures in which they exist. It is their
differing sets of behaviour, which we often call rules, structures and the like, that
can affect decision-making and the content of public policy. Rules and structural
arrangements are usually not neutral in their impact, rather, they tend to favour

59
some interests in society over others, some policy results rather than others. Public
policy is formulated, implemented and enforced by government institutions.
Government institutions give legal authority to policies and can legally impose
sanctions on violators of its policies. As such, there is a close relationship
between public policy and governmental institutions. It is not surprising, then,
that polit ical scientists would focus on the study of governmental structures and
institutions. Institutionalism, with its focus on the legal and structural aspects can
be applied in policy analysis. The structures and institutions and their
arrangements and can have a significant impact on public policy. Traditionally,
the focus of study was the description of government structures and institutions. The
study of linkage between government structures and policy outcomes remained
largely unanalysed and neglected.
The value of the institutional approach to policy analysis lies in asking what
relationships exist between institutional arrangements and the content of public
policy and also in investigating these relationships in a comparative manner. It
would not be correct to assume that a particular change in institutional structure
would bring about changes in public policy. Without investigating the actual
relationship between structure and policy, it is difficult to assess the impact of
institutional arrangements on public policies.
3.5 WINDOW THEORY
This theory which is also known as streams theory was propounded in 1995 by
Kingdon. The assumption of the theory is that policy analysis requires the understanding
of the three important streams. The streams which are problem stream, political stream
and policy stream are essential to policy making. By the problem stream, it involves the
concentration of the policy makers and the peoples‟ attention on a social problem. Such
problem can be resolved through an existing policy or allowing it to fade away.
The political stream according to Kingdon (1995), focuses on the level at which
government agenda is formulated. This is essential because it captures the development
of government policies. It should be noted that issues in problem stream may or may not
reflect in the political stream. Before any issue can make government agenda, it must
have been agreed on by the core players in the political stream. Those core participants
(players) are known as the visible clusters. They are the people visible at the political
stage. For instance, the lawmakers, the interest groups, the media, the bureaucrats are
related players. The main tool of the cluster members is bargaining.
The third stream known as the policy stream involves the decision agenda of the
government, and the development of different options that can be used to resolve issues
rose in policy problem or those identified in the agenda of government. At this point, the
activities of the hidden clusters become noticed and significant. Those are forces that
influence the alternative policy that would eventually be chosen by government.
According to Kingdon, those hidden clusters adopt the tool of persuasion as opposed to
bargaining of the visible clusters. To Kingdon, government policies are formulated

60
where and when these streams coverage. It is at the stage that we have a window.
Whenever there is an opening of the window, then there is a change in government or
policy.
Describe the system theory and explain how it could be used to study public policy
analysis
4.0 CONCLUSION
This unit has been able to expose us to the theoretical framework guiding the analysis of
public policy. The political system which is represented by Easton‟s model emphasises the
operation of political system on the basis of input and output. Also, the group theory
stipulates that policies are reflection of group interest while the elites theory captures the
role of the powerful minority small group that control the policy output in the society. The
institutional theory looks at the role of structural institutional setting in decision making.
The unit is concluded with window theory that specifies the understanding of the essential
streams as a yardstick in policy analysis.
5.0 SUMMARY
The theoretical analysis of policy is key to our understanding of various

perspectives public policy can be viewed. All the highlighted theories expose us to
the effectiveness of basic analysis of public policy using theoretical framework to
explain what leads to a particular policy framework and why a given policy is
adopted.

1. Describe the role of institutional theory to the study of public policy analysis
2. Describe the role of systems theory in the study of public policy analysis and
its limitations

Basu, R. (2004). Public Administration: Concepts and Theories. New Delhi:
Sterling Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
Dye, T.(1976) Policy Analysis. Alabama
Ham, C. and Hill, M. (1985). The Policy Process in the Modern
Capitalist State. Wheatsheaf Books Ltd.

61
Kingdon, J. W. (1995). Agenda, Alternatives and Public Policy.
Boston: Little Brown.
Publishing Ltd.
Sambo, Adesina (1999). “What is Public Policy?' In Anifowose, R. and Enemuo, F.

(eds) Elements of Politics. Lagos: Malthouse Press Ltd.

62
UNIT 4: THE PUBLIC POLICY MAKING PROCESS
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main contents
3.1 Stages in public policy process
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Public policy does not happen in a vacuum. It is a combination of many stages with
each of the stages indicating the process involves in decision making. One cannot
understand the purpose and target of a policy, if all the required stages are not
followed to the latter. It is in view of this that this unit will explain various processes
that policy passes through for effective and efficient assessment by a policy analyst.
These stages are independent but interrelated and policy analysts must understand
what informs each of the processes involved in public policy making.
2.0 OBJECTIVES
 Understand the concept of policy making cycle
 Explain the stages in public policy process
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 POLICY MAKING PROCESS

Policy making process is a sequential pattern of action involving a number of
functional categories. The complex activities involved in policy making
process prompts Sambo (1999) to view it as a pattern of action extending
overtime and involving many decisions. These activities are independent
stages but interrelated to achieve a policy mission. These stages constitute
policy cycle. They are important in order to understand how policy is
designed to solve social problem. The policy cycle is another way of making
reference to policy process and this has five distinct stage s. Public policy
process can be classified into five stages, as illustrated in figure (1) below:

63
Fig. 1: Public Policy Cycle or Process
However, Anderson, Brady and Bullock, (1978: 8) have suggested a model for
public policy process, which made of six stages:
3.1.1 POLICY FORMATION STAGE
STAGE 1: PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION

This involves a situation where human needs, deprivation or dissatisfaction
appear that must be addressed. If enough people believe the nature of the problem is
such that government should respond, it than becomes a public rather than a
private problem. Public problems involve large numbers of people and have
broad-ranging effects including consequences for people not directly involved
such as national minimum wage. Thus problem identification entails the demand
for action to resolve a problem.
STAGE 2: POLICY AGENDA

These are problems among many, which receive the government serious
attention.
Not all problems get policy agenda stage. Those that do reach there, get there
by a variety of routes.
APPROACHES TO AGENDA SETTING

There are three approaches to agenda setting in a democratic society (Stones,
1977:
37-8)

64
1. LET IT HAPPEN APPROACH
Here government takes a relatively passive role but maintains channels of
access and communication so that those affected can be heard. This
approach has its problems as the success depends on many of the principles
of group theory, which states that people will define its own interests,
organize and seek access, involve others in support of their cause;
influence decision-making, monitor implementation and so on.
2. ENCOURAGE IT TO HAPPEN APPROACH

Here, government reaches out to people in defining and articulating
their problems. The emphasis here is that government equips people to
participate not identifying and defining problems for them.
3. MAKE IT HAPPEN APPROACH

In this approach, government plays an active part in defining problem and
setting goals. In other words, government defines problems, set priorities
and establishes goals with the two other approaches as well. However, one
drawback with this system is that it places enormous burden on
government. Out of these three approaches, “make it happen” approach is
predominant in example, government decision-makers try to make it
happen” in foreign issues. They try to define the problems set the
priorities than domestic issues some critics also feel that deference
establishments are influenced by certain basic industries, hence
decision-makers “let it happen” that is allow such industries to define
the problems and set the priorities.
In spite of these classifications, agenda setting approaches are not mutually

exclusive. The breakdown of agenda setting into three approaches is to
assist analysts understand government action on individual public
problems and facilitate comparisons between issues. Whether a problem
gets on the public policy agenda or not depends on the power, stature and
number of people in the interest group political leadership influence
agenda setting. The office of the president in Nigeria plays a great role
in this regard. Beside these, approaches, crisis, events, such as wars and
depressions as well as protests and demonstrations put problems on the
policy agenda.
3.1.2 POLICY FORMULATION STAGE

This involves the development of pertinent and acceptable proposed courses of
action for dealing with public problems. Policy formulation in Nigeria is often
done by the president and his immediate advisers, other members of the executive
branch, career and appointed administrative officials, specially appointed
committees and commissions and legislators, who introduce bills for consideration
by the national assembly.

65
TYPES OF FORMULATION
Many types of formulation can be identified depending on the criteria for classification.
However, the most interesting and useful basis for identifies the nature of decision-
making. Three types can be identified (Jones, 1977; 56).
 Routine formulation: A repetitive and essentially changeless process
of reformulating similar proposals within an issue area that has a well-
established place on the agenda of government.
 Analogous formulation: Treating a new problem by relying on what was
done in developing proposals for similar problems in the past i.e.
searching for analogies.
 Creative formulation: Treating any problem with an essentially
unprecedented proposal one, which represents a break with past practice.
However, it is sometimes to see creative formulation government as many
proposals are normally modified along the way towards past practices
during the implementation stage.
Policy formulation process includes the following:

(i) The identification of the policy issues/problems
(ii) Specification of objectives/targets
(iii) Development of options/strategies
(iv) Selection of preferred option/strategies
(v) Policy decision-making
(vi) Design of implementation strategy; and
(vii) Policy review and reformulation
The conception of the problems could be identification of the policy

issues/problems against the background of the peoples‟ needs and societal
problems. Problems have to be perceived, interpreted and defined. The
distribution of social problems can be identified by the use of sample survey
technique for data and data processing capacit y of computers.
The process of policy formulation requires wide consultation prior to the initiation
of policy and involvement of stakeholders, particularly labour unions, the
organized private sector, the civil society and lower ties of government, legislative
and executive arms of government and so on.
3.1.3 POLICY ADOPTION STAGE

Legitimating of public policy is the fourth stage. This process means having a
particular proposal authorized. Formulators do not think only of problems and how
to solve them, but whether the course of action is feasible getting it authorized.
Decision or choices of policy requires some authoritative ratification as an aspect of
the principle of public accountability. While decision may be effectively reached at
one level, they will often be authorized and confirmed at another. Therefore,
some strategic considerations are directed toward the legitimization of process –

66
building support for a proposed course of action, maintaining support held
previously, deciding where compromises can be made; calculating when and where
to make the strongest play and controlling information flow to advantages.
This is often done by the notion of majority lobby building in legislature. In other
words, a course of action is legitimate when a majority in both houses of
the legislature (National Assembly) approves and the chief Executive affixes his
signature to the measure. So, given the necessity for building majority in a given
course of action, formulators of policies must consider all factors involved in its
legitimating process. However, the most formal adoption strategy is one of
proposal, legislative approval and Presidential (Executive) signature although there
are other adoption strategies that exist in government (Anderson et. al, 1978:9-10).
3.1.4 POLICY IMPLEMENTATION

Policy implementation is the process of assembling resources (including people),
allocating resources and utilizing resources (operations), in order to achieve policy
objectives. The administrative agencies are the primary implementers of public
policy, but the judiciary and legislature are also involved. The legislature may
over- rule the decision of the executive by two-third majority, while the Courts
interpret statutes and administrative rules and regulations. Agencies also make
“administrative laws” through delegated legislative authority by the legislature when
implementing statutes passed by the congress or National Assembly. The
application of a public policy passed by the Legislature can change the nature of
the policy itself, as implementation often affects policy content (Anderson, et al,
1978:10-11).
3.1.5 POLICY MONITORING AND EVALUATION STAGE
This is the last stage of the policy process. It involves an attempt to determine
whether a policy has actually worked. It is essential to monitor formulated
policies during implementation. Monitoring involves the assessment of progress on
policies, programmes and projects in comparison with what was initially planned.
Its object is the detection of deviations, so that corrective measures could be
applied. Evaluation, on the other hand, is concerned more with results of a policy or
programme. It tries to determine the relevance, effectiveness and impact of policy
and programme activities in the light of their objectives. It is also concerned with
the efficiency with which programmes are implemented. Such an evaluation
can lead to additional policy formulation to correct deficiencies. Anderson, Brady
and Bullock, (1978) categorized evaluation in two ways:
  Political evaluation to assess the political feasibility of the policy;

  Systematic evaluation seeks to objectively measure the impact of the policies
and determine how well objectives are actually accomplished. Such an
evaluation focuses on the effects which a policy has on the problem to which it
is directed.

67
Describe the formation and formulation of public policy

68
4.0 CONCLUSION
The public policy is a process. It entails issue or problem search, filtration and
definition, formulation, adoption, implementation, monitoring and evaluation. The
existence of monitoring and evaluation, however, does not totally prevent policy
failure. This necessitates policy review and evaluation. Evaluation gives room
for the assessment of the impact of policy and provides feedback to improve
policy implementation. It systematically judges the value of changes (planned and
unplanned) resulting from policy and project against the original plan.
5.0 SUMMARY
This unit explains the policy process. The main stages of the policy process
described include: problem identification, policy formulation, policy implementation
and evaluation. Public policy is cyclical. Here, Policy issues or problems
identified, filtered and defined during formation and formulation stage of policy
making process. As policy decisions or approval are made and implemented,
criticism in the form of feedback puts new decisions on the policy agenda. This
starts the policy-making cycle all over again.

(a) Describe what you understand by public policy implementation
(b) Explain the stages in public policy process
(c) Describe the public policy adoption process

Anderson, J.E (2003). Public Policy-making, 5th edition. New York:
Houghton
Mifflin Company.
Anderson, J., Brady, D and Bullock, C.(1978) Public Policy and Politics in America
Duxbury Press
Eneanya, A.N. (2010). Policy Research, Analysis and Effective public Policy-making
in Nigeria.
Lagos: Concept Publications Ltd.
Jones, C.O. (1977). An Introduction to the Study of Public Policy, 2nd Edition.
North
Scituate, Massachusetts: Duxbury Press

69
INTRODUCTION
Policy making does not happen in a vacuum. There are key players known as actors in
policy formulation and execution. This module examines the actors in decision making and
their role. The different models in analysing public policy also surface in this unit. The
tools or instruments of policy making process are well captured in part of the units of the
module while the phases involved in public policy analysis are discussed in the concluding
unit of this module.
CONTENTS


70
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Contents
3.1 Policy Actors
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0
,
INTRODUCTION
Public policy means series of decisions and activities resulting from structured and
recurrent interactions between different key players known as actors. These actors
comprising of public and private individuals who are involved in different
capacities to the emergence of policy designed to resolve social problem. Given
this, the term actor can be designated to connote an individual (minister, member
of the legislative), several individuals, legal entity or social group. In lieu of this,
this unit will look at the various actors involved in policy making. This is because
understanding the policy process without adequate knowledge on who is
responsible for what for the policy making would make the study of public policy
analysis less productive. Those actors which can be categorised into state actors
and non-state actors. The former includes government and its agencies at all organs
(Executive, Legislative and Judiciary) while the non-state actors include policy
makers outside the government bodies (Interest Groups, Mass Media, Political
Parties, Private Individuals etc)
2.0 OBJECTIVES
 Explain the role of official Actors in public policy making process
 Understand the indirect role of unofficial Actors in public policy-making
process.
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 EXECUTIVE
One of the key actors which falls to the category of state actor is the executive. In the
modern political system, the executive is vital when it comes to policy making
process. The executive which is usually headed by the President (Presidential System

71
of Government) takes decisions that affect the general public in the country. The
power assigned to the executive team makes it to be formidable in policy making
process. For instance, in Nigeria, the Federal Executive Council (FEC) often meet to
take decisions on some issues that would have impact on the populace. On the other
hand, the parliamentary system has the members of the cabinet as the executive
team. The cabinet takes decisions for the interest of the general public. The Prime
Minister usually heads the cabinet and public policy flows from the cabinet decision
making. Britain is an example of the country that adopts parliamentary system of
government.
3.2 LEGISLATURE
The legislative body is a government institution saddled with the responsibility
of making laws. Asides law making, the legislature controls the purse of the
country. This means the body has the power of appropriation which is done
through budget approval. In any democratic arrangement, either presidential or
parliamentary, the legislature law making power, approval or appropriation of
budget, confirmation of executive nominees such as the ministers and heads of
agencies and parastatals etc have placed the legislative arm as a key player in
public policy making. The legislature is also part of the state actor in policy
making as it belongs to the government institutions that determines authoritative
allocation of values in the society. For instance, the Nigeria‟s national budget
must be endorsed before it can be implemented. This singular power alone
makes the legislative arm to be a major player in decision making and public
policy process.
3.3 THE JUDICIACY

The role of law interpretation assigned to the judicial arm of government is key
to the policy making process. The different courts of law competence are
engaged in making judicial pronouncement on matters arising. The
pronouncement known as court judgement is binding and which invariably
determines the policy making process. Courts are approached to interpret and
decide the meaning of legislative provisions that often generally stated and permit
conflicting interpretations. In Nigeria for instance, several court pronouncements have
become law which affected persons or institutions must obey. The interpretation of
laws by the courts becomes policy. Though any court judgement by the lower court
can be appealed, the apex court determines some cases which the final judicial
pronouncement has become a policy statement in the country.
3.4 THE BUREACRATS

The administrators play major role in policy implementation. Most of the policies
formulated by the executive arm are passed to the administrative institutions for
effective implementation. Various ministries and agencies work assiduously to
ensuring policies are executed. For instance, if the executive gives approval to
construction of road, this can come to reality through its implementation by the

72
Ministry of Works. Put differently, sometimes the bureaucrats also participate in
policy formulation process as experts and technocrats in administrative agencies
advise the executives on what to be done at a particular point in time. They
supply information and help to articulate the broad objectives that guide policy
directions as a totality of management. The advice of experts can also lead to the
initiation of policies by decision-makers or politicians, apart from the vision of the
government itself in addition, experts assist with the scientific management of the
policy process through policy formulation and analysis. The expertise role of the
seasoned bureaucrats cannot be over emphasised.
3.5. POLITICAL PARTIES

The political parties remain one of the key non state actors of public policy. The
political party as an institution vies for political office by participating in elections
with the aim of wining political seats. However, the parties play significant role
when it comes to decision making process by proposing submissions to the
government on policy required. Most importantly, the party politics interface
between the ruling party and oppositions political parties makes the issue of policy
making process more robust. In some instances, the criticism from the opposition
parties forms the basis for government decision making. Though parties are known
for interest aggregation, they seek to convert such into general policy alternatives.
The way in which the parties “aggregate” interests is affected by the number of
desire of the parties to gain widespread electoral support will force both the parties
to include in their policy proposals popular demands and avoid alienating the most
important social groups.
3.6 INTEREST GROUPS

Basically, the existence of interest group is to influence government decisions to
favour their respective associations or general public. They sensitise the general
public on the content analysis of certain government policies. The awareness usually
creates public enlightenment on matters arising from decision makers. Asides
creating awareness by t sensitising the general public, they also make policy demands
on behalf of their members and general public which constitute inputs into policy
formulation. The interest groups do pressurise the government to ensure their
demands are considered. For example, the issue deregulation of petroleum product
in Nigeria generated a lot of contributions and demands from policies various
interest groups, such as labour various, media, private sectors/ professional bodies,
non-governmental organizational and civil society organizations. The government
got inputs from them before formulating policy with regards to deregulation of the
oil sector. Example of such interest groups are Nigeria Labour Congress NLC),
Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU).
3.7 INDIVIDUAL CITIZENS

The role of the citizens are mostly heard through public opinion. However,
some individuals with special attentions from the government usually influence

73
decision making. In fact, some members of the society belong to the category of
national and international figures. They have a lot respect locally and
internationally. This places their opinion to be respected by the government in
formulating policy. Apart from few individuals that enjoy certain charisma, the
larger society can also influence government decision through mass protest and
showcasing their opinions on issues affecting their wellbeing. With the aid of
social media in the contemporary societies, the citizens contribution in policy
making is significant as opinions can be easily sent to reach the government
representatives via different social media platform.
3.8 THE MASS MEDIA

The popular channel through which information are channelled from the people to
the government is the media. This makes the media to be the gatekeepers that
communicate peoples‟ agitation and request to the policy makers. Invariably, the
media assists in reshaping the actions and reactions of the people to government
largely in a democratic system. By publicizing specific causes, the media act as the
most important source of information for the government on the public‟s reactions
to contemporary issues. However, if the citizen is to make rational decisions about
public policy, the media should be of a high standard of reliability. This called for
objective and investigative journalism. With neutral and objective report, the
mass media can effectively pass the peoples‟ messages across to the
government. But the abuse of the media makes it to become a political resource
that can be manipulated. In this development, the mass media can manipulate
public opinion. The basic ethics of journalism is to report objective perspective
and serve as a fair channel between the populace and government. By and
large, with the power of reportage, the media is key in policy making process
and becomes a major actor in public policy analysis.
Examine the role of the executive in public policy
4.0 CONCLUSION
In this unit, we have been able to discuss the state and non-state actors of public
policy. These are actors are key to our understanding of how public policy are
formulated and as well implemented. The unit concludes that all the highlighted actors
are viable in policy making process
5.0 SUMMARY
The players or actors in public policy have been analysed on the basis of classification.
The first category belongs to the state actors representing government and its agencies.

74
(a) Describe the role of the judiciary in public policy formation
(b) Explain how interest groups contribute to policy formation of public policy

Anderson, J.E (2003). Public Policy-making, 5th edition. New York:
Houghton
Mifflin Company.
Eneanya, A.N. (2010). Policy Research, Analysis and Effective public Policy-
making in Nigeria.
Ebenezer, O.(2011). Public Policy Analysis. Academia.edu

75
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Contents
3.1 Rational Comprehensive Model
3.2 Bureaucratic Model
3.3 Incremental Model
3.4 Belief System Model
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
There are several models used in analysing decision-making process. .
Instructively, the concern of those models is to select among the
competitive alternatives. This makes it easier for a good analysts to
understand different approaches and models guiding policy makers’
decision process. For easier clarification, four models would be examined.
2.0 OBJECTIVES
  Understand rational comprehensive model of decision-making
  Explain Incremental model of decision –making
  analyse bureaucratic institutional model of decision-making
  describe belief system model of decision-making and
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
RATIONAL COMPREHENSIVE MODEL

The model is usually associated with Herbert Simon in his book „Administrative
Behaviour‟ published in 1945. The model is scientific analytical tool that carefully
examine a policy before making a choice. According to Simon, human rationality is
key to decision making process. And that every decision made is a careful logical
reasoning of an administrative man. The model is guided by five basic elements.
1. Identification of problem: In public policy analysis, a problem must be

identified before any decision could be made. As obtainable in science, the

76
basis of any finding or research to solve problem is to firstly identify a
problem. So, this principle guides rational comprehensive model.
2. Setting of Goals on Preference: The model emphasises setting of goals as
basic requirement in decision making. These goals are set on the basis of
individual‟s preference.
3. Consideration of Alternative Options: As a model that believes in rational
decision making, it argues that policy makers consider available
alternatives in decision making process. It implies that options are always
available for an administrative man before taking decision.
a. Analysis of the Alternative: The model is of the view that alternatives are
analysed on efficiency and reliable parameters. It states that policy
making is anchored on the effectiveness and reliability of alternative
decisions when it is required.,
4. Selection of the Best Alternative: The models believes that decisions are
made having considered the best available alternatives and its cost
implications.
However, the model is criticized for being idealistic. The reality is that sometimes
decisions are taken on political and environmental factors without considering the
economic and cost implications. This was supported by March and Simon (1958),
decisions are taken sometimes for minimum satisfaction which is against the maximum
benefits of the rational model
3.1 RATIONAL COMPREHENSIVE MODEL

The rational comprehensive model has the following elements:
(i) The decision-maker is confronted with a given problem that can be
separated from other problems or at least considered meaningfully in
comparison with them.
(ii) The goals, values or objectives that guide the decision-maker are
classified and ranked according to their importance
(iii) The various alternatives for dealing with the problems are
examined
(iv) The consequence (Cost and benefits) that would follow from the selection
of each alternatives are investigated
(iv) Each alternative and its attendant consequences can be compared with
the other alternatives
(v) The decision-maker will choose that alternative and its consequences
that maximize the attainment of his goals, values and objectives.
However, these assumptions are difficult to attain in real world. There are many
barriers associated with rationality. In rational comprehensive model, all
information required for alternative decisions are not available. All alternatives
cannot be possibly obtained and consequences predicted. Beside, most societal
values do not reach the decision agenda because of powerful elites and interest

77
groups. Hence, the model is criticized by scholars as being too idealistic and
narrow because it neglects some political variables of decision making.
3.2 THE INCREMENTAL MODEL

This model was popularised by Lindblom Charles in 1959. It was regarded as a
rejoinder to the proposition of the rational comprehensive model. Unlike the rational
model, the incremental model recognised the limitation of policy makers. The
limited capacities of man was not factored in by the supporters of rational
comprehensive model Also, the costliness analysis of rational model failed to realise
that such might not be obtainable in some instances . However, the incremental
model emphasises that every policy is a slight variation of the existing policy and
agenda of government. The model stipulates further that government is continuous
and that policy makers do not want to make new policies except consolidation on
existing ones. This is necessary due to the available resources, limited time and
knowledge to evolve new policies.
However, this model is believed to be conservative in its approach on decision

making process. By the argument that new policy is a variation of the past decisions,
the model sees incremental adjustment in the behaviours of decision makers. And by
implication, policies made are marginal adjustment of the past decisions. This
according to Sambo (1999) forgo the rigorous process of canvassing for new policies
by decision makers.
3.3 BUREAUCRATIC ORGANISATION MODEL

This model is propounded by Graham Allison in 1971. It combines two basic
elements. The model tries to explain the role of organisational structure and the
bureaucrats in decision making process. The model combines two theoretical
approaches namely; organisational process theory and bureaucratic politics theory.
a. Organisational Process Theory: This theory explains the critical role of the
organisational structure in decision making. It states that the values,
assumptions and patterns of behaviours in an organisation determines to some
extent how decisions are made in the organisation. It also stipulates that
organisational decisions are reflections of cultural affinity of the policy makers
in the organisation. Nevertheless, the role of individuals is suppressed by the
organisational structure.
b. Bureaucratic Politics Theory: This talks about the power of bargaining
between the employers and employee as a yardstick to arriving at decision
making process. So, decisions are made on the basis of negotiation and
bargaining before arriving on a policy. This is a reflection of synthesis of the
role of bureaucratic and organisational structure in public policy making.

78
3.4 BELIEF SYSTEM MODEL
This model predicates changes in policy on the values. It seems policies
made particularly in Nigeria are either not effective or lack implementation. This
according to the model threatens the achievement of the goals of some policies.
Successive governments in Nigeria seem to see public policy issues as a
matter of political jamboree which can be played around with. Many
promises are made by politicians, particularly during electioneering
campaigns, and eventually find their ways into becoming public policies
but government often lacks the political will to ensure the execution of
such policies. At another level, lack of requisite data needed for effective
national planning has constituted an albatross to policy- making in
Nigeria
Describe the rational comprehensive model of decision-making
4.0 CONCLUSION
In this unit, we have been able to discuss various models of decision-making.

All the models help to describe and prescribe decision-making. The major model is
rational comprehensive model decision-making. All others are reactive to it. They
tend to reflect and describe decision making in the real world situations than the
rational model. However, it makes a decision-maker want to act rationally in
decision- making or get net benefit of policies.
5.0 SUMMARY
In this unit, four models to the study of public policy analysis has been discussed.
Each of those models gives a better analogy on how decision making is guided and
what makes policy makers to act. The models explain the dynamics and patterns of
decision making process.

(a) Describe incremental model of decision making?
(b) Explain the criticisms levelled against rational decision making?

Publishing Ltd.

79
Lindblom, C. E. (1959). “The Science of Muddling Through.”
Public Administration Review, Vol 19.
Sambo, Adesina (1999). “What is Public Policy?' In Anifowose, R. and Enemuo, F.
(eds) Elements of Politics. Lagos: Malthouse Press Ltd.

80
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Contents
3.1
,
Use of Models
3.2
,
Scenario Construction
3.3 System Analysis
3.4 Decision Tree
3.5 Path Analysis
3.6 Forecasting
3.7 Cost Benefit Analysis
3.8 Cost Effectiveness Analysis
3.9 Management by Objective
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Policy analysis involves the use of different types of modern management decisio n
techniques and strategies, depending upon the nature of the decisions to be taken.
These techniques are largely different aspects and applications of system analysis
and include operations research, system engineering and network analysis tools
embracing programme evaluation and review techniques (PERT) and Critical Path
Method (CPM), scheduling, planning and programme budgeting system (PPES),
cost-benefit analysis and statistical methods. Others are scenario construction and
paradigms, organization analysis, management-by-objectives, etc. Most of these
techniques have been developed or given greater attention and aimed at clarifying
the task of policy analysts, policy planners and policy-makers. Almost all of these
techniques are based on scientific methods for solving problems and will lead to
rational decision-making.
In this unit, we shall examine various analytical tools and techniques used for
policy analysis.
2.0 OBECTIVES
At the end of unit, students would be able to:
  Understand general operational research tools for policy analysis
  Describe tools and techniques of policy analysis

81
3.0 MAIN CONTENTS
3.1 USE OF MODELS
Models can be constructed and used to compare performance of options and

to discover the relative effectiveness of them. A model is an abstract representation
of the real world. The process of applying the management decision
techniques, different models in the form of mathematical equations, computer
programmes, management games, scenario, organizational charts, maps, charters,
rules and regulations, standard procedures, budget documents, etc, are used. These
facilitate experimentation which is a crucial step in the process of policy analysis.
Policy analysis models could be viewed as a continuum reflecting different degrees
of their physical or symbolic characteristics as well as the types of techniques suited
to the various levels of qualification or use of judgment. Five steps of models
(quantitative, qualitative and judgmental (models) can be identified:
(a) Analytical models- take the form of sets of mathematical equations which
are susceptible to mechanical solution;
(b) Computer models- are more suited to decision problems in which the
relevant variables are too numerous and the inter-relationship too
complex to be handled analytically by conventional methods.
(c) People and computer models- involve a mix of people and all
computer models in the overall structure of the situation being studied
(d) Verbal models – are those models which have no quantitative
content.
Basically, they involve determining what factors in a given situation are relevant,
measuring the relativities among those factors and tracing out their interactions and
implications.
3.2 SCENARIO CONSTRUCTION

Is a description of the conditions and events under which a system is being studied
is assumed to be existing. Most scenarios are future-oriented, although they may
be reconstructions of the past or synoptic descriptions of the present. Scenarios
are particularly suited to dealing with conditions and events taken together and to
integrating several aspects of a situation more or less simultaneously. Scenarios
are often used in the field of foreign policy analysis.
3.3 SYSTEM ANALYSIS

System analysis is a systematic approach to helping a decision-maker chose a
course of action by investigating the problem; searching out objectives and
alternatives; and comparing them in the light of their consequences, using an
appropriate framework- insofar as it is possible/analytic – to bring expert judgment
and intuition to bear on the problem. Since, system analysis generates and

82
presents information in such a way as to improve the basis for decision-makers to
improve the basis for decision-makers to exercise judgment, which has the same
purpose as policy analysis. System analysis as a key technique in the process of
decision-making has recently been receiving considerable attention; a few
comments on its limitations would, therefore, be in order.
In spite of its acclaimed usefulness as a tool in the processes of decision-making,

system analysis is in general, ineffective where the problems to be solved
are behaviour-oriented and therefore, do not lend themselves to quantitative
measurement. Secondly, its successful application has been impeded by the lack of
the necessary skills. Thirdly, the attitudes and perceptions of professional systems
analysts have in many cases proved to be at variance with needs to be met. More
specific weaknesses and difficulties associated with the application of systems
analysis as a tool of policy analysis in developing countries could be categorized
as follows:
 Imprecise formulation and frequent and radical changes in the definition of
national goals; this undermines the stability of policies;
 The dearth of reliable data; and
 Alien foundation and orientation of the policy-making processes stemming
in most cases from the influences of colonial administration of pre-
independence days.
3.4 DECISION TREE

Decision tree is a decision making tool that presents graphically or
diagrammatically, the sequence in the decision process, to enable easier
understanding, management and choice in decision- making. It is a
diagrammatic model and a conceptual frame, which denotes precisely the flow
or sequence, the structure, stages, tasks, activities and consequences in the
decision making process. It, thus, enables a summary of essential information on
a flow chart, relating to a particular decision problem. It presents the decision-
maker with the sequence, the choices available, the uncertainties and calculations of
probabilities and outcomes.
The calculated pay off and the per cent chances of probabilities and outcomes. The
calculated pay-off and the percent chances of probabilities, form the basis of
decisions. The decision tree does not postulate techniques or methods of analysis.
Rather, any technique or analytical tool could be used in the valuation of
uncertainties, probabilities and outcome or pay-off. Cost-benefit analysis for
example may be useful in calculating pay-offs. Thus, a decision tree is just a
flow chart or diagram. This seeming inadequacy enables wider applicability of the
model.
3.5 PATH ANALYSIS

Path analysis is one of the methods of clarifying casual thinking about the causes
and consequences of public policy. Path analysis enables us to portray our ideas

83
about the causes or consequences of public policy in diagrammatic fashion. Path
analysis provides an overall estimate of the explanatory value of a model. It also
assists in identifying spurious relationships. More importantly, it permits the
testing of both direct and indirect casual paths in the determination of a dependent
variable. We can ascertain whether a determining variable acts on a dependent
variable directly or through mediating variables or both and we can compare the
relative influence of direct and indirect casual paths.
3.6 FORECASTING
The policy analysis approach to forecasting requires knowledge of what
techniques are available and of their limitations in theory and practice, but is not
obsessed with methodology or numbers as such. Forecasts cannot predict the
future but they can assist decision-makers to cope with uncertainty and change and
to explore the implications of policy options. The policy options approach to
forecasting also recognizes the crucial importance of how forecasts are consumed
by decision-makers rather than simply with how forecasts are carried out by
experts. Forecasting can be costly and a balance has to be struck between possible
benefits from forecasting and the costs of carrying out forecasts and consuming
them.
3.7 COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS

One possibility for guiding choice between programmes designed to accomplish
widely differing tasks would be to measure the benefits and costs in the same units
in all programmes, so that the difference between the benefits and costs could be
calculated for each programme and compared with the corresponding difference for
other possible actions. In practice, this means expressing both the benefits and
the costs in monetary units, naira for example. This process is often done
arbitrarily and this leads to the neglect of certain benefits and certain costs. This
technique is discussed more exhaustively in the last unit of this module.
3.8 COST-EFFECTIVENESS
It is a form of systems analysis in which the alternative actions or systems under
consideration are compared in terms of two of the consequences: naira or resource
costs and the effectiveness associated with each alternative. The effectiveness of an
alternative is measured by the extent to which that alternative if implemented
will attain the desired objective. The preferred alternative is usually taken to be
either the one that produces the maximum effectiveness for a given level of
cost or the minimum cost for a fixed level of effectiveness. Cost-effectiveness has
been exhaustively discussed in the last unit of the module.

84
3.10 MANAGEMENT BY OBJECTIVES (MBO)
It is management techniques that emphasizes establishing, clarifying
and operationalizing objectives, such that different sets of activities
operations and personnel within the organization or programme could be directed
and managed in accordance to defined objectives and achieve such objectives.
The belief is that the clarification of purposes and planned organization to
achieve them is considerably important to efficient and rational management and
effectiveness. MBO is not just a technique but a philosophy or belief in
subordinate-manager participation in goals setting and management and
cooperation in the joint act of achieving effectiveness.
Explain what you understand as system analysis to policy
analysis
3.0 CONCLUSION
In this unit, we have been able to examine various tools and techniques of
decision- making. Some of these techniques include: system analysis, cost-benefit
analysis, cost of effectiveness analysis, path analysis, scenario construction,
models and so on. These tools are adopted to analyse and rationalize choices in
policy making.
5.0 SUMMARY
Over the years, attempts have been made by government to improve the contents of
government decision making process. There are several tools and techniques
which are used in the planning, analysis, evaluation and management of government
policies and programmes. These tools include; system analysis, models, scenario
construction, cost-benefit analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis, forecasting, path
analysis and management by objectives. These tools are adopted to analyse and
rationalize choices in policy making.

1. Critically assess path analysis in policy analysis
2. Describe how cost benefit analysis tool can be used to analyse policy

Publishing Ltd.

85
Dye, T. (1972). Understanding Public Policy. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall Inc.

86
UNIT 4: POLICY PARTICIPATION AND POLICY INTEREST
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Contents
3.1 Public Participation in Policy Making
3.2 Special Interest and Policy Making
3.3 Policy Change and Policy Termination
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
7.0 References/ Further Reading
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The study of public policy has given us a basic understanding of the social
problem that invariably warrants decision making towards solving the problem.
However, the participatory process in decision making needs to be explored in
order to actualise the interest of the participants vis a vis decision making.
2.0 OBJECTIVES
 explain the participants in decision making
 understand the interest of decision makers
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN POLICY MAKING
This is a belief that those to be affected by a decision or policy have the right to be
involved in the process. By public participation, promotion and sustainability of
decisions can be ascertained. According to Warren (1996), public participation
creates room for democratic deliberation on decision making process. This allows
several individuals‟ input and public inclusion in the activities on any project for the
masses. Generally, public participation facilitates the involvement of the potential
beneficiaries of decision making. Such revolves around public interest and decisions
are influenced by public contributions.
In another dimension, public participation may be regarded as a strategy to empower

the larger society in taking vital decision for the general public interest. This remains

87
people centred or „human centric‟ principles in decision making process. The human
centric perspective appears in the western democratic culture to allow peoples
involvement in taking decisions in areas such as education, business and social
services programmes. This is advanced to be a paradigm of people first which
challenges the concept of „small is better‟ that is commonly associated by elitist
policy making projection.
The importance of public participation in decision making was also emphasised in

1990 through the African Charter for Popular Participation in Development and
Transformation held in Arusha, Tanzania. The Charter was endorsed by the
Economic Commission for Africa and Sixteenth meeting of the Economic
Commission for Africa Conference of Ministers responsible for Economic Planning
and Development. The central concern to embrace public participation in decision-
making is to enhance human development. This has led to the establishment of
International Association for Public Participation.
However, the contention has always been what constitutes public participation? How
can public participation in decision-making be increased? In response to this, Dalton
(2004) argues that the reduction in voters turn out in Western Europe was an
indication of citizens‟ frustration in government policies. This was interpreted to be a
gap between decision makers‟ policies and citizens‟ real needs, which might result to
legitimacy crisis of the government. Based on this, three principles must be met to
determine public participation in decision making process. These are:
Transparency: The government activities must be subjected to public scrutiny

Accessibility: Public information should be accessible to the people at any point in
time
Responsiveness: The new demands from the people must be efficiently responded to
by the government
3.2 SPECIAL INTEREST AND POLICY MAKING

The issue of interest in public policy is key and this creates room for contention of
who actually benefits from a policy. For a policy to gain momentum among the
decision makers, such policy tends to serve interest of specific stakeholders. The
argument here is that no policy gets attention from the actors except it favours their
interest. This leads to the question that, whose interest does a policy serve? Does a
policy actually enjoy popular support? Be that as it may, special interest in decision
making exposes the self –centeredness of policy makers.
Basically, policy analyst needs to identify the salient interest a policy intends
to serve. The more the populace lobby their demands to suit the interest of the
deciders, the better for decision making. However, the issue of special interest
in policy making has been criticised thus:
1. It gives space for policy abuse and corruption.
2. The policy makers become autocrats
3. The principle of special interest in policy making defeats democratic
tenets of accountability and transparency

88
4. The special interest negates public interest
In the final analysis, for a good understanding of public policy, it is pertinent

to understand the interest involved in a policy. This requires understanding
the political dimension of decision making. Given this, one can situate the
rationale behind allocation of values in the society
3.3 POLICY CHANGE AND POLICY TERMINATION

Policy termination is very important in policy analysis. Termination means the end
of something, conclusion or cessation, a result or outcome of something.
Termination in public policy analysis means the deliberate stoppage or cessation of
government policy or program. There is also partial termination of government
program. In this scenario, government services are significantly redirected in order
to justify its continuous existence.
By the inclusion of termination option, it is an indication that a policy needs not to

live longer and this calls for policy change. It means a policy objective has been
reached and there is need to replace the policy with another one. So, the previous
one would be terminated and new one designed to enhance policy change. An
example is the issue of coronavirus that emanated from China in 2019 which later
transmitted to various countries in the world. Nigeria as a member of World Health
Organisation (WHO) through the Ministry of Health, and Nigeria Centre for Disease
Control (NCDC) introduced a policy of social distancing among people in order to
curb the spread of the virus. Such policy seized to exist and became terminated when
the fight against coronavirus was over and vaccine developed to tackle the infection.
This indicates that social distancing as a policy was no more relevant and had to be
changed.
Explain the concept of policy interest
4.0 CONCLUSION
Public policy allows multiple dimension to its analysis. This places the field to be
scientific as researchers have diverse instruments to identifying motives and
implications of decision making. Asides having basic knowledge on decision
making processes, the participants in public policy can be ascertained.
5.0 SUMMARY
In this unit, we have explained policy participation and the dynamics of decision
making using the public participation, policy interest and policy changes as
yardstick of understanding decision making.

89
1. Describe the perception phase of public policy analysis
2. Explain the design phase of public policy analysis

Dalton, R (2004). Democratic Challenges, Democratic Choices: The Erosion of
Political Support in Advanced Industrial Democracies New York: Oxford University
Warren, M.(1996) Deliberative Democracy and Authority Annual Review Political

Science Vol 7

90
INTRODUCTION
Public policy requires a serious planning before a decision can be reached. This makes it
imperative in this module to analyse the strategic planning involved in decision making
process. The development of any country lies in its planning and effective policies. This
module will expose you to the factors responsible for categorisation of countries to
developed and developing. This would be done vis a vis planning as a mechanism. The
module also discusses planning and budgeting system in Nigeria and concludes with
explanation of networking in policy analysis
CONTENTS

CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Contents
3.1 Meaning of Planning
3.2 Characteristics of planning
3.3 Basic Steps in Planning
3.3 Strategic Planning
3.4 Relationship between planning and policy analysis
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The essence of planning in any organisation cannot be underemphasised. Planning
assists community, society, institution and individual to be well coordinated on what
to do, how to do it and why it should be done. Public policy requires a rigorous
planning in order to enhance sustainability of targeted goals and objectives. This

91
makes it imperative in this unit to consider the concept of planning and the strategic
ways it can be done to achieve desired objectives.
2.0 OBJECTIVES
 Describe the concept of planning
 Know the processes and strategies of planning
 Understand the relationships between planning and public policy analysis
3.0 MAIN CONTENTS
3.1 MEANING OF PLANNING

Planning is the process of thinking and outlining required activities towards
sustaining a goal. It is considered the basic and fundamental function in
management. For any organisational, societal or individual goals to be achieved,
planning is required to map out ways and how the objectives can be attained.
According to Omran (2002:68), planning is the process that allows individual or
organization to decide in advance on future actions. To Coffey (1999), planning
involves selection from among alternatives future courses of action for an
organization. In the word of Dimock et al, (1983:89), planning is “the use of rational
design as contrasted with change, the reaching of a decision before a line of action is
taken instead of improving after the action has started”. It is the process of devising
a basis for a course of future action. Chandler and Plano (1988:92) explained
planning from political point of view, thus:
Conceiving meaningful goals and developing alternative choices for future

action to achieve these goals. It involves a systematic procedure for the
reduction of many alternatives to an approved course of action. It determines
not only goals but the sequential order in which they are pursued, the need
for coordination and the standards for maintaining control.
From these definitions, these scholars regard planning as a technique which

anticipates policy decisions. Planning in the context of administration begins where
general policy stops. It is the means by which ends can be brought to fruition . In
other words, in public sector, government lays down the general policy, the
Administrative planning unit gives it practical shape to that policy in the form of
development plan for period of years envisioned. For our purpose, planning involves
some strategies. It specifies a definite goal and prescribes the method and the
mechanism by which concrete results may be achieved.

92
3.2 CHARACTERISTICS OF PLANNING
The characteristics of planning as stated by Bhagwan and Bhushan (2006: 244)
indicate that :
(i) Planning is closely associated with the goals of the organization. These
goals might be implicit or explicit. However, well-defined goals lead to
efficient planning;
(ii) Planning is primarily concerned with looking into the future. It
requires forecasting of future situation in which organization has to
function;
(iii) Planning involves selection of the best alternative to achieve the objectives
of the organization;
(iv) Planning is comprehensive and includes every course of action in
the organization;
(v) Planning is an inter-dependent and integrative process. It coordinates
the activities of various departments, sections and sub-sections;
(vi) Planning is flexible as it is concerned with future conditions which
are dynamic;
(vii) Planning is a continuous affair. It needs constant review and re-adjustment
in the light of achieved targets and future possibilities;
(viii) Planning as a process of formulation and evaluation is primarily a staff
function.
3.3 BASIC STEPS IN PLANNING

1. Establishing Objectives: The statement of objectives is the first step in
planning. These objectives should be clearly stated and known by the
concerns stakeholders in order to have good knowledge of the target
purposes. Objective stipulates what needs to be done, identify the procedures
and rules guiding the goals.
2. Establishing Planning Premises: Proper planning must have an agreement
involving the relevant stakeholders. By disseminating critical planning premises,
there would be room to give a forecast data and application of basic policies for
organizational goals. The premises will showcase the assumptions and future setting
of planning.
3. Determining Alternative Courses: Planning involves searching for alternative

courses of actions especially those that are not immediately clear. So, in planning
there is opportunity to have alternative course of actions.
,,
4. Evaluating and selecting from the Alternatives: Planning requires to sought from
the alternatives courses and evaluate the strong and weak points. This is about
weighing the various factors in the light of objectives and premises. Selection from
the alternative is adoption of a course of action. This allows selection from different
available alternatives using rational model perspective.
5. Formulation of Plans: After evaluation and selection process, plans are formulated.
This is followed with working out of modalities to enhance proper breaking down of
the goals.

93
3.4 STRATEGIC PLANNING
Strategic planning has a very important role to play in public policy process. It
gives a better understanding to policy formulation and policy priorities.
Generally, strategic planning refers to the processes by which an organisation,
community or society or an individual sets up goals and objectives to be achieved
with available resources. In essence, strategic planning guides decision makers on
what to do, how to do it and why it should be done. It involves three major
processes: Formulation of plan, execution and evaluation of plans. Bhagwan and
Bhushan (2006) the three steps required in strategic planning thus:
i. FORMULATION OF THE PLAN

This is the first and most important step of planning process. An ill-
conceived plan based on unreliable data and impractical targets may not
only mean wastage of precious human and financial resources but may
also create popular dissatisfaction. Formulation in this context entails
formulation of goals and objectives, which should be clearly and
unambiguously determined. This is followed by an assessment of the
means or resources available to realize these goals, such as: money, men,
material, equipment, ethical standards, political and administrative
feasibility. The preparation of a work programme designed to achieve the
determined objectives. The various available alternatives should be
examined in the light of organizational objectives and planning premises
and after objective evaluation of these alternatives the possible alternative
should be selected.
ii. EXECUTION OF PLAN
The execution or implementation of the plan is as important step of the
planning process as its formulation. A well-conceived plan may be set at
naught by poor implementation. Effective implementation of plan has
been the weakest link in the chain of the entire planning process. To
ensure effective implementation, the planning body should provide
adequate manpower, and financial resources, arrange sufficient officials,
build up the character and morale of the plan executors and stimulate
public cooperation.
iii. EVALUATION OF PLAN
Planning is a continuous process, therefore should be flexible enough to
incorporate unexpected events and make necessary adjustment in the light
of a plan appraisal. The appraisal of various plan projects particularly of a
long duration plan is necessary to ensure its right direction. The uncertainty
of the future necessitates continuous evaluation. The problems hindering
the effective implementation can be drawn only through constant
evaluation of the plan.

94
3.4 THE SYNERGY BETWEEN PLANNING AND POLICY ANALYSIS
Planning and policy analysis have their areas of commonalities. Olaniyi, (2001)
highlights the following as the common ground for planning and policy
analysis
(a) Problem identification or situation;
(b) Collection of all the relevant facts;
(c) Developing alternatives for future action to achieve these goals;
(d) Sequential orders for achieving these goals; and
(e) The need for coordination and control.
No doubt, planning and policy analysis have relationship as the former emphasises
on how to go about achieving a goal and objective while the latter identifies the
basic needs for public policy to be effective and efficient. Nevertheless, both
variables are import in identifying social problem that requires decision making.
SELF-ASSESSMENT EXERC ISE

Explain the term planning
4.0 CONCLUSION
In this unit, we have been able to define the concept of planning, the
characteristics, basic steps in planning, strategic planning and the nexus between
planning and policy analysis.
5.0 SUMMARY
Planning represents a new interest among policy makers in analyzing policy. It
helps policy analysts to know what to plan for, how to plan it and how to carry
out the plan. Planning is thinking before acting, establishing goals before setting
out and appreciating the limitations. .

(a) Discuss what you understand as planning
(b) Explain the relationship between planning and policy analysis

Bhagwan, V. and Bhushan, V. (2006). Public Administration. New Delhi: S.
Chand & Company Ltd
Chandler, R.C. and Plano, J.C. (1988). The Public Administion Dictionary.
England:ABC - CLIO
Dimock, M.E. and Dimock, G.O. (1983). Public Administration. New
York: Saunders College Publishing.
Eneanya, A.N. (2010). Public Administration in Nigeria: Principles, Techniques
and Applications. Lagos: Concept Publications Ltd.

95
Publishers Limited
White, L.D. (1955). Introduction to the study of Public Administration. New
York: Macmillan Co

96
UNIT 2: PLANNING IN THE DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Contents
3.1 Pre-requirement for effective planning
3.2 Problems of planning in the Developing world
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The significance of planning in socio-economic and political development of
any country cannot be undermined. The developed countries are believed to
have attained such feat with the aid of effective planning supported with
visionary leadership. However, most the developing countries and Nigeria in
particular face the challenges of strategic planning vis a vis leadership crisis. In
view of this, this unit explores the pre-requisite requirement for effective
planning and some of the huddles in developing countries as a result of lack of
effective planning.
2.0 OBJECTIVES
 Understand the pre-requisites for effective planning for socio-economic
development; and
 Identify some of the limitations of planning in developing countries
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 PRE-REQUISITE FOR EFFECTIVE PLANNING

(1) EFFICIENT ADMINISTRATIVE STURCTURE
The development of any society aligns with effective planning with
efficient administrative structure. The achievement of governmental goals
and objectives can be facilitated through solid administrative body for
proper implementation Planning requires devoted personnel able to

97
provide initiative and support. The personnel enhance policy target by
ensuring robust implementation. Though the political leadership must
support the administrative setting with adequate resources, planning
remains one of the heartbeats of successful state which requires efficient
administration.
(2) ADEQUATE INFORMATION SYSTEM
Information is also a key to the success of any planning. The more
informed an organisation or society, the better for effective planning. The
availability, accurate, reliable and up –to-date statistical data is an
important pre-requisite for effective planning. Without reliable data about
materials, capital, human and natural resources and accurate information
about the magnitude of the problems, achieving the goals and
objectives of the decision makers become a mirage. Abuse of relevant
data would jeopardise the mission and goals of an organization, individual
or state. Without reliable data, planning cannot solve the identified
problems.
(3) IDENTIFICATION OF SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES AND TARGET

A plan must be very specific about its objectives and proposed targets
to be achieved. This must have a time span to guide the execution of the
plan and how the social problem should be tackled, the priorities should be
clearly defined and targets should not be too ambiguous. The objectives
should be realistic, limited and feasible. Similarly, the targets fixed for
various sectors should be concrete ones. If there are constraints of
resources, targets should be accordingly reviewed to suit the limited
resources.
(4) LEADERSHIP COMMITMENT

The success story of most of the developed countries could be largely
ascribed to vibrant and visionary leadership. The government remains the
most active player to drive effective planning for progressive decision
making process. The leaders should have the political will to embark on
efficient planning. However, the absence of visionary leaders and where
corruption is allowed to thrive would definitely face the consequence of
wallowing in poverty. The leadership commitment is required for a
progressive planning and effective decision making process.
(5) STRENGHTENING INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATIONS

The idea of partnership and collaboration among sovereign countries is one of
the valid mechanisms for efficient planning. No country can be isolated as
international political system recognises bilateral and multi-lateral
relationships to boost socio-economic sectors. This is applicable to planning
that needs collaborations from different sovereign states. For a better
economic progress and increased productivity level, a county needs to
strategically plan with other nations in order to enhance investment drive.

98
3.3 PROBLEMS OF PLANNING IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
(i) LACK OF ACCURATE DATA
The availability of reliable data in developed world makes planning an easy
task. The data guides policy makers on what to be done and the category of
people decisions affect directly or indirectly. However, reverse is the
case in developing countries where data are not only reliable but lack
accuracy. This remains a limitation to effective and strategic planning.
Without reliable data, formulation of policy to serve the targeted
people might be difficult. For instance, Nigeria suffers from reliable
and accurate data which makes it difficult to actualise the percentage
and numbers of people belonging to a particular category. During the
fight against COVID-19 in Nigeria, the government disbursement of
cash to poorest people was criticised on the basis of reliability of data
used to generate the beneficiaries. Be that as it may, the lack of reliable
data has affected planning as decision makers formulate policy which later
resulted to „policy summersault‟.
(ii) INSURFICIENTRESOURCES
Most of the developing countries are usually faced with resources to
execute their planning. The resources which include human and
materials are not adequate in most of the developing nations. This
leads to dependant on developed states and international donor to
come to their rescue. For instance, the humanitarian supports for
foreign donors are largely directed to developing nations in Africa,
Asia and Latin America. Countries with good ideological drive might
have difficulty in planning if the required resources to execute plans
are lacking. It is on this basis that places developing economies to be
depending largely on foreign assistance.
(iii) PROBLEM OF EXPERTISE

Economic planning requires technical know-how for its formulation and
implementation to be effective. There is lack of skilled personnel with
adequate experience and education to formulate national development plan.
Most developing countries rely on technical assistance from foreign
countries in order to implement development programmes. In some cases,
there is lack of clear understanding of the objectives, leading to planning
with wrong priorities and subsequent failure of the programme or project.
(iv) IMPLEMENTATION PROBLEM

In most developing countries, after a successful plan, people face the
challenge of implementation. When policies are made and the
implementation fails to meet the goals, such makes decision making
process to suffer setback in developing countries. Planning must be
followed to the latter by ensuring proper implementations. However,
developing countries do contend with full implementation. This is largely
caused by corruption that paves way for lack of proper monitoring
mechanism to ascertain policies made are complied with full
implementation. In most cases, decision makers plan but to execute such
which invariably results to setback in the developing countries.

99
(v) LOOSE TIME FRAME
Timing is a key to ensuring effective and realisation of planning goals and
objectives. Most of the developing countries fail in strict compliance to
time span of planning. Time is a limiting factor for plan makers. When a
plan or project is delayed, it can invariably lead to denial. Asides that, it
becomes more costly as the plan may be reviewed with many additional
cost implication. The costs incurred in the formulation of the plan can
better be app lied to the actual implementation of the previous project and
schemes. Planning cannot afford to go beyond a certain time limit and it
must justify its costs.
4.0 CONCLUSION
Planning is important in understanding the direction of a country. This unit has
specifically explores the prerequisites elements of good planning. These have
been proven as sources to development of socio-economic and political
atmosphere of countries. However, the limitations face by the developing
countries in the area of planning have showcased why most of the states within
this category are yet to be developed.
5.0 SUMMARY
The relationship between planning and policy analysis has made it easier for
our understanding of developmental approaches to decision making process.
The viability of resources either human or material has been justified in this
unit. This contributes to the placement and categorisation of countries. The
major huddles of developing economies on planning must be tackled to ensure
effective achievement of planning goals and objectives in the societies.

(i) Discuss what you understand by planning
,
(ii) Explain the pre-requisites for effective planning
(iii) Analyse the problems encountered for effective planning in the developing
countries.
,,

Publishers Limited
Korel, G. and Robin, L(2018) Public Policy Making in Globalized World Sabanci
University

100
UNIT 3:PLANNING, PROGRAMMING & BUDGETING SYSTEM (PPBS)
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Contents
3.1 Elements of PPBS
3.2 Advantages of PPBS
3.3 Disadvantages of PPBS
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
PPBS embrace and emphasize the three concepts of Planning, Programming and
budgeting. The “Planning” aspect of PPBS involves long-term determination of
goals and specifying the best programmes to attain them. The “programming”
aspect of PPBS involves structuring the budget in terms of goals (programmes).
The budgeting function is the allocation of resources in money terms to achieve the
specified goals, programmes and projects. PPBS is a macro-economic, centralized
top-down policy and long-range planning technique. In this unit, we shall examine
the meaning of PPBS, its elements, advantages, disadvantages.
2.0 OBJECTIVES
 Explain the concept of PPBS
 Understand its elements
 Understand its advantages and disadvantages; and
 Nigeria‟s experience in its application
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 INTRODUCTION
It is an integrated system of planning which involves systematic consideration of
alternatives in the choice of strategies, and programming in the determination
of manpower, material and other needs for accomplishing a programme. Then,
budgeting is added to provide financial backing. In this unit, we shall examine

101
the components of PPBS, the advantages and disadvantages.
3.2 ELEMENTS OF PPBS

PPBS constitute five following elements:
(i) A program structure – a classification of the courses of action open to
an organization for attaining its objectives;
(ii) An approved program document that includes precise, quantitative data
on needs, resource inputs, and program outputs extending a number of
years into the future;
(iii) A decision-making process that establishes the functions, rules, and
timetables for the actions required by the PPBS;
(iv) An analysis process for measuring effectiveness and for weighing
alternatives; and
(v) An information system that supplies the data required to implement the
system.
PPBS is a management tool for providing a better analytical basis for decision-
making and for putting such decisions into operation. The PPBS specifies that
these activities should be integrated and coordinated within an organization. The
integral components of PPBS involve:
(i) Setting of specific objectives
(ii) Systematic analysis to clarify objectives and to assess alternative ways
of meeting them.
(iii) Establishing resource requirements for each alternative
(iv) The framing of budgetary proposals in terms of programmes directed
towards the achievement of the objectives;
(iv) The projection of the costs of these programmes for a number of years
in the future;
(v) Estimating benefits to be gained from each programme alternative in terms
of probable outcome;
(vi) The formulation of plans of achievement on yearly basis for each
programme and
(vii) Testing the long-range fiscal implication of the plan by analysing both
direct and indirect costs;
(viii) Evaluating the annual budget
(ix) Evaluating the success with which programme benefits are achieved;
(x) Revising planning standards; and
(xi) Repeating the cycle to accommodate changes and objectives, goals,
available resources and the institution/agency‟s environment.
(xi) An information system for each programme to supply data for the
monitoring of achievement of programme goals and for the reassessment of
the programme objectives as well as the appropriateness of the programme
itself (Oshisami, 1994:68).

102
In other words, the organization‟s budgeting must be integrated with its plans and
programmes, such that the activities of the organization are clearly organized,
guided and appraised. The budget time in PPBS is that of critical reviews and
decisions regarding plans, programme and project reviews, projections and
accomplishment levels. PPBS are, therefore, a comprehensive planning and
budgeting system, which unifies the entire organizations in terms of coordinating
the entire activities and functions of the organization. It is aimed at attaining
organizational goals in an efficient and effective manner. Institutions and
governments are often committed to PPBS because it permits the evaluation of:

The efficiency and economy of programme;

Alternative programmes or ways of implementing the same programme; and
Giving priority to various programmes to determine their overall effectiveness
3.5 APPLICABILITY OF PPBS IN NIGERIA

In Nigeria, it was first adopted in the Western State in 1972-73 financial years. The
Udoji Commission recommended its use for the nation‟s public service. By the end
of 1970s, however, the system was hardly still in use in any of the governments that
adopted it. This was because the technique encountered numerous problems.
According to Ikelegbe (1994), these problems were:
(i) The requirement of goal determination which could generate possible
conflicts;
(ii) The requirement of cost-effective, most beneficial programmes with the
quantifications and analysis involved which was rigorous
(iii) The system required projections which are saddled with enormous data
requirement analysis and uncertainties
(iv) The problem of time. The time span required to plan and design
programmes, review them and allocate resources could be considered
long and may constitute delays.
The system was also placing in the hands of officials rather than policy-makers
and politicians, the crucial role of deciding goals, planning programmes, making
crucial decisions and allocating resources. As PPBS emphasized rationalism,
efficiency and change, its introduction was resisted by officials because of the
rigour, time and changes required (Eneanya, 2010:193-4).
3.3 ADVANTAGES OF PPBS

1) Clearer definition of objectives and strategies
2) Enhancement of the flow of information and about inputs and
expected outputs
3) Facilitating the skills and knowledge of budget officers in the analysis of
the factors associated with informed decision
4) It is useful for capital budgeting
3.4 DISADVANTAGES OF PPBS

103
1) PPBS is weak and unsuitable, especially in times of economic or financial
decline;
2) It is not designed to improve administrative control over expenditure of
fund;
3) It focuses on what will be done, not how to do it;
4) It does not provide an operating tool for line officer, who implements the
policy and programme decisions
5) It is difficult for PPBS to evaluate the benefits of some government
programmes
6) The dearth or complete non-availability coupled with conflicting social
objectives and inability to relate outputs to objectives further complicate
the difficulties
Explain the Advantages and disadvantages of planning, programming and
budgeting system
4.0 CONCLUSION
In this unit, we have been able to examine planning, programming and
budgeting system. PPBS is an integrated systems of planning which involves
systematic consideration of alternatives in the choice of strategies, and
programming in the determination of manpower, material and other needs
for accomplishing a programme. Then, budgeting is added to provide financial
backing. PPBS is aimed at attaining organizational goals in an efficient and
effective manner.
5.0 SUMMARY
PPBS is a comprehensive planning and budgeting system which unifies the entire
organizations in terms of coordinating the entire activities and functions of the
organization. It is aimed at attaining organizational goals in an efficient and
effective manner. PPBS is made up of five elements:
(i) A program structure – a classification of the courses of action open to
an organization for attaining its objectives;
(ii) An approved program document that includes precise, quantitative data
on needs, resource inputs, and program outputs extending a number of
years into the future;
(iii) A decision-making process that establishes the functions, rules, and
timetables for the actions required by the PPBS;
(iv) An analysis process for measuring effectiveness and for weighing

104
alternatives; and
(iv) An information system that supplies the data required to implement the
system. PPBS is a management tool for providing a better analytical basis
for decision-making and for putting such decisions into operation.

(i) Describe the major components of planning, programming and budgeting
system.
(ii) Discuss the disadvantages of planning, programming and budgeting
system.

Eneanya, A.N. (2010). Public Administration in Nigeria: Principles, Techniques
and
Applications. Lagos: Concept Publications Ltd.
-------------(2010). Policy Research, Analysis and Effective Policy-making in
Nigeria
Lagos: Concept Publications Ltd
Publishing Ltd.

105
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Contents
3.1 Network Analysis
3.2 Forms of Network Analysis
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The focus of network analysis is to establish a link between different sections

involved in policy making process and public policy outcome. Also, Network
analysis is the technique used in planning and controlling well-defined programme
or project and their implementation. However, in this unit, the sophisticated forms of
networking to be discussed are: Critical Path Method (CPM) and Program
Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT).
2.0 OBJECTIVES
At the end of the unit, the students would be able to:
 analyse networking policy analysis

 Understand the relevance of networking techniques in public policy analysis
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 NETWORK ANALYSIS

Network Analysis is a set of integrated techniques adopted to depict relationship
among actors of social phenomenon. In the context of Public Policy Analysis,
Network Analysis is a technique used in planning and controlling of well-defined
programs or projects and their implementations. It can be used in executing,
building appropriate scheduling, monitoring and control of proms. Examples of
sophisticated forms of networking are as follows: Critical Path Method (CPM);
Programme Evaluation; and Review Technique (PERT).

106
3.2 FORMS OF NETWORKING
There are two major types of networking, namely: Critical Path Method and
Programme Evaluation and Review Technique.
Critical Path Method (CPM): This is also known as Critical Path Analysis. It is
commonly used in program evaluation. Basically, it is mathematical tool embraced in
assessing project and reviewing techniques .CPM is commonly used with all forms of
projects, including construction, aerospace and defence, software development,
research projects, product development, engineering, and plant maintenance, among
others. Any project with interdependent activities can apply this method of
mathematical analysis.
Programme Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT): This is a statistical tool,
used in project management that is, designed to analyse and represent the tasks
involved in completing a given project. It is used in conjunction with Critical Path
Method (CPM). It was able to incorporate uncertainty by making it possible to
schedule a project while not knowing precisely the details and durations of all the
activities. It is more of an event-oriented technique rather than start- and completion-
oriented, and is used more in projects where time, rather cost, is the major factor. It is
applied to very large-scale, one-time, complex, non-routine infrastructure and
Research Development projects.
Explain network analysis
4.0 CONCLUSION
In this unit, we have been able to describe network analysis construction. Network
analysis is the technique used in planning and controlling well-defined programme or
project and their implementation. Examples of sophisticated forms of networking are:
Critical Path Method (CPM) and Program Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT).
They are both used as modelling techniques for simple and complex projects,
respectively.
5.0 SUMMARY
Network analysis is a technique used in planning and controlling of well-defined

programs or projects and their implementations. It can be used in executing, building
appropriate scheduling, monitoring and control of proms. Examples of sophisticated
forms of networking are as follow: Critical Path Method (CPM); and Programme
Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT).
107

(i) Explain what you understand as Network analysis
(ii) Examine the forms of network analysis
Eneanya, A.N. (2010). Policy Research, Analysis and Effective Public Policy in
Nigeria. Lagos: Concept Publications Ltd

Publishing Ltd
108

INTRODUCTION
There are various dimensions for policy analysis. This module will explore all the necessary
framework guiding policy analysis. The cost benefit and effectiveness will be explained as well to
enrich our understanding of decision making. The essence of cost analysis cannot be undermine in
policy analysis. The module will also expose you to some government policies in the area of
education, health and agriculture. The assessment of those sectors would be done using their
targeted objectives and goals as yardsticks. The constraints in policy analysis are well captured in
the last unit of this module.
CONTENTS

UNIT 2: COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS
ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES
109

UNIT I: POLICY ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK
CONTENT
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Contents
3.1 Effectiveness
3.2 Unintended Effects
3.3 Equity
3.4 Cost
3.5 Feasibility
3.6 Acceptability
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Policy Analysis is guided with different dimensions. This informs diverse techniques in
analysing public policy. This unit focuses on six analytical framework that enrich
understanding of public policy analysis. The framework such as effectiveness, unintended
effects, equity, cost, feasibility and acceptability would be analysed vis a vis policy
making.
2.0 OBJECTIVES
 Understand the framework of analysing public policy
 Distinct the dimension of each of the policy analysis framework
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 EFFECTIVENESS
The first element that can be used in assessing the success of a public policy is
effectiveness towards its objectives (Salamon, 2002). For instance, any policy on health
issue is to remedy problem regarding health sector. In order to promote health policy, it
is necessary to underscore the impact of the public policy made. This indicates
effectiveness of a policy is a vital framework that can be used in analysis and evaluation.
By this, it is possible to report the effects of the policy under study in order to aggravate
the target problems. Though sometimes, it takes time to judge the ultimate effects of a
policy, nevertheless, it is required to ascertain the success of a decision. However, in a
situation whereby to examine the link between public policies and their ultimate effects
proves difficult, hence the value of taking into account intermediate effects. It becomes
necessary to deconstruct the chain of expected effects between the public policy under
110

study and the targeted social problem.
3.2 UNINTENDED EFFECTS
This is a consideration which is usually given to identify the effects produced as a result
of implementation of a policy. Such effects that are unrelated to the set objectives which
are external to the chain of the main goals. Given the complexities of human societies,
policy might not be regulated to achieve the targeted goals alone, there is every tendency
to have unintended effects which can be produced in all kinds of areas. For instance,
health policy might have socio-economic implications which ordinary are not part of the
objective but surface as unintended effects.
3.3 EQUITY
This is a framework to access whether the policy produces different effects on various
group of people. This involves categorization of the people by age, religion, gender,
socio-economic status, etc. By this, one can understand if the policy gives room for
inequality in the distribution of goods and services to the targeted population. It is very
important to take into account equity and not just general effectiveness of a policy.
Because sometimes policy might be generally effective but create inequalities among the
people. This is a signal that not all policies are equally distributed. For example, policy
on nutritional feeding is mostly less effective among the uneducated and lower income
earners, whereas the group generally are more affected with the problem of
overweighting and obesity.
3.4 COST
In a policy analysis, we think of financial cost government incurred in implementing a
policy. However, a policy can also generate gains, though it is necessary to also
consider costs of other factors (Salamon, 2002). A policy designed to improve health
facility would invariably contributes to government revenue. This serves as a gain for
the policy makers (government) at the long run. However, the relative cost can also be
analysed. There is need to compare the cost of the policy under consideration with the
cost of other potential policies. This consideration is valid to finalise at cost effective
policies.
3.5 FEASIBILITY
This dimension is about examining the technical feasibility of the policy being
analysed. By feasibility study, it can be done on the basis of given consideration to the
available and required resources. It incorporates personnel, technology and material
resources that a policy is required to achieve its objectives. It is also necessary to
verify the conformity of the proposed policy with the existing legislation (Ciliska &
Thomas, 2011). This will give a policy analyst better awareness about the distribution
of responsibilities between levels of government. Before a policy can be made,
consideration must be given to powers distributions among the various levels of
government. This will ascertain the legitimacy of a policy. Invariably, policy must
target the right decision makers for adoption. The essence of feasibility study in policy
111

analysis is to consider the workability of a policy without legal or institutional lacuna.
3.6 ACCEPTABILITY
According to Swinburn (2005), acceptability refers to how the policy being
proposed is judged by the stakeholders. It focuses on subjective element of the
actors that are making judgement on a policy. This means it partly depends on the
external factors influencing policy under study because the position of each actor
or judge is determined by his or her understanding, knowledge, beliefs, values and
interest which might be political, economic or otherwise (Peters, 2002). A policy
that fails to gather enough support (including the support from public opinion) is
likely to have difficulty in terms of adoption and implementation. Invariably, it
might face difficulty in achieving the targeted goals or desired effects. However,
weak acceptability does not mean that a policy should be abandoned or shelved. In
fact, a good policy analyst might be able to present the policy to stakeholders
convincingly in a way that their fears might be addressed. What makes effective
analysis of policy to gain acceptability is by identifying the beneficiaries of the
policy and clarify the goals and objectives of such policy in a convincing manner.
Explain the framework of policy analysis
4.0 CONCLUSION
This unit has been able to expose us to the framework of policy analysis. Each of the elements
of the framework makes a policy analyst to be guided with effective instrument of measuring
the relevance and success of a policy. With the understanding of the highlighted techniques, a
policy analyst can be scientifically guided in policy analysis.
5.0 SUMMARY
The essence of technical tools in policy analysis cannot be undermined. The six techniques
in this unit makes the study of public policy a more robust and scientific inquiry to our
understanding of decision making process. The success and failure of a policy is
basically on effectiveness and acceptability of the policy at large.

1. Critically analyse Cost in policy analysis
2. Explain the relevance of acceptability in policy analysis
112

Salamon, M.(2002) The New Governance and the tools of Public Action: An
Introduction in L. M Salamon(ed) The tools of Government : A Guide to the new
Governance, New York: Oxford University
Peters, B. (2002). The Politics of tool Choice in L. M Salamon(ed) The tools of

Government: A Guide to the new Governance, New York: Oxford University
Frank F.(2007) Handbook of Public Policy Analysis: Theory, Politics and Methods Taylor
and Francis
113

UNIT 2: COST-BENEFIT (CBA) AND COST EFFECTIVENESS (CEA)
TECHNIQUES
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Contents
3.1 CBA Technique
3.2 CEA Technique
3.3 Comparative analysis of CBA and CEA
3.4 Critiques of CBA and CEA
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
7.0 References/ Further Reading
1.0 INTRODUCTION
There are several analytical techniques in policy analysis ranging from system analysis,
linear programming, simulation, decision tree analysis, cost-benefit analysis, cost-
effectiveness analysis and others. However, the central focus in this unit is to compare
the cost benefit and cost effectiveness analytical tools
2.0 OBJECTIVES
 Explain the meanings of Cost-Benefit Analysis and Cost-Effectiveness
Analysis;
 Understand the differences between Cost-Benefit Analysis and Cost-
Effectiveness Analysis
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS (CBA)

It is a technique for analysing decision of programmes or project. It involves
evaluating all the costs of a programme or project whether tangible or not and all the
benefits accruing to the programme or project whether there are in short term or
long –time in qualitative and quantitative terms. The net benefit (subtracting cost
from benefit) is what paves away to choice or decision. It helps to determine the most
effective and alternative decision-decisions with net social benefits. Moreover, it
helps in project evaluation so that decision can be taken on its choice or feasibility.
In other words, cost-benefit analysis techniques are useful for decision-making and
evaluations.
Cost-benefit analysis is in theory a much more powerful tool for decision-making than
cost effectiveness. It can be used, for example, to choose between such diverse
114

alternatives, such as: allocating funds to build educational institutions, a bridge or dam
with irrigation and flood control as goals to providing ante- and post-natal facilities to
reduce maternal and child mortality. If the project‟s cost about the same thing, it is
merely a question of choosing the project for which the benefits exceed the cost by
the greater amount. In the exercise, we should not forget to cost and value the
indirect consequences resulting from a project - the so- called externalities, side-effects
and spill-over, for example, the Bar Beach that over flowed its bank rendered
shipping unusable; affected tourists and small road-side businesses. It should also be
noted that a project may still find favour in public policy even if the costs outweigh the
benefits. In circumstances, such as this, the government usually takes political and
social factors into consideration as well.
3.2 COST-EFFECTIVENESS (CEA)

It is a tool for determining the least cost of alternative programme or project. It bears some
similarity with cost benefit analysis. The major difference between costs-benefit
analysis and cost –effective is that the former emphasizes net social benefit, while the
latter emphasizes least cost of alternative or higher benefits (Ikelegbe, 1996). Cost
effectiveness requirements are based on the realization of the obvious difficulties of
quantifying and monetizing the benefits of public policy programmes. To an analyst
using this technique, the benefits are assumed, and the search is for the lower cost, but
maximally effective alternative to attaining the benefits. Cost effectiveness requires a
clear statement of objectives and output. It requires the comparison of alternatives in
relation to alternative objectives. The alternative that achieves most at the same cost is
preferred.
Cost effectiveness is useful and applicable to policy makers or project managers in

situations where the objectives and benefits of a programme accomplishment are fixed
and identical and the issue is only the determination of the least cost alternative
with highest effectiveness. Moreover, where the budget allocations or funds to perform
certain activities are fixed and the issue is the determination of the alternative that
would utilize the given level of funds to achieve greater benefits or higher level of
effectiveness. Cost effectiveness is particularly useful because of the limited and
inadequate resources available to governments and corporations amidst so much
problems, demands and needs (Ikelegbe, 1996:50). Governments and Corporations
often like to know the efficiency and effectiveness of resources expended.
However, effectiveness measurement could present a problem. However, the problem

could be solved by measuring effectiveness on a scale that depends on the nature of the
goal. For example, if we were to evaluate the effectiveness of educational programmes
to improve reading performance, we could directly relate the effectiveness on a
standardized reading test. We are often able to use cost-effectiveness to rank competing
alternatives that seek different goals, for example, to decide on the best overall use of
money when we have several long- range objectives in mind. That requires something
more, for instance, that there be a way to compare the worth or benefit for a particular
cost of achieving a certain effectiveness for one goal with that of another.
3.3.0 COMPARING CBA AND CEA SIMILARITIES

115

(1) Aside from this major distinction, the two forms of economic analysis are
basically identical;
(2) Both approaches attempt to assess the desirability of alternatives;
(3) Both look at short-and long-run costs and benefits;
(4) Consequently, both are troubled with the same kinds of methodological problems
3.3.1 DIFFERENCES
(i) The potential merit of cost benefit analysis over cost effectiveness analysis is
that the former allows for analysis across subject areas. When the expressed
ratio of benefits to costs of a program is 1.0, costs are equal to benefits. As the
ratio increases, the benefits accruing have increased. In contrast, cost-
effectiveness analysis would not allow such direct comparisons since the
effects would be expressed in time saved and families able to sustain
themselves. It has limited utility it takes benefit as given;
(ii) The technique does not help to justify the costs to benefits of alternative
programmes;
(iii) Beside, its utilization is difficult because of the quantification or monetization
or enumeration of the benefits of the programme or its alternative;
3.3.2 CRITIQUES OF CBA AND CEA

Critics have observed that both tools of analysis have certain limitations which make
them inadequate as tools of analysis and they include:
(1) The first critical problem of either approach is that of estimating what are the
causal relationships operative in the problem under analysis. In examining
alternative programs, the analysis will be required to make some assumptions
about causation in order to proceed. Some reliance can be placed upon earlier
experiences or evaluation of existing programs of similar character.
(2) In some cases, there may be little available material from which to make
an assessment of causal relationships. This is the case particularly
w h e n new technologies and materials must be developed as part of the
project being analysed. In other words, predictions, estimates or guesstimates
must be made regarding the relationships between resource inputs and
technological breakthroughs;
(3) There is the issue of what gets counted as a cost and a benefit. Determining
the financial costs of existing programs is often difficult, because accounting
systems are designed to produce information by organizational unit and not by
program as specified in program structures. Even, when this matter is
resolved, all that is produced are the direct financial costs to government.
Indeed, a standard criticism of economic analysis is that it tends to consider
only the costs to government and not the costs imposed upon others. Failure to
consider all costs tends to weight the analysis in favour of the proposed project
under review.
(4) Indirect costs as well as benefits imposed or granted to others are referred
to as externalities or spill over, secondary and tertiary effects. These are costs
and benefits that affect parties other the ones directly involved. Most
116

government expenditure decisions involve the same kinds of spill-over effects.
The costs of an urban renewal program may be assessed in terms of the outlays
required for purchasing and clearing land to the exclusion of spillover costs
upon families, businesses and industries that must be relocated. However, the
argument is made that there are no such things as secondary or spillover effects
that anyone or anything affected by a program should be part of the explicitly
considered benefits and costs of that program.
(5) Related to spillover costs and benefits are redistributive effects, a matter
which analysis often ignores. Involved here is the matter of whether some
groups in the society will be benefitted more than other groups. Other criteria
for judging re- distribution include: race, educational level, and occupational
class.
(6) Even, if an ideal model was designed, displaying all of the relevant types of
costs and benefits or effects, the problem of quantifying these remains. Much
of the problem of setting naira values in the analysis stems from the fact that
governmental programs do not entail market prices. Much of economic
analysis in the public sector, however, must input the prices or values of
programs.
This practice is known as shadow pricing. The procedure is easiest in dealing with
business- like operations of government such as in providing water and electrical
power and most difficult in areas involving social values. Thus, the relevant concept
of the cost of a public expenditure is the value of the benefits forgone by not
leaving the money in the private sector, where it would be consumed or invested.
There are other means than analysis for providing help to a decision-maker, who has to
arrive at a choice between alternatives. These include: (Oshionebo, 1998:77-83):
 Perceived needs of the people that is, relevance of programme irrespective of
cost;
 Political and social expediency
 Pure intuition with or without divine guidance and “muddling-through” – a
sort of trial and error process in which naturally occurring feedback from
what actually happens, supplemented by limited analysis, serves to provide
the help (Oshionebo, 1998:77-83)
Explain Cost-Benefit Analysis
4.0 CONCLUSION
In this unit, we have been able to discuss cost-benefit analysis and cost-
effectiveness analysis. CBA is a principal analytical tool used to evaluate public
expenditure decisions. It requires systematic enumeration of all benefits and all costs,
tangible and intangible, whether readily quantifiable or difficult to measure, that will
117

accrue to all members of society if a particular project is adopted. On the other hand,
cost-effectiveness analysis is characterized by measuring costs and benefits in
different units, with no need to search for a common metric. Because benefits and
costs are measured in different units, cost-effectiveness is not useful when we are
unsure whether the total benefit from an undertaking justifies the total cost CBA‟s
limitation as a tool of analysis stems from the fact that it is especially vulnerable to
misapplication through carelessness, or outright deception. They can be no more
precise than the assumptions and valuations that they employ. Cost-effectiveness
analysis, on the other hand, is not a useful guide when we are trying to select the
optimal budget level for a project.
5.0 SUMMARY
It is an analytical technique for analysing decision of programmes or project. It involves
evaluating all the costs of a programme or project whether tangible or not and all the
benefits accruing to the programme or project whether there are in short term or
long –time in qualitative and quantitative terms. The net benefit (subtracting cost
from benefit) is what paves away to choice or decision. It helps to determine the most
effective and alternative decision-decisions with net social benefits. On the other hand,
Cost effectiveness is useful and applicable to policy makers or project managers in
situations where the objectives and benefits of a programme accomplishment are fixed
and identical and the issue is only the determination of the least cost alternative with
highest effectiveness.
To an analyst using this technique, the benefits are assumed, and the search is for the
lower cost, but maximally effective alternative to attaining the benefits. Cost
effectiveness requires a clear statement of objectives and output. It requires the
comparison of alternatives in relation to alternative objectives. The alternative that
achieves most at the same cost is preferred. Critics have observed that both tools of
analysis have certain limitations which make them inadequate as tools of analysis
and they include critical problem of either approach is that of estimating what are
the causal relationships operative in the problem under analysis. In examining
alternative programs, the analysis will be required to make some assumptions about
causation in order to proceed. Some reliance can be placed upon earlier experiences or
evaluation of existing programs of similar character.

1. Discuss Cost Benefit Analysis
2. Itemise and discuss the limitations of CBA
3. Compare Cost-Effectiveness Analysis and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Banks, R.L. and Kotz, A. (1966). “The program budget and the interest rate for public
Investment!”. Public Administration Review, 26, 283:92.
118

Eneanya, A.N. (2010) . Policy Research, Analysis, and Effective Public Policy Making
in
Nigeria. Lagos: Concept Publications Ltd.
Feldstein, M.S. (1965). “Cost-Benefit Analysis”. Quoted in A.R. Prest and R.
Turvey, “Cost-Benefit Analysis: A Survey,”. The Economic Journal, 75,
683-735.
Ikelegbe, A.O. (1996). Public Policy Making and Analysis. Benin-City: Uri Publishing
Ltd.
Oshionebo, B.O. (1998). “Development Policy-making Management Skills and the
Public
Sector Manager”. In NCEMA Policy Analysis Series, Vol. 4, No. 2.
Stokey, E. and Zechhauser, R. (1978). A Primer for Policy Analysis. New York:
W.W.
Norton and Company
119

UNIT 3: ASSESSMENT OF FEW PUBLIC POLICIES
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Several governments in Nigeria have come with different policies in educational,

health, agricultural, industrial and other relevant sectors. The targets of some of
the policies have been on the need to improve the public social services delivery
in those sectors. Interestingly, some were remarkable policies that yielded
positive results while few have also failed to achieve the objectives and targeted
goals. Given this, this unit will concentrate on public policies in three key areas
of education, health and agriculture in Nigeria.
2.0 OBJECTIVES
 Understand and analyse government policy on education
 Examine government policy in the heath sector
 Comprehend public policy on agriculture
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 EDUCATION POLICY IN NIGERIA

Government has often viewed education as an instrument of national
development. The need for national policy on education became necessary,
especially the need to invest on education that would impact on the citizens and the
society. Hence, after the National Curriculum Conference, a seminar of experts
drawn from a wide range of interest groups within Nigeria was convened in 1973.
The seminar, which included voluntary agencies and external bodies, deliberated
on what a national policy on education for an independent and sovereign Nigeria
should be. The outcome of the seminar was a draft document after due comments
were received from the states and other interest groups, led to the final document,
the National Policy on Education, first Published in 1977 and revised in 1981, 1998
and 2004, keep with the dynamics of social change and demands on educational
policy innovations.
3.1.1 ANALYSING THE EXISTING SITUATION

Several efforts have been made from colonial times to structure the course
of education in Nigeria. However, Nigeria waited till 1977 to introduce its own
policy. This policy remains fussy and largely abandoned because of several socio-
economic and political crises which have crippled the educational system in Nigeria.

120
3.1.2 GENERATING NEW POLICY OPTION
The desire to diversify and restructure the education system from those inherited
fro m the British colonial regime 6+5+2+3 model (six years in primary school, five
years in secondary schools, two years in high school and three years in universities)
led to the introduction in Nigeria of the 6+3+3+4 model (six years in primary
school, three years in junior secondary school, another three years in senior
secondary schools and four years in the university of formal education. This new
system was designed to provide compulsory pre-vocational core subjects at the
junior secondary school level along with technology instead of importing or
depending on its transfer.
3.1.3 EVALUATING THE POLICY OPTIONS

It could be observed that this policy actually covers almost all the possible foci of
an education policy, ranging from its philosophy through pre-primary education,
primary education, secondary education, higher education, including: professional
education, technical education, adult and non-formal education, special education
teacher education, educational services, administration and planning of education to
financing of education.
3.1.4 RATIFYING THE POLICY OPTION
In 1977, the Federal Government formulated a New National Policy on Education,

which ushered in the 6-3-3-4 system of formal education. The educational policy
was based on the five main national objectives of Nigeria as contained in the second
National Development plan (1970-1974) which include the achievement of;
(i) A free and democratic society;
(ii) A just and egalitarian society;
(iii) A united, strong and self-reliant nation
(v) A great and dynamic economy;
(vi) A land of bright and full opportunities for all citizens
3.1.5 IMPLEMENTING THE POLICY OPTION
The 6+3+3+4 system formal education was actually designed to remove the
imbalance in the 6+5+2+3 and to introduce compulsory pre-vocational core
subjects at the junior secondary school along with Arts and Science subjects. The
aim of t he early introduction of the child into pre-vocational education is to arouse
the interest of the child in science and technology. It was believed that with this
early introduction to science and technology, the system will help to bring
about vocational skills acquisition and technological advancement which are
necessary ingredients for social, economic and political development.

121
3.1.6 ASSESSMENT OF POLICY OPTION
The federal and state governments are responsible for higher education. However,
the performances of the federal and state governments on education are poor. There
has not been enough interest on the part of various governments - federal and states
in the provision of the most valuable aspect of education pre-primary education.
Infrastructural facilities are lacking in most primary school. Instructional facilities
are in short supply. Adequately trained teachers are not enough and those
available are not enough and those available are not motivated enough to improve
their job performance. The results are frequent strikes, disrupting the system and
the increase in the number of private schools being established.
The performances of the tertiary institutions have also not been encouraging.
Industrial strikes by the three unions in the universities, polytechnics and colleges o f
education are rife. These strikes have affected the quality of teaching and learning.
The poor funding of the tertiary institutions have made private tertiary institutions to
get more attentions among the prospective students. The primary and secondary
educations are not effectively maintained as private primary and secondary schools
have overshadowed the public schools. This remains the fear of the Academic Staff
Union of Universities (ASUU) that the poor funding of the Nigeria‟s public tertiary
institutions might result to partial collapse of higher education as obtainable in the
primary and secondary levels.
Infrastructural facilities, instructional materials, library facilities, laboratories and

workshop equipment are grossly inadequate for effective academic work. The
leaders do not show enough concern over the shortage of instructional facilities in
the universities, many of which are nothing but glorified secondary schools. Adult
and non-formal educations have been relegated to the background. Pitiable
revenue is allocated to adult and non-formal education annually. For example,
between1970 to 1996, adult literacy increased from 25% to 56% (Human
Development Report, 1997). The neglect of adult and non-formal education has
affected adults who missed the opportunity of having formal education.
3.1.7 REDESIGNING POLICY: WAY FORWARD
The assessment of the performance of national policy on education over the

years show that, there is need for our leaders to have a rethink on the attitude
towards education, especially in the following area,
1. Budgetary allocation to education should be improved tremendously to

meet UNESCO‟s benchmark of minimum of 26 percent. This will
enhance improvement in Nigeria‟s educational sector.
2. There is need to step up the funding and management of adult and non-
formal education, in order to provide opportunities for adults, who had
earlier missed their opportunities to acquire formal education or those who
had some education but would want to improve on the level of educational

122
attainment. Adult and non-formal education programmes help in giving
equal education opportunities to every citizen, irrespective of age, sex,
religion or social economic or political status in the society. The work and
study technique adopted by the National Open University of Nigeria
(NOUN) needs more backing from the government. This is an avenue to
ensure adult education is sustained in the country.
3. Nigerian leaders should encourage research designed to improve the
quality of education. This they can do by sponsoring and utilizing the result
of research.
4. Government should provide the enabling environment to encourage
teaching and learning, Teachers or lecturers should be given good working
conditions. Salaries and allowances paid to teachers or lecturers should be
motivating enough to boost effective performance.
5. The grossly ill-equipped laboratories and educational infrastructural
facilities should be addressed. Laboratory spaces need massive expansion
to cope with the demands of Nigeria students. Equipment must be
provided and improved if possible.
3.2 AGRICULTURAL POLICY IN NIGERIA
Before the 1960s, the dominant role of agriculture was taken for granted. With
little support from the government, the agricultural was able to provide food for
increasing population in the country. The industrial sector too was getting raw
materials for building increasing government revenue and creating employment
opportunities for the populace. The little support from the government was
channelled to export crops like cocoa, groundnut, palm produce, rubber and cotton
as food sufficiency did not pose any threat worthy of public attention
However, indication of Nigeria‟s problem in agriculture became noticeable during

the first decade of the country‟s independence (1960-1969). The increasing short
falls in food supply, rising in food prices and declining foreign exchange from
agricultural exports. It was assumed to be a temporary challenge not until the civil
war surfaced (1967-1970). The second decade (1970-1980) witnessed a more
deteriorating agriculture in Nigeria. Not only widening area of food shortage but
sharp decline revenue generation from agricultural product. The residual effect of
the civil was made the case to be compounded. The oil boom in this period
contributed largely also to the neglect of the agricultural sector.
In an effort to tackle the problem, government initiated a number of programs and

projects to boost the agricultural sector. There were three successful national
development plans from 1970-1974, 1975-1980 and from 1981 to 1985.
Experience form these policies and programs convinced the government and
concerned stakeholders that agricultural products must be strengthen to promote
growth and development in Nigeria.

123
3.2.1 THE ROLE OF AGRICULTURAL SECTOR IN NIGERIA
The agricultural sector is a mainstay of the Nigerian economy with several roles in the
development plan of Nigeria. The following can be attributed as roles of the agricultural
sector:
1. Provision of adequate food for a larger and increasing population
2. Supplying adequate raw materials for the growing industrial sector
3. Contributing to the country‟s source of foreign exchange earnings
4. Provision of a viable market for the products of industrial sector.
The assessment of Nigeria‟s policies on agriculture would be considered on the

framework of the highlighted roles. Moreover, the overall importance of
agriculture is to contribute to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). In view of
this, the next section will look at few agricultural policies and their assessment
in line with the specified role of agricultural role.
3.2.2 AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS

The first decade of Nigeria‟s post -independence tried to direct agricultural
resources and services to the small scale farmers with a view to improving their
productivity and output. Government is aware of the limitations of small scale
farming strategy in an environment with outflow of young able bodied farmers
from the rural areas. This made it a required policy to rely on the small scale
farming strategy to provide short term solution in the country‟s agricultural
problems unless government policies succeed in inducing a backward flow of
the youths into farming. Tackling this problem would enhance a concurrent
strategy of fostering development of medium-scale and invariably large scale for
commercial purposes.
The second phase or target of the project was medium/large scale farming. It
was believed that Nigeria would witness a steady decline in the number of small
scale farming and gradual increase in the average size of farms in the coming
decades. This would make government to pursue a strategy to accommodate
medium and large scale farming side by side with the small scale farming. There
was a consideration that favours a large scale farming strategy. This would
improve production and enhance land consolidation. By this, scientific
management techniques and the use of modern input would increase agricultural
productivity. Also, the large scale is believed to generate mass employment.
The project was expected to look into backward integration. Under this strategy,
agro-industries would make use of modern small scale contract farmers to
undertake the production and supply of required agricultural raw materials.
Farmers will be assisted with requisite inputs such as loans and agreement to
purchase the farmers‟ produce and withhold part of the revenue due to the
farmers in payment for outstanding loans.

124
The projection of the policy was to ensure back to the land mechanism that
would enable youths and school leavers to get attracted to farming. This was to
go with enough of incentives if the back to the land programme is embraced.
The idea is to encourage younger and viable people to participate actively in the
farming sector. The strategy is to induce a backward flow of able youths into
farming
3.2.3 POLICY ASSESSMENT

The policy was well designed to ensure speed production from small scale
farming to a larger production of agricultural products. Despite the fact that
Nigeria is blessed with fertile land, the target to expand farming activities within
the country could not achieve this purpose. Though there were series of small
scale farming which basically covered household and communal consumption,
the large scale production remained the basic challenge of the Agricultural
Development Project (ADP).
The major threat to agricultural productivity that affected the goals of ADP was
the discovery of oil in the 1970‟s. The oil boom era led to government diversion
of focus leading to abandoning of agricultural sector. This invariably restricted
the effectiveness of agricultural policy particularly on large scale production.
The mono-cultural economy principle as a result of the country‟s reliance on oil
production was a major setback to agricultural sector. The agricultural
productivity sharply dropped and revenue generation form the sector was
nothing to write home about.
In addition, the plan to engaging the abled youth in farming activities could not
be failed to materialise. The attention on oil sector complicated the problem of
agricultural productivity in Nigeria and more youth got attracted to the oil
business than agriculture. The policy target towards attracting the youth in small
scale and large scale farming became a mirage as majority of the abled young
persons disserted the rural setting for white collar jobs in the urban cosmopolitan
areas.
Be that as it may, asides the Agricultural Development Plan (ADP), several

other national policy on agriculture were formulated. Policies such as Operation
Feed the Nation, Agricultural Commodity Storage, Agricultural Commodity
Processing, and many others were designed to improve agricultural productivity
in order to enhance food security in the country. Nevertheless, most of the
policies remain good but the major challenge has been implementation.
3.2.4 POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

Having considered that agricultural sector needs to be revamped and boosted to
enhance mass production for food security and self-sufficiency in the country,
the following suggestions can improve Nigeria‟s agricultural productivity.

125
1. Economic Diversification: This diversification has always been part of
the government proposal. It is high time such policy got perfect
implementation. There is need to shift attention from the monopoly of oil
as the revenue of Nigeria and more aggressive decisions towards
improving agricultural sector is required. This has become imperative to
engage more Nigerians on agro-business and make the sector more
attractive. The oil price is falling of recent times and the country needed
to improve its agricultural plan to fast-track the growth and development
projects in the country
2. Mechanised Farming: In order to achieve a larger scale agricultural
production, there must be modernised farming. The mechanisation of the
farming activities will boost productivity and contribute to mass
cultivation of agricultural products. The traditional farming has always
been at slower paste without a larger production
3. Loans and Incentives: The Nigeria‟s government should increase its
capacity in terms of loans and incentives to prospective farmers. Such
move will attract more prospective farmers to scale up their production. It
will also improve agro-business by widening opportunities in the
agricultural industry.
4. Improved Budgetary Allocation: The government should make
appropriation to the agricultural sector to be more robust so as to increase
participation and production capacity. With this, the level of food
security can be improved and self- sufficiency might be guaranteed
3.3 THE NATIONAL HEALTH POLICY

The National Health Policy was redesigned in 2016 with the mission of
promoting the health of Nigerians to accelerate socio-economic development.
This emerged following an elaborate consultative process involving all
stakeholders in the health sector. Professor Eyitayo Lambo was the Chairman
of the Technical Working Group (TWG) on the development of the new
National Health Plan. Prior to the development of this National Health Policy
in 2016, Nigeria had developed and implemented two National Health Policies
in 1988 and 2004 respectively. However, the 2016 National Health Policy
came up after the enactment of the National Health Act 2014 for Nigeria and
when there is global re-commitment to a new framework, Sustainable
Development Goals (SDG) and increasing global support for the attainment of
Universal Health Coverage (UHC).
3.3.1 THE SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS

The situational analysis that warranted the formulation of the new policy was
based on examining the functionality of the Nigeria Health System from the
perspective of Strategic Thrusts of the NHSDP and the WHO health system
blocks. The situational report indicated the weakness of the Nigeria health
system and lack of performing of major health structures across blocks. The
governance of health system was weak and in fact, there was total absence of

126
financial risk protection in the health system. Though Nigeria had recorded
milestone in the fight against guinea worm, control o f Ebola and the
interruption of wild Wild Polio Virus (NHP, 2016), there was need to
improve on the health facilities that have shown a clear dichotomy in the
society. In lieu of this, the Federal Ministry of Health through consensus
building among stakeholders developed the 2016 National Health Policy with
the vision of universal health coverage for all Nigerians.
3.3.2 POLICY OBJECTIVE AND THRUST

The overall goal of the policy is to straighten Nigeria‟s health system,
particularly the primary health care. And to also deliver effective, efficient,
accessible, affordable and comprehensive health care services to all
Nigerians. However, the policy thrusts are ten (10) and were derived from
NSHDP and WHO health system building blocks. They are: Governance,
Health Service Delivery, Health Financing, Human Resources for Health,
Medicines, Vacines, Commodities and Health Technologies, Health
Infrastructure, Health Information System, Health Research and
Development, Community Participation and Partnership for Health.
3.3.3 POLICY DIRECTION AND ASSESSMENT

The direction of the policy is tailored towards the aforementioned thrust. No
doubt, the policy created rooms for creation of more primary health care
centres across the country. This was done with partnership with National
Primary Health Care being an agency of the Federal Ministry of Health. Also,
part of the projection of the policy is for state and local governments to
complement the effort of the national government in delivering health
services to the people.
Be that as it may, most of the state and local government failed to develop a
plan on domestication of the National Health Policy to suit the component
units. The policy is yet to achieve its goals, though as planned, it would be
reviewed in every 5 years. Up till date, most of the Nigeria‟s health facilities
fail to meet the WHO prescribed standard. The political leaders hardly
comply with some of the medical professional advices by not sufficiently
finance the health sector. The budgetary allocation to the health system is not
impressive which leads to the policy as a mere academic exercise.
3.3.4 WAY FORWARD

1. There must be adequate finance of health system. This requires
improved budgetary allocation to the sector
2. Policy implementation should be holistic. The 2016 National Health
Policy has a good framework and thrust but implementation remains the
major challenge.
127
3. The public hospitals should be well equipped with modern facilities.
The COVID-19 scenario exposed the relegated situation of the
country‟s medical facilities
4. The health workers must be motivated and regular capacity building
should be done
Examine the impact of National Health Policy on Nigerians
4.0 CONCLUSION
In this unit, we have examined three sectors that are key to development of any
country. The assessment indicates that more still requited to be done in the
country. The policy makers have developed some good policies but the level
of implementation has always been worrisome.
5.0 SUMMARY
In policy analysis, the impact of assessment makes one to understand the role a
policy has played and how effective or otherwise decisions made are well
executed. The analysis of education, health and agricultural sectors in this unit
expose us towards policy assessment and effective evaluation. The analytical
framework indicates that more needed to be done in the area of health, education and
agriculture.

(1) Give an account of the thrust of the National Health Policy
(2) Analyse the Agricultural Development Project

Federal Ministry of Agriculture (2000). Agricultural Policy for Nigeria
Mifflin Company.
Federal Ministry of Health (2016). National Health Policy Document
Owolabi, J. (2005). Policy making and Educational Policy Analysis.
Uganda: Makerere University Printery

128
UNIT 4: POLICY ANALYSIS CONSTRAINTS
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Objectives
3.0 Main Contents
3.1 Politics constraint
3.2 Budget Constraint
3.3 Institutional Constraint
3.4 Values Constraints
3.5 Expectation from the Society
3.6 Multiple Problems
3.7 Costly Solution
3.8 Uncertainty
3.9 Lack of communication
4.0 Conclusion
5.0 Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Policy analysis simply put is the study of the causes, processes, formulation,
implementation and consequences of public policy. It involves the description and
explanation of particular policy choices and contents; determination of strategies for
optimal policy.-making, performance, implementation and impact of public policies. It
uses collected data to systematically explain, describe and prescribe policies with the aid
of certain social science methods, theories and approaches. However, almost all
participants in policy formulation have stakes in the configuration that policy takes.
This creates problem to policy analysts. In this unit, we shall examine the constraints
faced by the analyst in the course of decision- making.
2.0 OBJECTIVES
  Understand the constraint of politics on public policy analysis;
  Understand the constraint of budget in policy analysis;
  Appreciate institutional constraint in policy analysis;
  Explain the constraint values place on policy analysis;
  Understand what the society accept as good policy;
  Understand that mult iple cases of a problem can hinder appropriate solution to policy
problems; and
  Understand that costly solution to a social problem would affect the
acceptability of a policy
129

1.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1
,,
CONSTRAINTS OF POLITICS
The activities of political leaders constrain policy analysis. Policy ideas are dropped
because elected politicians and other appointees oppose them. The reaction of
Senators, House of Representatives, the President and Presidential Advisers are
anticipated as proposals are debated. Many ideas are discarded because specialists
cannot conceive of any plausible circumstances which they could be approved by
elected politicians and their appointees. Policy analysis suffers these political
constraints when policy issues are being analysed.
3.2 BUDGETARY CONSTRAINT
Budgetary constraints also affect policy analysis. Expectations may always outpace
the capabilities of government. Before any proposals is accepted and approved,
decision-makers need to be convinced that it has the resource to do them. As
observed by Kingdom (1984:145-6), “decision-maker need to be convinced that
the budgetary cost of the programme is acceptable; that there is a reasonable chance
that polit icians will approve; that the public in its various facets both mass and activists
will acquiesce”. There must, therefore, be sufficient fund to meet policy expectations,
failure which policy analysis suffers.
3.3 INSTITUTIONAL CONSTRAINT
Policy analysts also face the problem of institutional acceptance on policy outcomes.
Institutional characteristics limit what can or will be done. Specifically, an agency
accustomed to doing things in a particular way cannot innovate very often. Rather, it
looks for an effort to integrate new demands into existing patterns of doing business.
3.4 VALUES
Though, objectivity is relative as many analysts believe that policy analysis is not value-
free since value judgment also influences how they record or present information.
Nonetheless, policy analysts are more objective than programme administrators
as analysts often recommend alternatives, review consequences before arriving at
policy conclusion, whereas the bureaucrats are national maximizers of self-interests
(Down, 1967, Niskanen, 1971). In relative terms, policy analysts are more objective
where there is no conflict of interests. Policy analysis cannot provide solutions to
problems when there is no general consensus on what the problems are. It is incapable
of resolving societal value conflicts. At best, it can offer advice on how to accomplish
a certain set of end values. It cannot determine what those end values should be.
Furthermore, social science research cannot be value-free. Besides, it is difficult for the
government to cure all or even most of the maladies of the society. The y are
130

constrained by certain values in the society, such as: religious beliefs, diversity in culture
and languages. These cannot easily be managed by the government.
3.5 ANTICIPATION OF ACQUIESCENCE BY SOCIETY

Anticipation of acquiescence within a community is another constraint to policy
analysis. Specialists in policy community know that ultimately their proposals must be
acceptable to the public reaction as they design their proposals. The public possible
negative reaction to policy proposals acts as a constraint to policy analysis.
3.6 MULLTIPLE CAUSES OF A PROBLEM
There are also certain societal problems which may have multiple causes and a
specific policy may not be able to eradicate the problem. There are policies that solve the
problems of one group in society which create problems for other groups. In a plural
society one person‟s solution may be another person‟s problem. This is a constraint to
many policy proposals and such policy analysis proposal to solve such societal problem
becomes an uphill task.
3.7 COSTLY SOLUTIONS

Policy analysis also faces the constraint of solutions to some problem being more costly.
For instance, certain levels of public disorder including riots, civil disturbances and
occasional violence cannot be eradicated without the adoption of very regressive policies
which would prove too costly to democratic values, freedom of speech and press; rights
of assembly; freedom to form opposition parties. Thus, a certain level of disorder may
be the price to pay for democracy. All these act as constraints to policy analysis.
3.8 UNCERTAINTY
As future is always uncertain, it is questionable whether policy analysis can find
solutions to the problems regarding the future of society. Poverty, unemployment,
inequality, and environmental pollution are some of the major problems in the society.
Of course, this is an excuse for failing to strive for a better society. It must be
realized that solutions to these problems may be difficult to find. There are several
reasons for tempering our enthusiasm for policy analysis.
3.9 LACK OF COMMUNICATION

It has been observed that policy analyses are gathering dust because they are either too
long or too hard to understand. A policy analysis is of no use if it cannot be
communicated to others. Too often, the policy analysis deals with subjective topics
and must rely upon the interpretation of results. Professional researchers often interpret
the results of their analyses differently. Obviously, quite different policy
131

recommendations can come out from these alternative interpretations of the results of
research.
Describe how budgetary constraint affects public policy analysis
4.0 CONCLUSION
In this unit, we have been able to examine the constraints of policy analysis. Public
policy analysis faces various problems, such as: politics, budget, institution, values and
expectation of members of the society. In spite of the constraints, it seems safe to
say that social scientists can at least attempt to measure the impact of present and past
public policies and make this knowledge available to policy-makers. Reason, knowledge
and scientific analysis are always better than the absence of any knowledge. Lineberry
(1977:135) notes that “policy analysis rests on the assumption that information is better
than no information, and that right questions are better than no questions asked, even
when the answers may not be definitive”.
Policy analysis may not provide solutions to society‟s ills, but it is still an appropriate
tool in approaching policy questions. Policy analysis enables us to describe and explain
the causes and consequences of public policy. Policy analysis is applied to inform
the policy-maker
about the likely future consequences of choosing various alternatives. Policy analysis
guides decision-makers in making optimum choices and outcomes among discrete
alternatives.
5.0 SUMMARY
Policy analysis is limited in solving so many societal problems. Political consideration
and self-interests conflict with objective formulation, selection and evaluation of public
policy. The political system is not often structured for completely rational decision-
making. The solution of societal problems generally implies a rational model, but
government may not be capable of formulating policy in a rational fashion. Instead, the
political system ma y reflect group interests, elite preferences, institutional forces or
incremental changes more than rationalism.
Moreover, expectations of members of the society may be more than the capabilities of
governments leading to budgetary constraints. Progress in any policy area may simply
result in an upward movement in expectations about what policy should accomplish.
Policies that solve the problems of one group in society may create problems for other
groups. Finally, the solutions to some problems may require policies that are more
costly than the problem. In spite of these problems and constraints of policy analysis,
policy analysis is a useful tool that guides policy-makers in making optimum choices
and outcomes among discrete alternatives.
132

1. Describe the problems policy analysts face in developing effective policy?
2. Discuss whether policy analysts could be value-free in their analyses.

Eneanya, A.N. (2010). Policy Research, Analysis and Effective Policy- Making in
Nigeria.
Frank F.(2007) Handbook of Public Policy Analysis: Theory, Politics and Methods
Taylor and Francis Group
Kingdon, J.W. (1984). Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies. USA:
HarperCollins Publishers.
Lineberry, R.L. (1977). American Public Policy: What Government Does and
What
Differences it Makes. New York: Harper & Row.
Niskanen, W.A. Jr. (1971). Bureaucracy and Representative Government. New
York: Aldinel/Atherton.
133

POL317-Public Policy Analysis-Augustine Nduka Eneanya-2010

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

POL317-Public Policy Analysis-Augustine Nduka Eneanya-2010

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

POL317-Public Policy Analysis-Augustine Nduka Eneanya-2010

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA

SCHOOL OF ARTS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

COURSE CODE: POL 317

COURSE TITLE: PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS

Download more at Learnclax.com

COURSE CODE: POL. 317

Course Writer: DR. Augustine Nduka Eneanya

Course Reviewer: Dr Rauf Tunde Sakariyau (JUNE 2020)

Content Editor: Dr Tem Alabi

National Open University of Nigeria

Download more at Learnclax.com

National Open University of Nigeria 2010

Download more at Learnclax.com

POL 317: Public Policy Analysis (3 Credit Units)

Download more at Learnclax.com

Download more at Learnclax.com

COURSE AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

i. Have a bas ic kno w ledge o n P ublic P o li c y Ana l ys is by understanding how

WORKING THROUGH THE COURSE

Download more at Learnclax.com

There are 21 study units in this course. They are:

MODULE 1: FOUNDATION OF PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS

UNIT 1: MEANING AND DEFINITION OF PUBLIC POLICY

MODULE II: POLICY ANALYSIS AND POLICY MAKING

MODULE III: KEY ELEMENTS OF PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS

UNIT 1: PUBLIC POLICY ACTORS

MODULE IV: PLANNING AND PUBLIC PLICY ANALYSIS

UNIT 1: CONCEPT AND STRATEGIES OF PLANNING

Download more at Learnclax.com

UNIT 1: POLICY ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK

TEXTBOOKS AND REFERENCES

Download more at Learnclax.com

COURSE MARKING SCHEME

COURSE OVERVIEW PRESENTATION SCHEME

Unit 3 The Concept of Public Policy Analysis Week 3 Assignment 1

Unit 5 Scope and Characteristics of Policy Analysis m Week 5 Assignment 1

Unit 1 Public Policy Actors Week 10 Assignment 1

Download more at Learnclax.com

WHAT YOU WILL NEED FOR THE COURSE

TUTORS AND TUTORIALS

Download more at Learnclax.com

FINAL EXAMINATION AND GRADING

HOW TO GET THE MOST FROM THIS COURSE

Download more at Learnclax.com

5. Read this course guide thoroughly. It is your first assignment.

Download more at Learnclax.com

NHP- National Health Policy

ADP Agricultural Development Project

ASUU Academic Staff Union of Universities

CBA Cost Benefit Analysis

CEA Cost Effectiveness Analysis

CPM Critical Path Method

PERT Programme Evaluation and Review Technique

PPBS Planning, Programming and Budgeting System

WHO World Health Organisation

NCDC National Control of Disease Centre

Download more at Learnclax.com

Olaniyi, J.O. (2001). Foundations of Public Policy Analysis Ibadan: Sunad

Download more at Learnclax.com