Politics and Policy Implementation in the Third World

Policy Content and Context in Implementation

Background: "Explicit considerations of the frequent disparity between goals and outcomes in the implementation of public policy in the Third World… have tended to focus more narrowly on the administrative apparatus and procedures of implementing bureaucracies or on the characteristics of bureaucratic officials"(p.4) rather than considering the how the characteristics of the policies and programmes themselves or the characteristics of the political contexts (esp. in the Third World) affect or relate to implementation problems or successes.(p.5)

Aim: to explore "how and why content and contextual variables intervene in the implementation process in the Third World"(p.6). Specifically:
(i) "What effect does the content of public policy have on its implementation?" (p.5)
(ii) "How does the political context of administrative action affect policy implementation?" (p.5)

On implementation: viewed by Grindle as "an ongoing process of decision making by a variety of actors, the ultimate outcome of which is determined by the content of the program being pursued and by the interaction of the decision makers within a given politico-administrative context"(p.5-6)

"In general, the task of implementation is to establish a link that allows the goals of public policies to be realised as outcomes of governmental activity. It involves, therefore, the creation of a 'policy delivery system,' in which specific means are designed and pursued in the expectation of arriving at particular ends"(p.6) The ends being specified by policies ("broad statements of goals, objectives and means"p.6) and the means being action programmes designed to achieve them. So holds that the outcomes of specific programs "also serve as partial measures of the success or failure of overall policy implementation"(p.6) [policy is as policy does notion, but recognising the complexity of the interaction and the blurring of policy & programme distinction in practice].

In considering success or failure not interested in the programme design and whether it was appropriate / sound, but their capacity to deliver, as designed. So implementation starts "only when general goals and objectives have been specified, when action programs have been designed, and when funds have been allocated"(p.7). These formulation decisions "are integral factors in determining how successfully the programs themselves will be delivered"(p.8)

On the content of policy: determines what political activity will be stimulated by the implementation process:

• Opposition depends on eg. collective vs divisible benefits and affect 'implementability' of programs.(p.8-9)
• Degree of behaviour change required of intended beneficiaries (eg new technologies?) (p.9)
• Long-range vs. immediate and visible advantages to participants (p.9)
• Number of decision-makers/units required for implementation (e.g. implementing education policy requires more involvement of street-level bureaucrats than monetary policy) (p.9)
• Capacity of bureaucratic agencies to manage programs successfully, including expertise, personnel, political (elite) support, resources etc. (p.10)
• Whether goals are stated clearly or ambiguously (p.10)
• Consensus about goals amongst political and administrative officials (p.10)

On the context of policy: the environment in which programme is being pursued and its intended impact on the social, political or economic context (p.10). Relevant factors include:

• Power, interests and strategies of actors involved, from national to local level, and conflicts within and between these different actors and groups – implementers, elites and beneficiaries
• Compliance and responsiveness – of elites, implementing agencies, street-level bureaucrats, beneficiaries and potential losers (p.12). "The problem for policy administrators is to ensure an adequate amount of responsiveness to provide flexibility, support, and feedback, while at the same time maintaining enough control over the distribution of resources to achieve the stated goals"(p.13)
• Institutions and regime characteristics – "the extent to which political regimes and administrative organisations have the power to implement policies they are committed to"(p.14). Includes Qs about decentralisation without sufficient central power (loss of control without sanctions/rewards to elicit compliance); type of political regime and level of responsiveness;
• also environmental influences such as "ideology, culture, political alliances and payoffs, and international events"(p.14) and impact of other public policies and priorities.

On context of politics and implementation in the Third World:

• greater competition due to resource scarcity (p.15)
• remote and inaccessible policy-making process, meaning contestation, demand and influence occurs at output rather than input stage (p.15)
• less representation and weaker structures for aggregating and arbitrating interests (p.16)
• limited communication, education, experience to support broad interest representation or policy formulation responsive to needs of majority rather than elite/s (p.16)
• limited channels/processes for participation (viewed by political leaders as "illegitimate or inefficent") yet many policies have direct distributive/redistributive implications (p.17)

All these mean that (a) there will be many who have a direct interest in policy (b) that influence will only be possible at the implementation stage and (c) that adjustment will be necessary at implementation stage anyway to adapt to local specifics. Result is that people "focus their demand making efforts on officials and agencies empowered to distribute benefits, or on politicians who may have influence on individual allocations"(p.18) and participation is structured on individualised demands through factions, patron-client relationships, ethnic ties etc. at local level, often beyond reach of central control where policy formulated.

"This means that the implementation process may be the major arena in which individuals and groups are able to pursue conflicting interests and compete for access to scarce resources. It may even be the principal nexus of the interaction between the government and the citizenry… Moreover, the outcome of this competition and interaction can determine both the content and the impact of the programmes established by government elites, and thus influence the course of a country's development."(p.19)

Fig.1.2: Critical Choices in the Implementation Process: The politico-administrative context impacts on:

1. choices made about policy & program definition and their effects on subsequent implementation efforts
2. choices made about implementation strategy and their consequences for program delivery
3. choices made about who benefits – resource allocation and their consequences for groups and individuals in the society. (p.21)

Findings from the case studies:
Links between policy formulation to implementation:

• Aspects of the political environment influenced how programs were initially defined and suggested the "extensive influence of nondecisions on the implementation process"(p.22)
• policies with extensive political support and promotion at the formulation phase but which remain poorly defined "will result in a failure to achieve any useful development advance" (p.23)
• goals must be clear, unambiguous, and agreed upon by political & administrative officials at all government levels (p.23). Failure to do so at top has result of shifting power downwards in the political system during implementation as conflicts occur at lower implementing levels.(p.24)

How implementing strategies are chosen and variables determining success or failure of program goals:

• Need to consider "not only the political acceptability of various programs, but also their political attractiveness to national decision makers"(p.26). "careful strategic thinking about the specific content of the program can enhance its political attractiveness"(p.28)
• "that under conditions of fragmented political power, decentralisation is not a useful strategy for achieving policy goals, and its failure may have consequences for its future as a strategy"(p.29)
• But if programs are both distributive and measurable, they "may strengthen the hand of central authorities and allow them to permit extensive decentralised responsibility for implementation"(p.29)
• Determinants of success or failure influenced by type of policy pursued (e.g. divisible/collective benefits)
• "Decisions made about how to go about implementing a program must take both political realities and program objectives and criteria into consideration"(p.30)

Deciding who gets what:

• Need to "integrate considerations of both the influence of regime type and the impact of politics on the local level in the determination of who will have influence over resource allocation processes"(p.30)
• "the capacity of low-income groups to acquire benefits from their governments may be strictly limited in an environment that minimises the influence of numbers on political decision making through the elimination of open elections and rotation of political leadership"(p.30)
• "there is an enduring structure of relationships between the bureaucracy and the political system in which it is embedded and to which it is responsive"(p.31) e.g. bureaucracies in authoritarian regimes seem to be responsive primarily to the regime itself rather than low-status clienteles.
• Content affects level of conflict which impacts allocation decisions esp. re: redistributive policies
• "Resources allocated for the achievement of specific program goals may be reallocated at the site of implementation in order to achieve more pressing and general regime goals" eg political peace(p.31).
• Thus "political realities may dictate that distributive policies are implemented effectively only when they do not threaten interests whose support is essential to the regime."(p.32)
• Closed political processes effectively prohibit access of low-income sectors to demand making channels.

Conclusions: the CS's "underscore the variable nature of the implementation process in a setting of political conflict due to the scarcity of available resources, the wide range of actors involved, and the willingness or capacity of various regimes to be responsive to demands. Importantly, the studies indicate that the content of public programs can be considerably affected during their execution due to the nature of political participation, demand making, and bureaucratic response."(p33-34)

(Notes by Lin Cotterrell)