# 1999 University of South Africa

Revised edition 2003

All rights reserved

Printed and published by the

University of South Africa
Muckleneuk, Pretoria

PLC202-V/1/2004±2007

3B2

97377759
CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION AND USE OF THE STUDY GUIDE (vi)

THEME 1
WHAT IS PUBLIC POLICY?
STUDY UNIT 1
WHY PUBLIC POLICY IS IMPORTANT 3
1.1 Explanation of the case study 4
1.2 What is public policy? 5
1.3 Context of public policy in the 2000s 9
1.4 Public policy and democracy 11
1.5 The importance of public policy and
policy studies 11
STUDY UNIT 2
THE SOURCES OF PUBLIC POLICY 15
2.1 Introduction 15
2.2 The election manifesto of a political
party 16
2.3 Official discussion documents,
green papers and white papers 19
2.4 Legislation and the legislative
process 22
2.5 The budget 25
2.6 Policy statements, speeches and
articles 28
2.7 International and interstate
agreements 30

PLC202-V/1/2004^2007 iii
 2.8 The actions of decision-makers 32
2.9 Summary 35

THEME 2
POLICY-MAKING
STUDY UNIT 3
THE PUBLIC POLICY-MAKING PROCESS 41
3.1 Why a process? 41
3.2 Identification of policy -relevant
problems (stage 1) 43
3.3 Agenda setting (stage 2) 48
3.4 Policy formulation and
decision-making (stage 3) 51
3.5 Policy legitimation and
formalisation (stage 4) 56
3.6 Policy implementation (stage 5) 61
3.7 Evaluation of policy impact (stage 6) 65
3.8 Summary 72
STUDY UNIT 4
POLICY-MAKING: DEALING WITH DILEMMAS 77
4.1 How should the private and public
domain be demarcated? 78
4.2 When is there a need for public
policy? 82
4.3 Making policy in the absence of
sufficient information 83
4.4 Making policy on highly technical
issues 84
4.5 Making policy that can affect the
government's constituency 85
4.6 Dealing with conflicting interests
and values 86
4.7 Lack of resources and funds 88
4.8 Unintended consequences 89
4.9 Transparency 90
4.10 Summary 90

iv
THEME 3
POLICY ANALYSIS
STUDY UNIT 5
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS FOR POLICY ANALYSIS 95
5.1 Purpose of this study unit 95
5.2 Rational choice theory 97
5.3 Pluralism 104
5.4 Corporatism 105
5.5 Public choice theory 107
5.6 Neostatism 109
5.7 Summary 111
STUDY UNIT 6
CASE STUDY: SOUTH AFRICAN MACROECONOMIC
POLICIES 113
6.1 Background 113
6.2 How does one analyse this policy? 115
6.3 The main policies 116
6.4 Main sources of the policies 116
6.5 Main participants in the policy
processes 121
6.6 Identifying the policy objectives 129
6.7 Evaluation of policy outputs 131
6.8 Summary 134

CONCLUSION 137

ANSWERS TO SELF-TESTING 138

PLC202-V/1 v
INTRODUCTION AND USE OF
THE STUDY GUIDE
This module is an introductory course in public policy. Policy
studies has become a very popular discipline in Political Science
and related subjects, especially in the USA where it is also
associated with behavioural studies or political dynamics. This
module is therefore merely an introduction to the discipline, and
you should be able to do an elementary policy analysis after
completing the module.

The approach followed in this module is to concentrate on public

policy in democratic dispensations. However, we do not wish to
create the impression that non-democratic dispensations are not
using public policies. Wherever an authority is in power and rules
over a number of people, the means of governing constitutes a
policy which is a public policy. The choice in favour of the
democratic mode of policy formation is justified by the considera-
tion that studying politics should not be confined to what ``is''; in
other words, describing different situations. Political scientists have
the task to profess what ``ought to be''. In this course the democratic
form of government (in all its variations) is presented as the
preferable option. It would serve as a guideline for South African
students on how the consolidation of democracy should be
approached and is therefore a form of education in democracy
and citizenship.

This module has been written with the South African context in
mind. Accordingly, most of the examples or illustrations are South
African. You will find that most publications on public policy are
American and therefore it is necessary to extend the scope of the
course for South African students. You are encouraged also to
search for other case studies and examples.

The following are a number of well-known publications in the field

of public policy:

Cloete, Fanie & Wissink, Henry (eds). 2000. Improving public policy.
Pretoria: Van Schaik.
Anderson, James E. 1984. Public policy-making: an introduction. 3rd
edition. New York: Holt, Rinehardt & Winston (or 4th edition,
2000).

vi
Dye, Thomas R. 2002. Understanding public policy. 10th edition.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Parsons, Wayne. 1995. Public policy: an introduction to the theory and
practice of policy analysis. Aldershot: Elgar.

A number of institutions and periodical publications dealing with

public policy are available if you are interested in pursuing the
subject matter further. You are referred to the following:

Policy Studies Journal (journal of the Policy Studies Organization)

Journal of Public Policy (Cambridge)
Development Policy Studies
Policy Studies Review
Policy Sciences (Kluwer Academic)
Public Policy and Administration (Royal Institute of Public Admin-
istration, UK)
Journal of Policy Analysis and Management

Other journals specialise in specific policy issues, such as health or

education. They are not listed here, but you can contact the main
Unisa library if you are interested in them. In South Africa, the
Centre for Policy Studies in Johannesburg is the most specialised
institution for policy studies. The South African Institute of
International Affairs and the Foundation for Global Dialogue
specialise in South African foreign relations and policies. Most
Schools of Government, such as the John F Kennedy School of
Government at Harvard, or the School of Government at the
University of the Western Cape, are also specialists in public policy
studies.

This study guide is designed around objectives identified in each

study unit with particular outcomes in mind. You are introduced to
each study unit by a number of study objectives which you should
keep in mind while working through the unit. Activities are
included as a form of self-assessment to enable you to determine
your progress and how well you have followed and understood the
discussion. At the end of each study unit you are given another
opportunity to assess yourself, this time about the study unit as a
whole.

This course is supported by tutorial letters in which additional

information and assignments are included. Moreover, we also

PLC202-V/1 vii
 prescribe books for this course which you have to purchase.
However, the course is not based on one particular textbook or
prescribed book and therefore the books prescribed are used to
complement the study guide. All these materials constitute your
tutorial matter for the course and must be studied.

We trust that this course will empower you to be actively involved

in policy-making processes, to give informed advice to policy-
makers or to apply the skills and knowledge gained from the course
in your own environment. Policies are not made only in Parliament
or by cabinet, but also at local level and in the most humble
environments.

viii
 T H E M E 1

WHAT IS PUBLIC POLICY?

Study unit 1: Why public policy is important

Study unit 2: The sources of public policy
 STUDY
UNIT 1

WHY PUBLIC POLICY IS IMPORTANT

OBJECTIVES

After you have completed this study unit, you should be able to
Š explain what is meant by public policy and distinguish it from other types of
policy
Š explain why public policy is political
Š demonstrate that you understand the importance of public policy and policy
studies

ACTIVIT Y 1.1

Though you have not yet done any work in this module, the following is
an exercise to demonstrate why public policy is important. Try to an-
swer the questions as best as possible.
CASE STUDY
Party A won the general election and was able to form a government
on its own. It won the election on the basis of its election manifesto in
which it promised the electorate to introduce lower taxes, to improve
the quality of public education, to build more houses and to address
unemployment. Party B received the second highest number of votes
and became the official opposition party. Its election manifesto con-
centrated on the role of the private sector in health care, education

PLC202-V/1 3
 and housing projects. Government is presented as only a secondary
partner in those areas.
When the government's budget was tabled in Parliament, housing re-
ceived more than in the previous year, personal income tax was raised
and it was announced that 10 000 teachers had to be retrenched in
order to reduce the deficit of the national budget. A new form of bud-
geting based on the performance output of projects was also an-
nounced, to be introduced the following [Link] opposition criticised
the budget, because its views on the role of the private sector were
accommodated nowhere. The government's response was that it in-
tended to improve tax collection and adherence to tax law in order to
increase the public revenue and thereby to provide better services.
(1) What is the main difference between the status of parties A
and B?
(2) Whose election manifesto has been converted into the policy of
the government (public policy)?
(3) How will that policy take effect through the budget?
(4) Why were the opposition's views not included in the budget?
(5) Who is affected by the government's decisions and policy -
making when it indicated its intention to improve tax collection
and adherence to tax law?

1.1 EXPLANATION OF THE CASE STUDY

This case study uses a democratic dispensation as a point of

departure. You should be aware that public policy is not used only
in democracies but also in non-democratic dispensations Ð in other
words wherever governments or authorities are in power and
governing. Under democratic conditions a general election serves as
the means by which political parties can compete with each other to
become the majority party and therefore also government. Part of
the competition is to put before the electorate their respective
election manifestos which are an indication of the policies they will
pursue if they were to be the government.

If a party receives an absolute majority of 50%+1 vote, it can

constitute a government on its own. If the majority party receives
less than 50%+1, it has to look for partners who have sufficient
support to take them jointly past 50%+1, and then form a coalition
government. An election gives a mandate to the majority party to
implement its election manifesto in the form of official government
or public policy.

Part of the privilege of being the government, is to control the

4
budget. Minority, opposition parties do not have access to the
preparation of the budget. The budget is a means of allocating the
resources of the state in such a way as to achieve the policy goals
determined by the government of the day. Because the policy goals
of different governments differ, the manner in which a budget is
structured also differs from government to government. Public
policy is therefore directly linked to the finances of the state. A well-
known definition of politics therefore is that of Harold D Laswell:
who gets what, when and how?

Public policies differ from other policies in the sense that they are
enforceable on the whole society. The state and government are the
only institutions in society that can take policy decisions that are
applicable on all the members of that society and that can be
enforced by institutions such as the police and courts of law.

This case study illustrates one aspect of public policy that is

probably most familiar to you: majority parties constituting a
government and governing through the process of the legislature
and the executive. In the discussion that follows other aspects will
also be discussed.

1.2 WHAT IS PUBLIC POLICY?

We should first look at the two components of public policy: public

and policy.

Policy is normally a statement (or a dispersed set of statements) in

which goals are set. It is a programme developed by decision-
makers in response to conditions in a particular society, determin-
ing how the conditions will be addressed, the principles underlying
the programme, sometimes also criteria determining the imple-
mentation of the policy, and the policy goals to be met. (You should
not interpret a programme as one neatly set and articulated
document in which everything regarding a particular policy issue
appears. The purpose of this study unit is to demonstrate to you
how diverse policy can be and how dispersed the sources of such a
programme or policy normally are. Programmes of different
policies can also overlap and you should be able to separate them.)

Public policy refers to the policies determined in the public sector (as
opposed to the private sector). It is similar to the distinction
between the state and civil society. It therefore involves the policies
made by state departments, provincial departments, local author-

PLC202-V/1 5
 ities, the cabinet, and in Parliament and other legislatures. Private
policies, on the other hand, are the policies of private institutions
such as businesses, sport clubs, professional associations, churches,
trade unions and the media. You should remember, however, that
public policies (such as South Africa's Labour Relations Act) can
apply to private institutions but private policies cannot apply to
public institutions, except by agreement.

Public policies can affect all spheres of life and society Ð economic
policies, welfare policies, housing policies, monetary and fiscal
policies, immigration policies, education policies, transport policies,
and so forth. They also include policies guiding relations with other
states and governments (foreign policies). Each of these areas
involves policy specialists. It is therefore impossible to be a
specialist in all the spheres of public policy.

definitions There are many definitions of public policy. We shall concentrate

on a few to introduce you to this field.

One definition of politics with an emphasis on public policy that

you will find quite often, is the following of David Easton:

Politics is the authoritative allocation of scarce values for a

society.

What does it tell us about public policy?

(1) Public policy is authoritative. It means that the government

has the authority to formulate and implement the policy.
Authority implies legitimacy, and capacity or power. The
government, therefore, has the general permission of the
electorate as well as the means of implementing the policies.
Thus, it also has the authority to enforce adherence to the
policies. For example, if legislation has been passed by
Parliament, it can be enforced by the executive and civil
service, such as the police.
(2) Public policy (domestic policies) is mostly concerned with
the allocation of resources. It determines how resources are
distributed in society. Therefore, it means that decisions are
made to determine priorities. Under democratic conditions,
it also implies that procedures are used to determine how the
allocations will be made and that those procedures are
transparent and open to groups outside the public sector to
be used. In non-democratic situations it is confined to the
public sector.

6
(3) Public policy is always limited by the scarcity of resources. It
means that there are always more needs in society than the
resources available to address them. Because of the scarcity,
public policy is about determining priorities and about how
best to achieve the policy goals of the party/government
with the limited resources. It implies that policies should be
evaluated or assessed to determine how successful they were
in terms of achieving the policy goals. Policy analysis is
therefore an integral part of public policy planning and
evaluation.

You should note that David Easton has been used very often in
regard to public policy. His approach is the systems approach,
which is also the basis of the structural-functionalism of Gabriel A
Almond and G Bingham Powell. Their views originated from the
1950s when pluralism and behaviouralism became important
approaches in Political Science. In subsequent years other
approaches also emerged and this module will concentrate more
on them.

Another definition of public policy is that of Thomas R Dye (1998:2±3):

Public policy is whatever governments choose to do or not to

do.

According to him, all the other well-known definitions boil down to

the same thing. His focus is not only on government action but also on
what government is not doing. According to him, the impact of
government inaction can be as great on society as government action.

Other definitions of public policy are:

Š Harold D Lasswell & Abraham Kaplan: Policy is ``a projected

program of goals, values and practices''.
Š Carl Friedrich: ``It is essential for the policy concept that
there be a goal, objective, or purpose''.
Policy is ``a proposed course of action of a person, group, or
government within a given environment providing obstacles
and opportunities which the policy was proposed to utilize
and overcome in an effort to reach a goal or realize an
objective or a purpose'' (quoted in Anderson 1984:2±3).
Š Heinz Eulau & Kenneth Prewitt: ``Policy is defined as a
`standing position' characterized by behavioral consistency

PLC202-V/1 7
 and repetitiveness on the part of both those who make it and
those who abide by it''.

James E Anderson (1984:3) gives the following definition of policy

and public policy:

Policy is a ``purposive course of action followed by an actor or

set of actors in dealing with a problem or matter of concern'' and
``public policies are those policies developed by governmental
bodies and officials''.

Anderson (1984:3±5) highlights the following five aspects of his

description of public policy:

(1) Public policies are intended to produce certain results and

should be purposive or goal-oriented action. They are not
random behaviour or accidental occurrences. It implies that
to achieve particular goals, certain specified actions should
be undertaken.
(2) Policies are courses or patterns of actions by government
officials and not separate, discrete decisions. Policies emerge
normally in response to policy demands for action or
inaction on some issues. Policy decisions authorise or give
direction and content to a policy.
(3) Public policies involve what governments actually do Ð not
what they intend to do or what they promise to do. In this
regard policy outputs are important in pursuance of policy
decisions and statements.
(4) Public policy may be either positive or negative in form. It
may involve overt government action to do something
(positive) or it may involve a decision by a government not
to do something (negative).
(5) Public policy should be based on law and should be
authoritative. Government has the monopoly to legitimately
use coercion for the enforcement of its policies. No private
organisation has the authority to articulate its policies in the
form of legislation or other sources of law.

ACTIVIT Y 1.2

You are an official in the Department of Housing. Legislation regarding

8
housing was recently passed by Parliament. You are responsible for
the implementation of the legislation. In the course of implementing
it, a number of shortcomings or loopholes in the legislation became
apparent.
(1) Is the housing policy you have to implement a form of public
policy or private policies?
(2) How authoritative is this policy and can it be enforced?
(3) If you report the deficiencies in the legislation to your seniors,
will it be a new policy input or a policy decision?
(4) If there is no response to your report and recommendations,
will that be a policy decision or merely apathy and therefore
not related to policy -making?

FEEDBACK
The fact that it is a policy of the Department of Housing (a state department)
means that it is a public policy and not the policy of a private association. As a
result, the policy can be enforced and is supported by the authority of the
state. Later you will see that the policy process includes ongoing and consis-
tent review or evaluation ö also called policy analysis ö and identifying
shortcomings or deficiencies is a typical example of it. Your reporting of it is
therefore a new policy input. Only when a decision is taken on the basis of
such an input is it a policy decision.
In our discussion of definitions of public policy we pointed out that the inac-
tion of a government is often a policy decision and therefore constitutes a
[Link] absence of any response to your report can therefore be a deliber-
ate policy decision, though a lack of interest or apathy cannot be completely
excluded.
A follow-up question that you should treat critically is: What type of policy is
the policy of a parastatal (or a semi-governmental organisation such as
many of the airlines in the world)?

1.3 CONTEXT OF PUBLIC POLICY IN THE 2000s

Public policy can be studied from a multitude of perspectives.

Policy studies are often conducted in the form of case studies or
studies of particular policies. In this course, the emphasis is on the
political dimensions of public policy in order to distinguish them
from the focuses in Public Management/Administration. In this
course you will therefore not find detailed discussions of policy
implementation and the role of the public service or bureaucracy.

Policy studies are often located in either of two of the following

traditions in Political Science:

(1) The tradition associated with behaviouralism. This tradition

focuses on the behaviour of political actors. Political

PLC202-V/1 9
 dynamics in the sense of communication, psychological
motivations for political behaviour and political values and
culture are then emphasised. Politics in this context is
analysed in terms of actors' behaviours.
(2) The tradition associated with institutionalism. The emphasis is
on the role of institutions in policy-making and implementa-
tion. Neostatism (see study unit 5) is one example of this
tradition in which the state is recognised as an important
actor in the policy processes. Focus on the state and its
institutions and build on first-level modules in Political
Science which focus exclusively on the state. You can read
them again, should you fail to recall their most salient
aspects.

Public policy is one of the fundamental components of governance.

Therefore changes in the nature of the states and governments will
directly affect the nature of public policy. Changes in the nature of
public policy will have a similar impact on the state and
government. At the end of the Cold War we experienced, and at
the beginning of the 21st century are again experiencing paradigm
shifts in those areas. A state's ability to take decisions and make
policies for itself without external sanctioning or interference is the
ultimate indication of a state's sovereignty. That ability is no longer
so absolute and a state's control over its policies is therefore also
curtailed. Tendencies that affect such a limitation are globalisation
(especially market liberalisation spearheaded by the World Trade
Organisation); increasing influence by social movements, NGOs
and businesses in the public sphere; and regionalisation. However,
counter-tendencies with direct consequences for policy matters,
have emerged in the form of nationalist movements calling for a
resurgence of the nation-state and propagating xenophobia, or a
counter-movement to reduce the free mobility of labour across
national borders, and immigration from developing countries
which changes homogeneous nation-states into heterogeneous
multinational states.

One of the consequences of the changing context is that clear

distinctions between particular policy areas are slowly disappear-
ing. In the past, policy studies concentrated on domestic policies
such as housing, health issues, education, environmental matters or
immigration. Foreign policies were treated as the domain of
diplomacy and diplomats, the Presidency and officials in the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, who were solely responsible for them.
The above-mentioned tendencies have reduced this demarcation

10
 and in many instances it is almost impossible to classify a policy as
either domestic or foreign relations. Many foreign relations issues
involve trade, cultural exchange, immigration, military or health
policy matters. In this course public policy is therefore not limited to
domestic policy matters.

1.4 PUBLIC POLICY AND DEMOCRACY

Public policy, as the policy of government, can be applied to any
form of regime Ð from the most totalitarian to the most democratic.
Policies are made and implemented under most conditions Ð from
an intense war situation to a peaceful one. In this course, the
normative bias is in favour of a democratic dispensation, which
means that we discuss policy-making and implementation as they
occur in a democratic environment. Although autocratic policy
processes and actors are extremely interesting and worth studying,
we have opted not to do so in this course.

Democratic policy processes depend on particular value systems

and institutional arrangements, such as the separation of powers
and competitive, free and fair elections. They also demand sound
practices of public accountability and collective responsibility. In
summary, constitutionalism Ð as the prevention of abuse of power
Ð is the backbone of democratic public policy-making.

Accountability and collective responsibility as elements of consti-

tutionalism, are determined by a number of factors. One of them is
the distinction between a presidential and a parliamentary system
of government. In a parliamentary system the government is
accountable for its policies to parliament. An unsuccessful govern-
ment can therefore be removed by parliament. A presidential
system requires accountability directly to the people/electorate and
parliament cannot remove the government. Should you wish to
read more about this topic, you may consult

Lijphart, Arend. 1999. Patterns of democracy. New Haven & London:

Yale University Press.

1.5 THE IMPORTANCE OF PUBLIC POLICY AND POLICY

STUDIES
Public policies as a political phenomenon and studying them in the
form of policy studies are vitally important for political scientists.
importance The following are some of the reasons for their importance:

PLC202-V/1 11
 Š Public policies define the goals or objectives of a govern-
ment:
Ð They provide the guidelines or framework for
government officials on how to approach their tasks.
They normally also determine the priorities in a
certain policy area.
Ð They provide the benchmarks by which the perfor-
mance of the officials can be evaluated. Such an
assessment can be done not only in the civil service
but also by public and private watchdogs, such as
opposition parties in Parliament, the media, the
auditor-general or others.
Ð Public policies are articulations (statements and
actions) by government about its goals, and therefore
they are means by which a government has to account
for its performance. The electorate has the final say at
a general election.
Š Public policies are also important for outsiders such as
observers and researchers:
Policy studies are a means of studying government. Policy
studies are important in societies where the state is strong
and well institutionalised and public policies are therefore
implemented and making an impact on society. Policy
studies are therefore essential for studying government or
the public sector in general. Such studies could include also
policies related to international relations, especially govern-
ment-to-government relations.
Š Studying public policy as a discipline has career implica-
tions:
Ð Studying public policy can create the possibility for
you as a student to become a policy researcher or
policy analyst in various professions, such as a
journalist, a consultant, a risk analyst or a politician.
Ð It can also prepare you to be a participant in any of
the stages of the policy-making process.

A good practical example of the central role of policy-making is the

book by Graham T Allison (1971, 1999) Essence of decision: explaining the
Cuban missile crisis in which he discusses the crisis that resulted from
the Soviet Union's decision to send missiles to Cuba in 1962. The
response of the United States and subsequent escalation of tension,

12
aggravated by a nuclear threat, set the stage for a fascinating process of
superpower decision-making and policy-making.

Governments are not always amenable to the idea that ``outsiders''

be involved in policy-making. Sometimes think tanks or brain-
storming groups are identified to assist in the process. One such
example is the John F Kennedy School of Government at Harvard
University whose faculty members are specialists in policy studies
and who train senior public servants in those areas. They are often
handpicked for assignments in policy-making. In the case of South
Africa the ANC used two academics to formulate its first foreign
policy framework. Consultants are quite often used to identify
options but they are seldom involved in the final decision-making.

TEST YOURSELF
The following questions are based on all the sections of this study unit.
Use them to assess your understanding of these sections.
(You will find the answers to this self-assessment at the end of the study
guide.)
(1) What is/are the main difference(s) between public policy and the
policies of private associations?
(2) What does it mean that public policies are authoritative?
(3) Is it TRUE or FALSE that a government's inaction on a particular
issue can also constitute a policy?
(4) Why is public policy important?
(5) What are the practical applications of policy studies and how can
they assist you as a student?

REFLECTION
Now that you have worked through this study unit, you should be able to
Š explain what public policy is
Š distinguish public policies from other policies
Š discuss a number of definitions of public policy
Š explain the importance of public policy and policy studies

PLC202-V/1 13
 SOURCES
Allison, Graham T. 1971 1999. Essence of decision: explaining the Cuban
missile crisis. Boston: Little Brown.
Anderson, James E. 1984. Public policy-making. 3rd edition. New York:
Holt, Rinehardt & Winston.
Colebatch, HK. 1998. Policy. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Dye, Thomas R. 1998. Understanding public policy. 9th edition. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Heywood, Andrew. 1997. Politics (chapter 19). Basingstoke: Macmillan.

14
 STUDY
UNIT 2

THE SOURCES OF PUBLIC POLICY

OBJECTIVES

After you have completed this study unit, you should be able to
Š name the main sources of public policy
Š explain how each of them serves as a source of public policies
Š explain how they can be used for the purpose of policy analysis

2.1 INTRODUCTION

New governments normally spend a lot of time drafting policies

and converting them into published policy documents. The longer
they are in power, the more difficult it becomes to gain access to a
concise and comprehensive policy document on a particular issue.
Thus the policy analyst's task becomes increasingly tedious and
complicated. It is therefore necessary to know what constitutes the
official sources of a policy Ð in other words, where to search for
and find all the dimensions of a policy, from its preparation to its
development.

The sources that we shall discuss in this module are (the sequence
partly informed by the stages of policy formation):

Š the election manifesto of a political party

PLC202-V/1 15
 Š official discussion documents, green papers and white
papers
Š legislation and the legislative process
Š the budget
Š policy statements, speeches and articles
Š international and interstate agreements
Š the actions of decision-makers

Quite often policy is best articulated in the works and commentaries

of researchers and scholars involved in policy analysis. These can,
however, only be regarded as unofficial or secondary sources of
public policy and should be treated as such.

A very important but contentious aspect of this topic is the role of

the judiciary in public policy-making Ð especially those judiciaries
that can interpret the constitution and can test the constitutionality
of legislation.

Each of the sources will now be discussed:

2.2 THE ELECTION MANIFESTO OF A POLITICAL PARTY

Before an election each of the participating parties prepares an
election manifesto election manifesto in which it sets out the policies it would pursue if
it were to receive the majority of votes and become the government.
Such documents are directed at the electorate and therefore they are
more about image building and public relations than about
discussing policies in detail. Many people regard them as merely
``election promises''.

Strictly speaking, an election manifesto is not a source of public

policy, because in it the party states policy objectives without
knowing whether it would become the government. However, after
it has won an election and assumed the position of government, its
election manifesto can be a source of public policy, because it serves
as the mandate on policy matters given to government by the
electorate. The party's performance as government can then be
measured against its original policy proposals as articulated in the
manifesto. Therefore the manifesto can be treated as a base
document for policy development.

The following are excerpts from a few examples of election

manifestos used in the 1994 South African general election:

16
Workers' List Party
The WLP enters the elections in order to promote the formation
of a Mass Workers' Party (MWP). We believe that only such a
Workers' Party will be able to carry forward the struggle of the
exploited and oppressed masses of South Africa. ... We believe
that a Mass Workers' Party based on democratic socialist
principles will find the solutions together with the workers of
Southern Africa, of Africa and of the World.

Women's Rights Peace Party

The Women's Rights Peace Party believes that the issue of
sexism and discrimination against women must be addressed
at the same time as liberation from racism and apartheid.
We will constantly monitor all government policies and
decisions, and vigorously oppose any that in any way
discriminate against women and children.

National Party
The new National Party has the best policies:
Š its constitutional policies will bring real democracy to all
Š its economic policies will bring investment and create
jobs for all
Š its labour policies will bring harmony and increased
production
Š its education policies will bring decent education for all
Š its health policies will bring affordable health care to all
Š its housing policies will bring homes within reach of all

ANC
To build a better life for all requires clear goals and a workable
plan. Any solution to the crisis of apartheid needs an approach
which rises above narrow interests and harnesses all our
country's resources. It requires:
Š a democratic society based on equality, non-racialism
and non-sexism;
Š a nation built by developing our different cultures,

PLC202-V/1 17
 beliefs and languages as a source of our common
strength;
Š an economy which grows through providing jobs,
housing and education;
Š a peaceful and secure environment in which people can
live without fear.

These are the principles which will guide us as we work

together to build a new society. The detailed framework is
contained in our Reconstruction and Development Pro-
gramme.
According to our discussion, the ANC's election manifesto is the
most relevant as a source of public policy, because of its majority
position in Parliament. Because the NP was also a member of the
Government of National Unity, its manifesto was also relevant,
though less than the ANC's. The other two parties were not
represented in Parliament and therefore their views were not
relevant for the legislative process. However, they do constitute a
voice in the public opinion and inasmuch as public opinion is
considered in policy-making, their manifestos might have an
impact.

Election manifestos are most useful in order to understand the

background to public policies and to see how a government
originally prioritised its policy framework before it came to power.
As policy documents, however, they have not any more use for
policy analysis purposes.

ACTIVIT Y 2.1

When should an election manifesto be considered as a source of pub-

lic policy?

FEEDBACK
In the discussion we already indicated that only the election manifesto of the
majority party that formed a cabinet should be considered for public policy
purposes. An election manifesto in itself is not a public policy document but
serves, most of the time, as an important base document for the develop-
ment of policies. It therefore depends very much on the judgement of the
policy analyst to determine to what extent an election manifesto can be used
for policy purposes.

18
 2.3 OFFICIAL DISCUSSION DOCUMENTS, GREEN
PAPERS AND WHITE PAPERS

The process of preparing legislation in a democratic situation is

normally protracted and cumbersome. The earliest stages are often
characterised by the publication of a discussion document, followed
by a green paper, then a white paper, and finally draft legislation (a
bill) is prepared. Each of these stages plays an important part in
policy-making.

discussion document An official discussion document represents the most basic phase in
policy-making that will lead to legislation. In some instances
legislation is not envisaged but a statement of policy is required.
Then a discussion document is a useful base document to review
and refine policy. A useful example of such a document is the
``South African foreign policy discussion document'' issued by the
South African Department of Foreign Affairs in 1996. The Minister
introduced it as follows:

This is a consultative document, designed to stimulate a debate

to assist government in the formulation of its foreign policy. It
will be supplemented by Occasional Papers on specific issues
and relationships, which will be published from time to time.

To give you an indication of the drafting procedure that was

followed, the document stated the following:

The discussion document is a further step in the process of

policy review which began in 1993. .... Policy workshops were
held within the Department under the chairmanship of the
Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs and the 1994 and 1995
Foreign Affairs Parliamentary Budget Debates were used to
expand and formulate updated policy papers on specific issues
and on general policy directions. Many institutions, organisa-
tions and persons were consulted. The Portfolio Committee for
Foreign Affairs of the National Assembly and the Portfolio
Committee on Trade and Industry, Public Enterprises and
Foreign Affairs of the Senate, were among the bodies that were
actively engaged in the discussions.

After such preparatory work, discussion documents are published

for comment from the public and specific interest groups. Such
responses are assessed and integrated into the discussion docu-
ment. It is not uncommon for a second draft of the document to be
published for consultation purposes. (You can consult the South

PLC202-V/1 19
 African discussion documents on the World Wide Web at:
[Link]
Once the preliminary consultation has been completed, a statement
green paper of the possible policy is drawn up in the form of a green paper. While
a discussion document mainly investigates and assesses policy
options, a green paper has already identified preferences to be
pursued as policy. It still discusses policy issues, provides data
supporting them and refers to the enabling authority of interna-
tional agreements or academic scholars and research work. An
example is the following extract from the ``Green Paper: Proposals
for a New Employment and Occupational Equity Statute'' (1996):

The Green Paper makes proposals of key policy considerations

that have to go into the Employment Equity Bill. These
proposals are made in the context of South Africa's social and
economic development. The provisions of the ILO Convention
111 that could be integrated into policy formulation processes
in order to ensure that South Africa meets her obligations in
this branch of International Labour Standards, have also been
considered in drafting this Green Paper.

A green paper is still aimed at consultation and is published in the

Government Gazette for general information and public comment to
be submitted to the responsible department. In some instances a
subsequent white paper is not contemplated and then the green
paper is tabled before cabinet to be approved as official government
policy. If it is approved, the next step is to draft a bill. (You can
consult the South African green papers on the World Wide Web at:
[Link] If the policy
still needs refinement, a white paper is prepared.

white paper A white paper states official government policy and therefore should be
approved by the executive (cabinet). It is also published in the
Government Gazette. This paper does no longer contemplate various
policy options or substantiates the department's policy preferences,
but states directly the chosen policy framework so that it can relatively
easily be translated into draft legislation. For example, the Reconstruc-
tion and Development Programme (RDP) white paper was published
in 1994 after the ANC had won the election on the basis of its own RDP
document. When the new government was constituted, the process of
transforming the ANC's base document into government policy was
initiated. For that purpose a white paper was published which
included contributions from the other two government partners (the
NP and the IFP). Therefore, the document stated:

20
 The RDP White Paper establishes a policy-making methodol-
ogy and outlines government implementation strategies within
the framework provided by the Base Document. ... This
document is Government's White Paper and it reflects
Government's policy. However, it has not yet been adopted
by Parliament in order to allow further discussion and debate.
Public hearings will take place during October and the
finalised document will be tabled in Parliament for adoption.

The white paper stage can also be divided into a draft and a final
stage, because its purpose is still to be consultative and to invite
comment from interested parties outside government. The ``Draft
White Paper on the Transformation of the Public Service'' (1995), for
example, was a second, revised draft. It went even further and
stated that the ``consultative process will continue into the
subsequent phases both before legislation is presented to Parlia-
ment, as well as afterwards''. The next phases are normally
approval by cabinet, adoption by Parliament and then preparation
of the draft bill by the relevant state department for tabling in
Parliament, although not all these phases are necessarily followed
in all cases. (You can consult the South African white papers on the
World Wide Web at:
[Link]

ACTIVIT Y 2.2

This exercise deals with discussion documents, green papers and

white papers as sources of public policy. You should identify the one
option in which the two items are IRRECONCILABLE.
(1) green paper used for public consultation
(2) white paper must be approved by the executive
(3) discussion document the final policy document
FEEDBACK
The two items that are irreconcilable are option 3 (discussion document ö
the final policy document). Instead of the discussion document, a white pa-
per is the final policy document before it is converted into draft legislation,
and therefore it has to be approved by the executive (cabinet). A discussion
document is the first formal step in the public consultation process that has
to take place in order to formulate public [Link] is followed by the green
paper, white paper and legislation phases.

PLC202-V/1 21
 2.4 LEGISLATION AND THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS
In a democratic dispensation legislation refers to Acts of Parliament,
ministerial or executive proclamations issued in terms of specific
legislation legislation, legislation passed by regional authorities and the by-
laws of local authorities. In non-democratic dispensations legisla-
tion is mostly in the form of executive decrees, such as a
presidential or military decree.

What is legislation? In simple terms, it is the enactment of a

particular aspect of a government's policy in order to grant it an
authoritative status so that it can be enforced. Acts of Parliament are
an important source of the law Ð known as positive law (as
opposed to common law and case law). Legislation is normally not
entrenched and can be changed (amended) or removed (repealed)
by an absolute majority (50%+1) in the legislature. It means that
legislature passed by a previous government can be changed or
removed by the incumbent government to suit its own policies.
Therefore, government policies are the basis for creating law but
also for changing the law of a country.

An important exception in this regard should be the constitution of

a country, normally also in the form of legislation. A constitution
ought not to be an articulation of the policies of a particular
government but should encompass the broadest possible set of
values and norms of a society and be the basis of a national
consensus on the future direction of that society. Hence, most
constitutions formulated for a consolidated democracy are rigid
and can be changed only with special majorities, such as a two-
thirds, to prevent governments from changing it at will.

The law (and legislation) is meant to be an articulation of the dominant

norms and values in a society at a particular time. Public policy should
therefore also reflect the dominant norms and values Ð most directly
articulated by the public opinion regarding a particular issue. This
view is the foundation of a truly democratic dispensation in which
politics is not about serving the sectional interests of politicians and
officials but the interests of the population. Public policies are the
means by which these interests can be served. If these policies fail, the
electorate will choose a new government to implement policies
resembling the values much closer. In authoritarian situations public
policies (and legislation) are often used to undermine popular
opposition (examples are the banning of the ANC by legislation in
1960, the outlawing of the use of the Kurdish language in the media
and schools in Turkey, and the exclusion of all minority parties in
Zimbabwe from funding from the national budget for election
purposes) or to engineer grand social strategies. Public policies can
therefore be exploited or manipulated.
22
Thus, in most systems characterised by constitutionalism, the
judiciary can test the constitutionality of legislation. In other words,
the scope of public policies is restricted by the parameters of a
constitution. For example, under the South African constitution of
1996 it would be unconstitutional to reintroduce capital punishment
or corporal punishment as policy.

The legislative process in a legislature provides us with a useful

opportunity to determine the background to, reasons for and
content of public policies. In the South African parliament the
legislative procedure is that a bill is examined by a parliamentary
committee (such as a portfolio committee) and then tabled for three
readings and a committee stage. During the second reading the
responsible cabinet minister normally explains the reasons for the
legislation, which provide us with a clear indication of its content as
public policy. The debates about proposed legislation are recorded
and published as the Debates of the National Assembly and the Debates
of the National Council of Provinces. They are commonly known as the
Hansard. (You can consult the South African Hansard on the World
Wide Web at [Link] and
legislation at [Link]

The following activity will illustrate the use of such a debate for the
purpose of analysing a public policy:

ACTIVIT Y 2.3

The Minister of Home Affairs introduced the second reading debate on

the Identification Bill as follows (Hansard ö National Assembly, 4 No-
vember 1997: cols 5855^5858):
(1) Mr Chairperson, hon members, the Bill before the House
contains proposals with a view to regulating the compi-
lation and maintenance of the population register, as
well as the issuing of identity cards on a more effective
basis. The proposals contained in the Bill are, to a large
extent, a redraft of the provisions in the Identification
Act of 1986, but some important new features, which I
will highlight later on, are now accommodated in this
Bill.
(2) However, to return to the Bill, its primary object is to pro-
vide for an identity card that will replace the various
identity documents issued to South African citizens
and permanent residents in the Republic. The need for
an identity card to replace the identity document be-
came apparent during the development of the Home Af-

PLC202-V/1 23
 fairs National Identification System project, known as
the Hanis project.
(3) The objectives of the Hanis project are: To ensure that
each qualifying inhabitant of South Africa will be issued
with only one identity card and number by the Depart-
ment of Home Affairs; to provide an efficient verification
service to any department or private organisation that
needs to prove that a person is who he or she claims to
be; to issue to every qualifying inhabitant of South Africa
a machine readable identity card; ...
(4) The proposed provisions contained in this Bill comply
with the much-needed Hanis system. ...
(5) The country is currently reeling under a spate of crimes
in which serious offences involving dishonesty such as
fraud and forgery, are [Link] Bill, which strikes a fine
balance between protecting the privacy of the depart-
ment's client on the one hand and the obligation to fur-
nish information for the exercising or protection of
rights, or in the public interest, on the other, will also es-
tablish closer links between the department, other or-
gans of State and the private sector, with a view to
creating mechanisms for utilising the new identity cards
as a key to any service requiring positive verification of
identity.

(1) List the policy objectives articulated in this legislation.

(2) What is the relationship between this legislation and the Hanis
project?
(3) Are the objectives of the Hanis project also policy objectives?
(4) How would you formulate the government's policy regarding
personal identification based on this legislation?
(5) Is this identification policy related to other public policies, such
as a policy on crime prevention?

FEEDBACK
The policy objectives are mentioned in paragraphs 1 and 2: to regulate the
compilation and maintenance of the population register and to issue identity
cards that can meet the objectives of the Hanis project. More detailed goals
were identified by the Hanis [Link] policy objectives were formulated
because of
(1) the many different identity documents used during the apartheid era
which needed to be standardised in one document
(2) the fraudulent practices used especially by illegal immigrants to gain
South African identity documents
(3) the need to have an efficient electronic verification system available,
which means that identity cards should be machine readable (for in-
stance, contain a bar code).

The relationship between the Bill and the Hanis project is a good example of

24
 how different sources of public policy inform each other. It is clear from the
Minister's speech that the Hanis project was developed (probably by officials
in the Department of Home Affairs) before the Bill was tabled in Parliament.
The project and the Bill are therefore not the same thing. The legislative pro-
cedure in Parliament creates the opportunity for sections of the Bill to be
changed before it is finally adopted. Therefore, the policy developed by the
officials and the policy approved by the parliamentarians may slightly differ.
Departmental policy will ultimately be determined by legislation. Therefore,
the objectives of the new Hanis project are policy objectives as far as they are
not in conflict with the objectives of the legislation.
In paragraph 5 it is quite clear that the policy on personal identification is
presented also as an instrument for the implementation of other policies,
such as crime prevention.

2.5 THE BUDGET

budget The budget of a government is a special type of legislation. In South
Africa it is called the Appropriation Act. The budget is normally
tabled in Parliament by the Minister of Finance who explains it in
his/her budget speech. While the budgetary legislation proceeds
through the three readings and the committee stage, the budget
post of each of the state departments receiving money from the
budget is discussed. During those debates several policy statements
are made. (You are referred to the section on discussion
documents Ð 2.3 Ð where reference is made to the Foreign Affairs
parliamentary budget debates.)

Below is an extract from the South African national budget for the
financial year 1998/99 as an example of a budget:

From a Political Science and policy studies perspective, a budget is

an expression in numerical and financial terms of the government's
policies for the coming financial year. It gives us an indication of the
priorities of the government, such as what the most pressing needs
in society are and how they will be addressed, what the policy
targets are (for example, for the building of houses), what the role of
the government is in economic activities (for example, whether
privatisation in certain sectors is mooted), and what fiscal and
monetary policies are to be followed (regarding tax, state
expenditures, interest rates, a budget deficit, etc).

All of these are policy issues and therefore deserve the attention of a
policy analyst.

PLC202-V/1 25
 EXTRACT FROM THE NATIONAL BUDGET 1998/99
6 No. 19015 GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 29 JUNE 1998
Act No. 29, 1998 APPROPRIATION ACT, 1998
Vote
No. Title Column 1 Column 2
R R
13 Environmental Affairs and Tourism .................... 395 212 000
Including Ð
Grants-in-aid:
National Botanical Institute............................ 42 904 000
National Parks Board ..................................... 50 000 000
SA Nature Conservation Centre ................. 20 000
SA Bird Ringing Unit ..................................... 114 000
SA Tourism Board ........................................... 64 664 000
Contributions:
Habitat Board .................................................... 32 000
Keep SA Beautiful Campaign ..................... 204 000
United Nations Environment Programme 205 000
14 Finance ............................................................................... 5 983 080 000
Including Ð
Contribution:
National Development Agency .................. 50 000 000
15 Foreign Affairs ................................................................ 1 183 773 000
16 Health ................................................................................. 5 446 060 000
Including Ð
Contributions:
SA Institute for Medical Research ............. 21 000
SA Medical Research Council ..................... 76 434 000
Financial assistance:
SA National Tuberculosis Association ..... 25 000
SA National Council for the Blind ............ 250 000
SA Federation for Mental Health ............... 200 000
17 Home Affairs ................................................................... 1 056 625 000
Including Ð
Grant-in-aid:
Consultative Committee for Performing
Artists ............................................................... 82 000
18 Housing ............................................................................. 3 629 309 000
Including Ð
Contributions:
People's Housing Partnership ..................... 2 000 000
Habitat Foundation ......................................... 20 000
Housing support organisations .................. 16 442 000
19 Improvement of conditions of service ................... 3 375 000 000
20 Independent Complaints Directorate ..................... 27 760 000
21 Justice ................................................................................. 2 009 251 000
Including Ð
Contributions:
Legal aid .............................................................. 120 000 000
Legal Aid Board ............................................... 100 000 000
Legal aid by former territories .................... 2 903 000
Truth and Reconciliation Commission ..... 21 904 000
Human Rights Commission ......................... 13 233 000
Commission on Gender Equality ............... 10 244 000
Special Investigating Unit ............................. 16 192 000
President's Fund ............................................... 100 000 000

26
ACTIVIT Y 2.4

The following is an extract from a national budget. It includes the budg-

etary figures for the new year (1999) compared to the budget of the
previous year (1998). From these figures you should try to analyse
the government's public policy.

Portfolio 1999 1998

Agriculture 718 854 000 720 918 000
Correctional services 4 345 494 000 4 651 245 000
Defence 9 721 173 000 10 876 241 000
Education 6 495 650 000 5 123 875 000
Health 5 446 060 000 5 702 978 000
Salary increases
(public service) 3 375 000 000 2 850 000 000
Human Rights
Commission 13 233 000 12 568 000
Commission on
Gender Equality 10 244 000 10 108 000

(1) How would you describe the government's policies for 1999?
(2) How do they differ from 1998?
(3) What are the priorities for the government in 1999?
(4) How would you explain the relatively small amounts allocated
to the two commissions?

FEEDBACK
The policies for 1999 are characterised by an emphasis on education and
health care. Expenditure on the military was clearly a major priority in the
past, but the defence budget for 1999 was smaller. Therefore it appears to
be less of a priority than in the past. The allocations that increased, are for
education, for salary increases and for the two commissions. All the others
decreased, including health ö which appears to be a contradiction. The
most apparent reason for the decreases is the need to reduce the budget
deficit (ie the fact that more money is spent by the government than the rev-
enue it receives). The most obvious difference between the two years is that
in 1998 education and health received almost the same amount of money
and were therefore equally important. It appears that in 1999 education
moved past health to the top priority for the government.
The two commissions are important, given the increases in their allocations
and, although they are valued for their symbolic functions, they cannot be
compared with health or education in terms of the magnitude of their socio-
economic development potential.

PLC202-V/1 27
 2.6 POLICY STATEMENTS, SPEECHES AND ARTICLES

Almost daily government leaders deliver speeches at functions and

other events. Depending on the nature of the event, the speeches
can contain a summary of existing policy, can indicate that policy
revisions are being contemplated, or can announce new policy
decisions. Events or speeches are often explained in press releases at
media conferences and follow-up questioning by the media. Each of
these are opportunities at which policies can be summarised,
explained or announced.

Another category of policy articulation is when a policy-maker

publishes an article in a newspaper or a magazine, or is interviewed
by a journalist.

speeches An important opportunity where a speech can be used for policy

purposes is the ``State of the Union'' speech delivered annually in
January by the American President in Congress. In South Africa the
speech in which the President opens Parliament serves as a ``state of
the nation'' speech. In both instances the President presents the
main policy objectives for the year ahead and this presentation is
based on an assessment of the previous year. Take for example the
speech delivered on 2 February 1990 by FW de Klerk Ð the State
President at the time Ð in which he unbanned the ANC, PAC,
SACP and released the political prisoners, which was also an
opening of Parliament speech. The following quotations from the
1998 speech by Pres Mandela further illuminate the point:

I wish once more to reiterate that, for us, the issue of

restructuring of state assets is not driven by ideology. We
shall privatise where necessary. But we shall also set up new
state enterprises where market imperfections and failures play
themselves out to undermine social programmes.
The government has heard the appeals for urgent reparations.
And we shall be ready to provide modest assistance when the
details have been forwarded. As part of the multi-year budget,
account will be taken of the needs, within our limited
resources; and we hope that those who benefited from the
suppression of others will find it within themselves to make a
contribution. ...
Special attention this year will be paid to the further
consolidation of Local Government, with its critical contribu-
tion in areas of infrastructure, job-creation, small business
development and the very legitimacy of democracy.

28
 In our relationship with the world, we can now confidently say
that South Africa has found her niche as an independent
participant in world affairs. Our starting point in these
relations is the obvious: that South Africa is an African
country. ... We shall continue to expand these relations and
close co-operation with our sister African nations bilaterally
and through the OAU, within the context of Africa's
renaissance.

The first and last paragraphs clearly indicate policy guidelines for
the restructuring of state assets and foreign policies. The third
paragraph spells out policy objectives for the coming year. All those
aspects give us an indication of what the government's public
policies would be for 1998.
Journals or magazines with a political focus such as Foreign Affairs
interviews often publish an article by, or an interview with a public policy-
maker. An example was an interview in Time magazine (June 8,
1998:23) with the Pakistani Prime Minister Mian Mohammed
Nawaz Sharif. It was at a time of heightening tension between
India and Pakistan because of India's nuclear tests and Pakistan's
reciprocation. Three excerpts from the interview give us insight into
policy considerations:

Why did you find it necessary to conduct a second set of tests? Ð

Only one test was conducted today. It was purely for technical
purposes, for data purposes. The present series of tests have
now been completed.

Will there be any more? Ð

I don't see more tests in the foreseeable future. There is no
need. We never felt the need to carry out tests until India did.

Is an arms race on the subcontinent now unavoidable? Ð

Despite the harsh Indian attitude, I still feel we can make
progress through bilateral negotiations and talks. This oppor-
tunity should not be lost.

article An example of an influential article by a policy maker is an article

written by Joe Slovo in The African Communist (3rd quarter, 1992:40)
at a crucial phase in the constitutional negotiation in South Africa.
Though Slovo was not yet a government official at the time, he was
an important factor in policy decision-making. He wrote about the
future form of government:

PLC202-V/1 29
 There are, however, certain retreats from previously held
positions which would create the possibility of a major positive
breakthrough in the negotiating process without permanently
hampering real democratic advance. Let me at once grasp the
nettle and specify some areas in which compromise may be
considered as part of an acceptable settlement package.
a. a ``sunset'' clause in the new constitution which would
provide for compulsory power-sharing for a fixed number of
years in the period immediately following the adoption of the
constitution. This would be subject to proportional representa-
tion in the executive combined with decision-making proce-
dures which would not paralyse its functioning.

The effect of Slovo's idea was that it was included in the interim
constitution (1993) in the form of the Government of National
Unity. Though it was compulsory up to the 1999 election, the
National Party withdrew from it in 1996. The ANC and IFP
continued in 1999 with it in the form of a voluntary coalition
government.

statements Policy statements (such as a communique or media release),

speeches, articles and interviews are very useful for the observer
or policy analyst. Be careful not to judge these pronouncements at
face value, but make sure that you are fully informed of the context
in which they are articulated, and combine them with the other
sources of public policy. (You can consult the press statements by
South African decision-makers on the World Wide Web at
[Link] and speeches at
[Link]

2.7 INTERNATIONAL AND INTERSTATE AGREEMENTS

international International and interstate agreements refer to conventions and
agreements protocols such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the
Genocide Convention, the Geneva Conventions (on war crimes),
other United Nations conventions, the OAU's Declaration on the
Protection of Human and People's Rights, the Lome Convention on
free trade between the European Union and ACP countries, and
numerous others. Such agreements are mostly between states
(represented by their governments). Most of these agreements need
to be ratified by a minimum number of states before they can
become effective. When such an agreement has become effective, it
becomes binding on the states that have signed it.

30
The decision to ratify is a policy decision. For example, the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) was not ratified by
South Africa until after 1994, because of its apartheid policy which
was in conflict with the Declaration. The USA and China refused to
sign the agreement in 1998 for the establishment of the Permanent
International Criminal Court, because of their own policy con-
siderations. Therefore, the agreements which a state is a party to, do
provide an indication of the values and norms that the particular
state subscribes to.

The South African constitution (1996) states that an international

agreement binds South Africa only after it has been approved
(ratified) by both houses of Parliament. Any international agree-
ment becomes law in South Africa when it is enacted by national
legislation. Self-executing provisions of an agreement approved by
Parliament are law unless they are inconsistent with the Constitu-
tion or an Act of Parliament [section 231(2) and (4)].

Such agreements also enable new policy decisions. For example,

chapter 8 of the UN Charter refers to regional initiatives for conflict
prevention or peacemaking and peacekeeping. It is the enabling
clause used by the Southern African Development Community
(SADC) and the OAU to consider a regional peacekeeping force.
South Africa, Zimbabwe and Botswana are key participants and
again this is based on a policy decision by those governments.

International relations and foreign policies are more than domestic

policies, influenced by factors beyond the control of a government.
The first decade after the Cold War was characterised mainly by
economic (specifically trade) considerations and associated security
matters. Military considerations were less important for most states,
except for the USA. Thus, globalisation of economies and
communication force domestic policies to conform to international
norms. In analysing all aspects of a foreign policy, those
considerations should be integrated into the policy analysis.

ACTIVIT Y 2.5

Is the following statement regarding international and interstate

agreements as a source of public policy TRUE or FALSE?
All agreements signed by the representatives of a state automa-
tically become law in that state. Because the law is a source of

PLC202-V/1 31
 public policy, all the agreements form part of the public policies of
the government in that state.

FEEDBACK
Many states require that all international or interstate agreements signed on
their behalf should first be ratified by the legislature (parliament) before they
are binding on the state. Some constitutions ö but not all ö also determine
that such ratified agreements then become law in that country. Generally,
the law of a country derived from legislation (ie positive law) does articulate
the government's policies. International agreements, however, are not an
outcome of a government's policy -making process but were negotiated with
other governments and are therefore often a [Link], they are not
necessarily a reflection of the government's policy goals but are more or less
acceptable to the government. Taking all into account, the statement is
therefore false.

2.8 THE ACTIONS OF DECISION-MAKERS

In study unit 1 we looked at the definitions of Thomas R Dye and

others of public policy. Dye defined it as ``whatever governments
choose to do or not to do''. Therefore, one of the sources of public
actions of decision- policy is the actions or inactions of governments or decision-
makers
makers.

two forms These actions/inactions can assume two forms, namely:

(1) the actions of the bureaucracy in the process of policy

implementation
(2) the actions of decision-makers in the absence of a stated and
formal policy, which could be applicable to any or all the
stages of policy formation (not only policy implementation)

The first form is closely related to policy implementation (to be

discussed later) and specifically the role of the bureaucracy. The
bureaucracy has an important discretion to interpret policy in order
to implement it and to formulate rules and regulations for
implementation to become feasible. Despite the fact that in
democratic dispensations the bureaucracy does not have constitu-
tional power to decide policy questions, it does so in the process of
policy implementation. The two functions are relevant for policy
formulation in the following manner:

32
Formulating rules and regulations

Most policies are articulated in relatively general terms. Their

implementation therefore requires formal rules and regulations
provided by a formal and approved policy framework (such as
legislation). In some instances particular procedures are prescribed
which a bureaucracy is expected to follow when formulating the
rules and regulations, such as holding hearings to allow interest
groups to make submissions, soliciting public comment or
conducting formal consultations before finalising rules and regula-
tions. When finalised, they have the force of law. However, a
legislature can change them, mostly by changing the enabling
legislation.

Bureaucratic discretion

Because policies are mostly articulated in relatively general terms,

the bureaucracy is responsible for determining how exceptional
cases are dealt with. Therefore discretion is always a dimension of
policy implementation. When rules and regulations can have
different outcomes or more than one rule can be applied, a public
servant should exercise discretion. Such discretion has an impact on
policy implementation (Dye 1998:329±332).

Before discussing the second form of actions, let us first look at

three examples of such actions and inactions:

(1) When Hitler's National Socialist Workers Party came to

power in Germany through parliamentary elections, its main
policy goals were to overturn the humiliation suffered by
Germany at the Versailles and other peace conferences after
World War I. Over time Hitler and the Nazis started to think
about expanding the borders of Germany, to create more
living space (``Lebensraum'') for the Germans and to create a
third German empire. Those policy objectives became
apparent when Hitler first annexed Austria in 1938 (the
``Anschluss''), then forced Czechoslovakia to transfer Sude-
tenland to Germany in 1938. The next year the Nazis
occupied the whole of Czechoslovakia and finally Hitler
invaded Poland on 1 September 1939, which started World
War II. These actions became known as Hitler's Lebensraum
policy, though it was never encapsulated in legislation, a
budget or explicit policy documents. Britain's response to

PLC202-V/1 33
 Hitler's actions was that Prime Minister Chamberlain tried to
convince Hitler to refrain from such actions without taking
positive steps. This policy later became known as his
``appeasement policy''.
(2) During the 1980s the apartheid government undertook a
number of attacks on neighbouring states, such as Zambia,
Zimbabwe, Mozambique and Lesotho, to eradicate ANC
structures and operatives. Those raids also had economic
implications, because at times borders were closed or
economic installations damaged. Support for Renamo in
Mozambique and Unita in Angola sustained civil wars that
affected the whole region. The main objective of the actions
was to destabilise the ANC. The actions became known as
South Africa's policy of destabilisation of Southern Africa Ð
again without the government having explicitly articulated it
as such in a policy document.
(3) The implementation of economic sanctions against South
Africa in the 1980s was, in most instances, not based on
legislation or other formal policy documents. It constituted
part of countries' foreign policies towards South Africa but
was seldom articulated as public policy before its imple-
mentation. The most significant exception was the USA:
Congress approved the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act
in 1986 to authorise the sanctions. For other states it became
part of a policy of the international isolation of South Africa
together with the academic, cultural and sport boycott and
arms embargo encouraged by the United Nations and other
international fora.

All three examples illustrate the point that a policy can emerge or
can be detected by monitoring the actions of decision-makers and
governments. Policy analysts can then reconstruct the policy in
accordance with those actions and articulate it in a comprehensive
form. One of the most classic examples of such an approach was the
``Soviet watchers'' during the Cold War. They interpreted, for
example, the order in which the Soviet leadership stood on Red
Square inspecting a military parade on May Day as an indication of
who would be the likely successor of Brezhnev, or of what changes
to expect in their hierarchy.

A variation of this point is that government actions can also indicate

changes in well-articulated and formal policies. Sometimes a
government has to deviate from its stated policies, and these are

34
detected by the manner in which policies are implemented. Thus, a
policy analyst cannot rely only on written and stated policy
documents and statements, but needs also to be a vigilant observer
of the policy implementation (ie the actions and inactions).

2.9 SUMMARY
When you are confronted with the task of analysing a particular
policy, you have to ask at least two questions before you can
proceed with your work:

(1) Who is responsible for the policy; who are the policy
decision-makers; and who are the implementers of the
policy? (the focus of study unit 3)
(2) Where will I find information about the policy; how is the
policy articulated; what is the content of the policy? (the
focus of this study unit)

The second question is of vital importance, because the sources

from which you receive your information must be valid and
reliable, or have authority. In other words, they must be original
sources. The various sources are also important for the policy-
makers, because they create options for them to select the most
appropriate form in which to articulate the policy.

TEST YOURSELF
The following is a summary of the most important aspects of this study
unit. You should evaluate yourself after completing this unit by completing
the diagram and filling in all the blank spaces.
[You will find the answers to this self-assessment at the end of the study
guide.]
The columns refer to the following:
Who?: Who is responsible for articulating policies by this method?
Where?: Where would you find this source of public policy?
What?: What does this source tell us about public policy?
Examples: Give examples of this source of public policy.

PLC202-V/1 35
Policy source Who? Where? What? Examples
election Ð election articulate policy not applicable
manifesto manifesto proposals
documents
Ð speeches by
party leaders
during election
campaign and
other
materials
discussion docs Ð departmental consultative not applicable
officials procedure for
Ð ministers preparing legislation
Ð cabinet or new policy
Ð parliament
legislation Ð legislators articulate policy Ð acts of
Ð political goals parliament
executives Ð executive
(ministers) proclamations
Ð by-laws
Ð executive
decrees
budget Ð debates in articulate policy Appropriation Act
Hansard priorities
Ð legislation in
Government
Gazette
policy government Ð published in Ð summary of
statements leaders the media existing policy
Ð media Ð contemplated
conferences policy revisions
Ð text of Ð announce new
speeches policy
international Ð government Ð international Ð Universal
agreements officials and agreements Declaration of
ministers Ð debates in Human Rights
Ð Parliament Hansard Ð Genocide
Ð legislation in Convention
Government Ð Geneva
Gazette Conventions
actions Ð government actions and Ð Hitler's invasion
officials and inactions by of Central
policy decision- governments Ð Europe
makers no explicit policy Ð SA's
documents destabilisation
policy
Ð international
isolation of SA
or Libya

36
REFLECTION
Now that you have worked through this study unit, you should be able to
Š identify the most important sources of public policy
Š explain how each of those sources can be used to analyse public
policy
Š discuss who is responsible for and where you would find each of
these sources
Š analyse a particular policy issue by identifying and using the
appropriate policy sources

SOURCES
Colebatch, HK. 1998. Policy. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Dye, Thomas R. 1998. Understanding public policy. 9th edition. Upper
Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
Venter, A. 1998. Government and politics in the new South Africa. Pretoria:
Van Schaik.
World Wide Web (South African sources of public policy):
[Link]

PLC202-V/1 37
 T H E M E 2

POLICY-MAKING

Study unit 3: The public policy-making process

Study unit 4: Policy-making: dealing with dilemmas
 STUDY
UNIT 3

THE PUBLIC POLICY-MAKING

PROCESS

OBJECTIVES

After you have completed this study unit, you should be able to
Š list the most important stages in the public policy-making process
Š explain each of the stages
Š apply your knowledge in practical situations of public policy-making

3.1 WHY A PROCESS?

a process A process suggests a continuous movement and not only a state of
affairs. Public policy can be viewed as a state of affairs if it is treated
as merely a statement of goals or objects, or as the outcome of policy
formulation and decision-making. The development or formation of
policy, on the other hand, is more dynamic and ongoing, and
therefore can be viewed as a process. A process can be cyclical (ie it
repeats itself in cycles) or linear (ie all developments are milestones
on a straight line with a beginning and an end, and therefore each
event is new and unique). History as a discipline very often uses
these two views as a means of analysing the history of humankind
(see, for example, Von Rancke and Arnold Toynbee).

PLC202-V/1 41
 In this module the emphasis is on the development of public policy
and how it can be studied or analysed. The idea of a process is used
extensively in the discussion. Prominent scholars of politics, such as
David Easton, view politics (including public policy) as a system
and therefore also as a process. Change characterises the public
policy domain: evaluation of existing policies with the view to
improve on them, identification of loopholes in policy that need to
be closed, accommodating exceptions for which the policy has not
been designed, and so forth.

Though it is important to view public policy in terms of a process

and not as a static phenomenon, you should not understand it as a
process consisting of neatly demarcated and chronological stages.
You will find almost identical descriptions of the process in most
textbooks on public policy. The stages may appear to constitute a
chronological evolution of policy-making. In reality those stages are
not so neatly defined and the sequence of stages may even change
or be repeated in the same policy-making cycle. Thus, we shall look
at the stages for purely analytical purposes.

The following stages in the public policy-making process are

discussed in this course:

Š identification of policy problems (section 4.2)

Š agenda setting (section 4.3)
Š policy formulation and decision-making (section 4.4)
Š policy legitimation (section 4.5)
Š policy implementation (section 4.6)
Š evaluation of policy impact (section 4.7)

In the past the approach of Gabriel A Almond and G Bingham

Powell (in Comparative politics: a developmental approach, 1966) was
also used for policy analysis purposes. They worked with the
following stages: interest articulation, interest aggregation, rule
making, rule application and rule adjudication. Easton's systems
approach was based on a similar notion: inputs, conversion,
outputs, feedback.

policy analysis Before we start discussing the stages, the concept of policy analysis in
the context of the policy process should be clarified. It is usually
used in either of the following two manners:

(1) Analysing the impact of policy as an integral part of the

evaluation stage. In such a situation the policy analyst is an

42
 active participant in the policy-making process and fulfils an
important function in decision-making.
(2) Analysing or researching the whole policy-making process
as an observer or researcher. Here the analyst is not a
participant but observes the process for various reasons,
ranging from academic policy studies to being an advisor or
consultant for interest groups affected by or interested in a
policy issue.

Both meanings will be used in this course.

Each of the stages will now be discussed.

3.2 IDENTIFICATION OF POLICY-RELEVANT PROBLEMS

(stage 1)
problem identification The origin of a policy is the existence of a need. Politics can be seen
as the allocation of scarce resources (material resources or the
resources to satisfy identified needs in society). Public policy
determines how, when and to whom the allocations are made. It
presupposes a decision by government about which of the infinite
number of needs will be addressed. Thus, identifying needs and
deciding which of them should be considered, are fundamentally
important steps in the policy-making process. At this stage of our
discussion it is already possible to say that not all needs can or will
be addressed by a policy. Therefore, even the identification of needs
or policy problems is a screening process.

James E Anderson (1984:44±46) highlights the following four

considerations applicable to this stage of policy-making:

(1) The nature of the problems helps determine the nature of the
policy process. Quite often policy analysis does not consider
the various dimensions of the problem. Not all needs are
identified as policy problems or policy issues. Only those
with sufficient popular support become policy issues. For the
other stages of the process Ð such as policy evaluation Ð
information on the substance of the original problem is
vitally important to assess its impact and effectivity.
(2) Matters can be defined as issues or problems by persons
other than those directly affected. A little later we shall look
at public and elite opinion in order to elaborate on this point.
(3) The definition of a problem is a political process that will

PLC202-V/1 43
 affect the way a policy would address it. Different parties
and governments can approach the same issue differently.
For example, unemployment can be approached by policies
as a problem of economic growth and investments in the
public sector, or as the creation of jobs through public works
projects in the public sector, or by following a policy of better
social security and welfare.
(4) The definitions of persistent policy problems may change
over time. Combating crime can change from punitive hard
labour or societal retribution (such as capital punishment) to
correctional or rehabilitative measures taken while a person
is in prison.

We have said that not all problems in society become policy

problems. This gives rise to the question: How does a policy
decision-maker know when a matter is a problem, or how does she
or he determine that it is indeed a policy issue? Two indicators are
useful: public opinion and elite opinion.

public opinion 3.2.1 PUBLIC OPINION

As you know by now, public opinion is the opinion of a substantial

segment of the public on a particular issue. Classical democratic
theory assumes that public opinion should be represented by the
elected representatives in a legislature and should be the basis on
which the executive takes decisions. The main bone of contention,
however, is whether public opinion influences public policy or vice
versa. Dye (1998:318) is of the opinion that, for the following
reasons, public policy shapes public opinion more often than
opinion shapes policy:

(1) Few people have an independent opinion on the bulk of

policy questions.
(2) Public opinion is very unstable or flexible and can change in
a short period of time.
(3) Leaders do not have a clear perception of public opinion.
Most messages or signals are from other elites and not from
the ordinary public.

Sources of public opinion include the media, opinion polls and

1. media referendums. The media consist of published editorials, letters from
readers, talk shows and reportage. Editorials are normally an
expression of a newspaper's editorial policy and are therefore not a
barometer of the general public opinion. They are rather aimed at

44
 influencing public opinion. The readers' letters published in a
newspaper are more reliable sources of public opinion. The same
applies to talk shows on radio and TV. Reportage, especially in the
form of news programmes, is also an important source of
information that forms public opinion. Like editorials, reportage
is subject to an editorial policy and therefore also directed at public
opinion. Dye (1998:325) summarised the research conclusions that
the media can create new opinions more easily than changing
existing ones. The media can also reinforce values and attitudes that
persons already hold. But the media cannot change existing
patterns of value adherence. You should therefore take great care
in not accepting too easily the media as a barometer of public
opinion.

2. opinion polls Opinion polls are normally based on questionnaires and/or inter-
views (political ``market research'') conducted by research institu-
tions or professional market research companies. A representative
sample of the population (public) is determined and then polled. In
instances such as an election, the poll results can be quite accurate.
In the case of policy issues the accuracy of the response is more
difficult to determine. The reliability can be influenced by the fact
that the polls almost ``create'' opinions by asking questions that
respondents never thought about until they were asked. Opinion
polls are not identical and therefore different formulations of
questions dealing with the same issue may produce different
results.

In the case of South Africa, the Institute for Democracy in South

Africa (Idasa) provides the Public Opinion Service (POS) that
regularly conducts, analyses and publishes surveys of public
opinion. An example is their survey on public opinion about the
location of Parliament (in February 1998). Markinor is a private
market research company that conducts, among other things, party
political support surveys.

The South African government takes the effect of such opinion polls
during an election period quite seriously. Section 109 of the
Electoral Act 73 of 1998 states: ``During the prescribed hours for
an election, no person may print, publish or distribute the result of
any exit poll taken in that election''.
Opinion polls are generally more reliable than the media as
indicators of public opinion. The most reliable source, however, is
3. referendum a referendum. Switzerland and Sweden are known for their use of
referenda to determine the preferences of the electorate. Australia
will use a referendum in 1999 to determine the support for a

PLC202-V/1 45
 republican form of state in the Commonwealth. Uganda plans to
conduct a referendum in 2000 to determine whether a multiparty
system should be reintroduced or whether the Movement system
should continue. In South Africa referenda were used in 1960, 1983
and 1992 to determine support for a republic, the tricameral
constitution and the political transformation process respectively.
States such as the USA and Britain are not likely to use referenda.
Referenda were, however, used in the Republic of Ireland and
Northern Ireland in 1998 to determine support for the ``Good
Friday'' (10 April 1998) peace agreement for Northern Ireland.

A referendum is the most direct form of democracy, because it is

not an election of representatives but a pronouncement on a clearly
defined policy question. It is also not based on a sample of the
population but includes all eligible voters. Hence, the result of a
referendum is most reliable as a reflection of public opinion.
Governments will seldom take a policy decision against referendum
results.

elite opinion 3.2.2 ELITE OPINION

The elite normally includes the leadership echelons, the political

activists and influential people. A strong school of thought in
Political Science emphasises the importance of the elite in
government, decision-making, policy formulation and interaction
with the public. Examples are C Wright Mill's use of the concept
``power bloc'' and Robert Michels's ``the iron law of oligarchy''
discussed in his book Political parties: a sociological study of the
oligarchical tendencies of modern democracy (Collier Books, 1962).
According to him, democracy always leads to domination by the
elected few.

Anderson (1984) argues that it is more likely that the attitudes of the
elite affect public policy independently of public opinion. Elite
preferences are also more likely to be in accordance with public
policy preferences than with the public opinion of the population.
This does not prove that policies are determined by elite
preferences, but it assumes that elites understand government
better and are better informed.

The implication of this for a policy decision-maker and analyst is

that elite opinions are more influential than public opinion, except
for referendum outcomes, and that public policy-making would
therefore be closer aligned to them. A good example of this in South
Africa is the issue of the death penalty. Elite opinion is against it

46
 while public opinion appears to favour it. Therefore, the ANC
government refused the calls for a referendum on the issue.
Related to elite opinion is the opinion of government or public
public choice theory officials. It is dealt with in the public choice theory. This theory is
based on the following two principles:

(1) Actors in the public sector behave as if they maximise their

own interests.
(2) All social entities are fundamentally sets of individual actors.

In a very specific form, the theory argues that bureaucrats in

particular (as important actors in public policy-making) take
decisions on the basis of what is in their best interest. They do
not act collectively in terms of a collective interest but in terms of
individual interests.

Jan-Erik Lane (1995:205) quotes Mueller as interpreting public

choice as follows:

Public choice can be defined as the economics of nonmarket

decisionmaking, or simply the application of economics to
political science. The subject matter of public choice is the same
as that of political science: the theory of the state, voting rules,
voting behavior, party politics, the bureaucracy and so on. The
methodology op public choice is that of economics, however.

The theory states that in taking political decisions people do not

express interests as abstract ideals for society but rather in pursuit
of their own well-defined economic self-interests as individuals. It
assumes that selfish personal interests are more relevant than
vicarious personal interests (Lane 1995:205±211).

The relevance of this theory for the policy decision-maker and

policy analyst is that it restricts the identification of policy issues
even more than elite opinions. If the assumptions of public choice
are indeed accepted in the formulation process, it means that the
policy-maker pays more lip-service to the public opinion and even
elite opinion, but is using mainly the advice of the public servants.
The analyst should therefore also take care not to be sidetracked by
public and elite opinions but should focus on those who can
identify policy issues with the maximisation of their own interests
in mind.

After the issues and problems have been identified, the question is:

PLC202-V/1 47
 Which of them will receive attention for policy purposes? Therefore,
a policy agenda has to be determined (ie agenda setting).

ACTIVIT Y 3.1

Would you say that in the following scenario a policy -relevant problem
has been identified?
A group of homeless people living in an informal settlement decide
to present their plight to their representative in the local authority.
They send a delegation to her office but are met by an official in the
Housing Department who informs them that the current budget for
housing has been exhausted and that nothing can be done for them
this year. They should try again next year.

FEEDBACK
A problem has been identified (a housing need) but it is clear from the offi-
cial's response that it is not a policy -relevant problem for the present. No in-
dication is given, for example, that the Housing Department considers the
need so pressing that it will request an additional appropriation from the
present budget. The fact that the official suggests that they try again next
year, means that it has the potential of becoming a policy -relevant problem
when the budget for the following year is planned and prepared.

3.3 AGENDA SETTING (stage 2)

Not all policy problems identified initially will be considered by the
government or decision-makers for policy-making. The process of
determining which of the identified problems will receive attention,
agenda setting is a process of agenda setting. According to Anderson (1984:47),
``those demands that policy-makers either do choose or feel
compelled to act upon constitute the policy agenda''.

process First we need to pay attention to the process of agenda setting.

Quite often agenda setting is described as a process that just
happens. Three main approaches can be followed to demonstrate
the contrary: the pluralist approach (especially the role of the
media), the role of elites approach and the corporatist approach.

(1) The pluralist approach argues that the channels of access and
communication to government are open for all organised
individuals and groups to influence decision-makers. Lobby-
ing is an example. People should also be able to watch over
the implementation of government policies and pro-

48
 grammes. The media are instrumental in determining what
is news and what is ignored. They influence public opinion
and identify issues. This approach assumes that if an issue is
important for the public, decision-makers cannot keep it
away from the policy agenda.
(2) The role of elites has been discussed in part under the
previous section. It emphasises the role played by influential
individuals, policy-planning organisations, political candi-
dates and office-holders in influencing and determining
what should be on the policy agenda.
(3) Corporatism focuses on the relationship between organised
interest groups and government in the policy-making
process. Philippe Schmitter (1974:93±94) describes it as:
a system of interest representation in which the
constituent units are organised into a limited number
of singular, compulsory, noncompetitive, hierarchically
ordered and functionally differentiated categories, rec-
ognised or licensed (if not created) by the state and
granted a deliberate representational monopoly within
their respective categories in exchange for observing
certain controls on their selection of leaders and
articulation of demands and supports.

A corporatist relationship means that certain interest groups

are placed in a privileged position by a government in that
they are officially recognised by the government as the only
representative of specific interests. In this manner other
representatives are excluded from the decision-making
process. In return for this monopoly, the privileged interest
group subjects itself to a degree of government interference
or influence. Under these circumstances interest groups
influence the government directly. Accordingly, in certain
sectors of public life they act on the government's behalf and
perform functions which are delegated to them but which in
fact form part of the task of the public service. In Austria
several examples of corporatism are in operation. In South
Africa the best example is the National Economic Develop-
ment and Labour Council (Nedlac), though it is not yet fully
corporatist.

For the purpose of agenda setting the privileged interest groups in a

corporatist relationship have a critically important say in what is
included or excluded. They serve as ``gatekeepers'' that will make

PLC202-V/1 49
 the openness of the pluralist approach impossible. It is therefore
important for the policy analyst to determine which of the three
approaches or any other, is applicable in a particular situation in
order to determine how agenda setting takes place.

Agenda setting is also determined by nondecision-making. It occurs

when influential individuals or groups are able to suppress
demands for change in the existing allocation of benefits and
privileges in the society before they are even voiced, or keep them
covert, or stop them before they gain access to the policy-making
process.

two types Two types of decision-making can be used in policy-making: a

systemic agenda or an institutional or governmental agenda. A
systemic agenda consists of all the issues that the political
community accepts as matters for public attention and that fall
within the legitimate jurisdiction of the existing governmental
authority. It is essentially a discussion agenda. Crime is a good
example of such an agenda item, since it is typical of most societies.
The moment it becomes endemic and requires special attention it
should be transferred to the institutional/governmental agenda.

An institutional/governmental agenda is an action agenda and is

more specific and concrete than a systemic agenda. It is composed
of those problems to which public officials feel obliged to give
serious and active attention.

Finally, you should note that a policy agenda is not always highly
structured or defined (Anderson 1984:47±49), but a policy analyst
should be able to reconstruct the agenda. Political leadership are
normally important in agenda setting. They may seize upon a
particular problem, publicise it and propose solutions. More formal
agenda setting is often found in the American President's ``state of
the union'' speech or when a head of state opens a parliamentary
session.

ACTIVIT Y 3.2

Which one of the following statements is NOT applicable to agenda

setting?
(1) The pluralist approach argues that a particular interest group is
granted a special status in the policy -making process and
therefore has an advantage over other interest groups in set-
ting the agenda of policy options.

50
 (2) Agenda setting is also determined by influential persons or
groups ensuring that a particular issue is suppressed or does
not reach the stage of considering policy options.
(3) A systemic policy agenda is about frequently recurring issues
that do not require special consideration by the policy decision-
makers.

FEEDBACK
Option 1 is the only incorrect option, because the statement refers to corpor-
atism instead of pluralism. Pluralism allows for an open and market-defined
process of influencing policy decision-makers. Each and every interest group
therefore theoretically has an equal chance to make such an impact and to
influence policy. (The approaches are discussed in more detail in study unit
5.)

3.4 POLICY FORMULATION AND DECISION-MAKING

(stage 3)
policy formulation 3.4.1 POLICY FORMULATION

Once the policy agenda is in place, the development of pertinent

and acceptable proposed courses of action in dealing with the
policy problems must follow. Normally this assumes the form of
policy alternatives. Sometimes policy formulation means not to take
positive action but to let the situation evolve on its own. However,
in this section we shall first concentrate on the formulation of policy
alternatives. Almost immediately after this a policy decision is
taken. For purely analytical purposes decision-making is the second
focus point in this section.

1. who is involved in Who is involved in formulating policy alternatives? Generally, the

policy formulation? executive (an executive president or otherwise a premier and
cabinet), bureaucracies, interest groups, legislative staff and
legislators, special commissions, policy-planning organisations
(think tanks) and special study groups or advisory commissions
participate in the process.

executive The executive is mostly the initiator of policy proposals. This is due
to the fact that members of the executive are normally elected on the
basis of a policy plan (such as an election manifesto) and therefore
have to develop a programme for its implementation. The executive
also takes the political responsibility for the implementation of
policies and therefore prefers to formulate policies that suit its
preferences. The legislature is the final arbiter on accepting the
policy proposal.

PLC202-V/1 51
bureaucracies Bureaucracies are closely associated with the executive. Proposals
are drafted in the form of discussion documents, green papers and
white papers for the purpose of public consultation. Quite often
new policy proposals are formulated as an incremental change
made to existing policies. The officials responsible for the
implementation of policies are well suited to identify deficiencies
and loopholes in existing policies or, because they specialise in that
functional area, are well informed about developments or new
needs. Therefore, policy options and proposals are often identified
by them and given as advice to the political executive.

interest groups Interest groups may formulate their own policy proposals or will
go to the legislature with specific proposals for legislation.
Especially in a corporatist relationship they may work with
legislative and executive officials for the enactment of one officially
proposed policy. In open, pluralist relationships interest groups
often bring valuable technical knowledge to policy formulation.

legislatures Legislators and legislative support staff are also involved in policy
formulation. Especially where members of the cabinet are not
members of the legislature, as in the USA, the legislative staff are
important in the preparation of legislation. Over a period of time
some of the parliamentary committee staff and aids to individual
legislators become so knowledgeable about specific policy areas
that they can play a critical role in the formulation of policy options.
In South Africa and Britain the role of parliamentary committees is
fundamentally important for the legislative process and policy
formulation. No legislation can be discussed in Parliament without
the consent of such a committee. Committees can also conduct
public hearings during which inputs from individuals and groups
are considered for policy purposes. (You can consult the different
types of South African parliamentary committees on the World
Wide Web at [Link]
committees/[Link])

commissions Special or advisory commissions are regularly used to advise

government on a particular policy issue. Very often recommenda-
tions are included in their reports which have direct policy
implications. Examples are the recommendations of the Presidential
Review Commission (1998) on the reform and transformation of the
public service in South Africa, the Goldstone Commission or the
Commission of Inquiry regarding the Prevention of Public Violence
and Intimidation, and the South African Law Commission. The
Law Commission is involved in developing the policy proposal on
community courts. It held workshops in 1998, followed by a

52
 discussion paper in 1999, as part of the consultation process and
policy formulation. Other commissions in South Africa received
constitutional and statutory powers and are therefore permanent,
such as the Human Rights Commission, the Judicial Service
Commission, the Financial and Fiscal Commission, the Commission
for Gender Equality, the Independent Electoral Commission and
the Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of
Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities.

think tanks Policy-planning organisations are best developed in the USA.

Think tanks such as the Brookings Institution, the American
Enterprise Institute, the Heritage Foundation or the Council on
Foreign Relations can be central coordinating points in policy-
making. They can bring together the leadership of corporate and
financial institutions, the foundations, the mass media, the leading
intellectuals and influential government figures. They review the
relevant research on the policy problem and try to reach consensus
about action to be taken. In South Africa no comparable think tanks
are involved in policy matters. The defunct Urban Foundation
played a limited role in the past, and now the South African
Foundation is playing a similar role. German foundations such as
the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung or the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung are
also, to a limited extent, involved in this function. The World Bank
sometimes serves the purpose of a think tank, but is less influential
in South Africa in this role than the think tanks in the USA.

South African examples Two examples of informal think tanks created by government
leaders in South Africa were former Deputy President Thabo
Mbeki's Consultative Council (Mail & Guardian, July 19, 1996) and
the Brenthurst Group (Sunday Times, May 5, 1996:23) convened by
former President Mandela. According to some of its participants,
the Consultative Council has no official status but its members were
selected by Mbeki to advise him on opinions he should be aware of
when taking decisions. ``The deputy President felt the need to be in
dynamic contact with as many people as possible who are either
involved in the ANC, but at the ground level, or who are involved
with the community in various formations''.

The Brenthurst Group (named after Harry Oppenheimer's Park-

town estate) was convened by Oppenheimer around 1994 at
Mandela's request to provide a sounding board for thinking on
economic and fiscal matters. The group includes the top executives
of Rembrandt, Liberty Life, Anglo American, Sanlam, Standard
Bank, Old Mutual, Anglovaal and Barlows. Mandela consulted
them on his May 1994 inauguration speech in which he emphasised

PLC202-V/1 53
 investment, job creation and the need for South Africa to export
finished products, and not only raw materials. He consulted them
mainly on policy matters that might affect business confidence in
the country. The function of this Group as a think tank for policy
formulation is therefore apparent.

A relatively unique arrangement in South Africa for policy

formulation is the National Economic Development and Labour
Council (Nedlac). It is a statutory body established in 1995 and
consisting of government, organised labour and organised business.
Its founding document articulated its purpose as follows:

Organised labour, organised business and government believe

that it is now appropriate to establish one statutory co-
operative body ... to address economic, labour and develop-
ment issues. The present situation particularly requires this
with respect to the implementation of the Reconstruction and
Development Programme (RDP). Through such a body the
three parties, as well as those involved in developmental
issues, will strive to jointly promote the goals of economic
growth, increased participation in economic decision-making
and social equity in South Africa.

Nedlac consists of the following chambers: Public Finance and

Monetary Policy, Trade and Industry, Labour Market, and
Development. These chambers indicate in which areas Nedlac is
involved in policy formulation. Nedlac reports are tabled in
Parliament and the results of the tripartisan negotiations are
implemented by government almost without exception. Draft
legislation on the matters dealt with by the chambers are also
tabled in Nedlac before they are considered by Parliament. It should
be clear to you that Nedlac is a critical factor in the formulation of
policy in the designated areas.

If you want to read more about Nedlac, you can consult:

Dekker, L Douwes. 1995. Nedlac Ð creative tensions to avoid
tendencies towards authoritarianism. South African Journal
of Labour Relations. 19(2), Winter:13±24.

At this stage of the discussion we should make you aware that the
formulation of policy proposals and subsequently deciding on the
preferred option are the subjects of numerous approaches or
theories. Currently some of the most used of them are rational
choice theory (including the various game theories), public choice

54
 theory, collective choice theory and incrementalism. Later in this
course we shall pay more attention to them.

policy decision-making 3.4.2 POLICY DECISION-MAKING

The second topic discussed in this section is policy decision-making

(the first was the formulation of policy alternatives). According to
Anderson (1984:60), a policy decision involves action by some
official person or body to approve, modify or reject a preferred
policy alternative. It takes such forms as the enactment of legislation
or the issuing of an executive order. This stage of policy-making has
therefore progressed beyond considering various policy options or
alternatives (ie agenda setting and policy formulation) to taking
action on a preferred policy alternative Ð in other words, the policy
has been chosen. In the process some proposals have been rejected,
others accepted and others modified by narrowing the differences
and reaching a bargained outcome.

In most democratic dispensations final policy decision-making is

the responsibility of the legislature. Executive policy decision-
making can only occur within the parameters of policies enacted by
Parliament. Even in the absence of legislation dealing with a
particular policy issue, the scope of an executive's decision-making
powers is normally restricted by the budget approved by
Parliament and available to his/her department. In systems where
cabinet members are also parliamentarians (parliamentary govern-
ment system), those decisions are also subject to the cabinet
member's accountability to the legislature in answering questions
from the opposition, appearing before a parliamentary standing
committee or debating the department's budget vote.

A specific dimension of policy decision-making is the majorities

required. Policy decisions normally require an absolute majority
(50%+1) in the legislature. In special cases a loaded or special
majority of two-thirds or more is required. In exceptional cases,
when the opposition parties are divided or abstain from voting in a
``hung parliament'' (ie when the government does not have a
majority of 50%+1) a decision can be taken with less than an
absolute majority (ie a relative majority). Policy decision-making is
often a serious dilemma for a coalition government consisting of
more than one political party and in which no party can act on its
own. The Swiss executive and the South African Government of
National Unity (1994±1999) are special, consociational cases in
which the minority parties are too small to pose a threat to the

PLC202-V/1 55
 coalition but coherent policy-making and unified support for it are
no less challenging for the government.

ACTIVIT Y 3.3

(1) Who are the most important role players in the formulation of
policy alternatives?
(2) Is the following statementTRUE or FALSE?
Policy decision-making no longer considers policy alternatives
but has identified a preferred option that will become policy.
Such a decision is normally finalised by a legislature.

FEEDBACK
(1) The most important are the executive, government bureucracies, in-
terest groups, legislative staff and legislators, special commissions,
policy -planning organisations, and special study groups or advisory
commissions.
(2) The statement is true.

The following stage identified by Dye is policy legitimation.

3.5 POLICY LEGITIMATION AND FORMALISATION

(stage 4)
policy legitimation Dye (1998:328) concentrates on the role of ``proximate policy-
makers'' in legitimising policies developed and formulated mainly
by officials, interest groups, think tanks and commissions of
inquiry, who are not elected representatives, and by means of
discussion documents and green papers. A stage in the process is
required where policy is converted from a mainly technocratic
product into a publicly sanctioned government programme
embraced by the elected political representatives. In other words,
in a democratic dispensation the democratic institutions must
assume ownership of the policy, legitimise it and vest it with
authority.

``Proximate policy-makers'' refers to an executive president or

premier, the cabinet, parliament and parliamentary committees,
and political parties. The legitimation stage is the open, public stage
of policy-making often characterised by bargaining, competition,

56
 persuasion and compromise among the policy-makers. The agenda
for policy consideration and the formulation of policy proposals
have been completed before the proximate policy-makers enter the
process. Legitimation is concerned with details of implementation
that are raised and decided within the context of policy goals and
directions already determined.

political parties Political parties are important proximate policy-makers. In the USA
they subscribe to the same fundamental political ideology in a
relatively homogenous political culture. Therefore, they do not have
much independent impact on policy outcomes. In other countries,
such as Turkey, South Africa or Russia the parties do not share a
common political culture or ideology. In Turkey, the Refah
(Welfare) Party came to power in 1996 as the first Islamist party
to counter the secular nature of the state formed by AtatuÈrk, and its
focus was on the Islamic East. The right-of-centre True Path Party
(DYP) of Tansu C Ë iller, on the other hand, had the support of the
military which guaranteed the existence of the secular state, and
was focused on the West such as Germany. Especially foreign
policy and education policies were therefore directly affected by the
parties' ideological orientation. A change in government would
therefore also amount to a substantial change in the policy direction
and hence a new process of policy revision and legitimation.

Let us now look at a brief case study of the African National

Congress (ANC) in South Africa since it came to power in 1994, as
an illustration of policy formulation and policy legitimation.

case study: CASE STUDY: THE ANC AND POLICY-MAKING

ANC The ANC is a political party but still describes itself as a
liberation movement. During its period of struggle it formed the
Tripartite Alliance with the South African Communist Party
(SACP) and the Congress of South African Trade Unions
(Cosatu). Since its victory in the 1994 general election and its
transformation into government, the Alliance remained intact
though it experienced problems from time to time. Leaders of
the three parties meet regularly and develop common positions
on particular issues.
Since its induction as government the ANC maintained a
distinguishable presence as a party or movement, as opposed to
the ANC as government. Both identities are important for
decision-making and policy-making. (The diagram further
down summarises this.)

PLC202-V/1 57
 First, we can look at the extraparliamentary structure and
functioning of the ANC. The highest decision-making and
policy-making body is the National Conference which meets
every three years. In addition to policy-making, it elects the six
office-bearers and the National Executive Committee (NEC).
The NEC consists of 60 elected members plus the provincial
leaders who serve in an ex officio capacity. Its task is to be the
policy-making and decision-making body between meetings of
the National Conference. All the office-bearers and almost all the
ANC cabinet members and provincial premiers serve on the
NEC. It is therefore the nerve centre of decision-making in the
ANC.
The National Working Committee (NWC) could be seen as the
``management committee'' of the NEC and normally meets bi-
weekly. It consists of approximately 20 members elected by the
NEC. The majority of them are members of Parliament but not
necessarily cabinet members. Urgent decisions are taken by the
NWC.
This structure is more or less duplicated at the provincial and
local branch levels.
Administrative decision-making is the responsibility of the
office of the Secretary General in the ANC's head office (Albert
Luthuli House). Before 1994 the then Shell House housed a
plethora of ANC departments, such as Information and
Publicity, International Affairs, Political Education and Health.
After many of the departmental officials were either elected to
Parliament or took up office as public officials, these depart-
ments were converted into study units and study groups.
The parliamentary and governmental functions of the ANC
are concentrated in the cabinet, the ANC parliamentary
caucus and parliamentary standing committees. All the ANC
members of Parliament are members of the ANC's parlia-
mentary caucus, chaired by an ordinary MP. They include the
core of the NEC and NWC as well as all the cabinet members.
The weekly caucus is held in private and is the forum where
the ANC develops its approach or strategy for parliamentary
debates and other parliamentary activities. It includes policy
matters. Caucus decisions can inform NEC or NWC decisions
and vice versa. Cabinet decisions are also discussed in the
caucus. The extraparliamentary study groups can also inform
caucus discussions. Caucus decisions are also a basis for the

58
ANC's participation in the parliamentary standing committees.
Except for one or two, all the committees are chaired by ANC
parliamentarians. Some of them are NEC members and
members of study groups dealing with the same topics.
Hence, decision-making by the extra/parliamentary and parlia-
mentary structures of the ANC are intricately interwoven. Policy
issues do not always take the same route and therefore we
cannot generalise about them. You are, however, encouraged to
read more about them. Very little has so far been published
about policy-making and decision-making in the ANC, but the
following are of general use:
Lodge, Tom. 1999. Policy processes within the African
National Congress and the Tripartite Alliance.
Politikon 26(1) (May):5±32.
Marais, Hein. 1997. Leaders of the pack. Leadership
August:52±63.
Mayibuye, Journal of the African National Congress.
McKinley, Dale T. 1997. The ANC and the liberation struggle: a
critical biography. London: Pluto Press.
Ngombane, Noby. 1997. ANC transformation into party
inevitable. New Nation. January 24:26.
Rantete, Johannes. 1998. The African National Congress and
the negotiated settlement in South Africa. Pretoria: Van
Schaik.
Interactions between the NEC and NWC and ANC
representatives in the parliamentary structure ensure that
policy legitimation includes both the extraparliamentary
party structures of the ANC and its Alliance partners, and
the parliamentary/governmental structures that are most
important for non-ANC supporters. Thus the ANC utilises
both its identities as party and as government in the policy-
making process.
It may appear to be obvious and logical, but parties with a
large majority and with the expectation to be in power for a
prolonged period (ie a dominant single party regime) tend
to dismiss the distinction between party and government
(or state) so that party interests are treated as equal to the
interests of the state. Except in cases of strong constitu-
tionalism, it is a small step away from authoritarian rule, as
the case has been in Zimbabwe since about 1995.
Authoritarianism is first detected in the area of policy-
making, when the process becomes closed.

PLC202-V/1 59
 DIAGRAM OF ANC POLICY-MAKING
" NATIONAL CONFERENCE (5-yearly) PRESIDENT: Thabo Mbeki
(90% of delegates from branches Ð DEPUTY PRES: Jacob Zuma
+3 400 delegates) NATIONAL CHAIR: Patrick Lekota
Ð National Policy Conference SECRETARY GEN: Kgalema Motlanthe
Ð National General Council (after 3 yrs) DEPUTY SG: Sankie Mthembi-Mahanyele
TREASURER: Mendi Msimang

ANC HEAD OFFICE

(Luthuli House)
NATIONAL EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Ð ANC Policy Committee
(NEC)
" (60 + provinces & Youth/ ANC STUDY UNITS
Women's Leagues)

NATIONAL WORKING COMMITTEE PRESIDENT

(NWC) DEPUTY PRESIDENT
(6 officials, 15 elected CABINET
Youth/
Women's League)
PARLIAMENT

PROVINCIAL CONFERENCE National National Council

(Chairperson/premier) Assembly of Provinces
Ð Provincial Policy Conference (Frene Ginwala) (Naledi Pandor)

PROVINCIAL GENERAL COUNCIL

PROVINCIAL EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

(PEC) ANC Parliamentary
Caucus

REGIONAL EXECUTIVE PARLIAMENTARY

(regional policy workshops) standing committees

BRANCH GENERAL MEETING

(prepare draft resolutions
for Provincial Policy Conference)

BRANCH EXECUTIVE

60
 ACTIVIT Y 3.4

Identify the elements of policy legitimation from the case study on the
ANC.

FEEDBACK
You should first present the ANC both as a party and as government. It is not
always clear where the dividing lines are, but for the purpose of policy legiti-
mation the emphasis should be on its role and identity as government and as
a party represented in [Link], your emphasis should be on the
parliamentary structures of the [Link] focus should thus be on the work of
cabinet and the executive, the parliamentary standing committees and the
parliamentary legislative process, and the ANC's parliamentary caucus. You
should explain how the preferred policy proposal is legitimised by being em-
braced by these structures of elected representatives.

policy implementation 3.6 POLICY IMPLEMENTATION (stage 5)

After policy has been formulated, final decisions taken and, in the
case of legislation, the policy has been signed into law by the head
of state, it has to be implemented or executed. The executive and
public administrative sectors are primarily responsible for this.
Thus the circle, which started with the public sector officials (or
bureaucracy) being instrumental in the formulation of policy
problems and determining the policy agenda, is closed with the
implementation of the new policy.

In practical terms policy implementation means that the political

executive (ie cabinet members who are responsible for state
departments) takes control and directs departments, agencies,
commissions and other relevant institutions in order to execute
the policy and to reach the policy objectives. It involves all the
activities designed to carry out the policies. They can include the
creation of new organisations (departments, commissions or
divisions) or the assignment of new responsibilities to existing
organisations. Policy has to be translated into operational rules and
regulations. That translation requires decision-making by the
bureaucracy (Dye 1998:329±330).

Policy implementation is often associated with public administra-

tion, and is treated as a separate and distinct sphere from politics. It
means that administration is concerned with questions of fact (what
is) rather than normative questions (what should be or ought to be).
This view assumes that politics is about value judgments, while

PLC202-V/1 61
 administration is merely the implementation of those judgments or
decisions. This distinction still underlies the ethos of the British
public service, while the French civil service (and also the
American) consists of political appointees or elected officials and
therefore does not maintain such a dichotomy.

who is responsible? 3.6.1 WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR POLICY IMPLEMENTATION?

(1) The bureaucracy is the most obvious answer. According to

Anderson (1984:85±87) the legislature, the courts, pressure
groups and community organisations may also be either
directly involved or may act to influence the implementation
process.
(2) A legislature's main task is to decide on policy in the form of
legislation. Legislation can vary in terms of the details it
provides for implementation. The more detailed it is, the less
discretion implementing agencies have. Sometimes legisla-
tion includes an explanatory section in which its intention is
further explained. (An example in South Africa is the Higher
Education Act 101 of 1997.) The public service officials can
hardly ignore these guidelines.
(3) The judiciary or courts are another important implementation
instrument. Courts have to interpret legislation and admin-
istrative rules and regulations and apply them. They can also
review administrative decisions. In so doing they can
facilitate or hinder the implementation of policy. In states
where the judiciary can review the constitutionality of
legislation and administrative actions, its impact on policy
implementation is even greater. The court applications first
brought to the Cape and Pretoria High Courts and then to
the Constitutional Court by the Democratic Party and New
National Party in 1999 against the South African government
and the Independent Electoral Commission for restricting
voter registration to voters with a barcoded identity
document, is an example of how implementation of the
Electoral Act 73 of 1998 can be affected by judicial decision-
making. Determining the constitutionality of actions or
interpreting the constitution can even amount to policy-
making.
(4) Pressure groups and community organisations can influence the
implementation process, especially if they are affected by the
policy. Given the fact that policy implementation is always
associated with officials' discretionary decision-making,

62
 opportunities exist for those groups to influence the
decisions in order to promote their interests. In corporatist
relations between interest groups and government such an
influence is highly conceivable. For example this is possible
in the case of licencing boards, such as the Independent
Broadcasting Authority in South Africa, on which a member
of the Freedom of Expression Institute serves, or the Human
Rights Commission, on which representatives of organisa-
tions of the disabled serve.

how is it implemented? 3.6.2 HOW IS POLICY BEING IMPLEMENTED?

Implementation of policies starts with the requisition of funds

appropriated by the budget. Financial management is a critical
aspect of public management and state expenditure. The national
treasury, normally located in the Department of Finance, has its
own procedures, rules and regulations according to which state
departments can utilise funds from the budget. Implementation
therefore is about how to spend the public funds most cost-
effectively and with the best impact on the set policy objectives.
Public administration as a discipline focuses on this management
process.

We shall concentrate on three aspects of the bureaucracy's role in

implementation, namely regulation-making, bureaucratic adjudica-
tion and bureaucratic discretion.

(1) Regulation-making: Policies are normally formulated as

principles, objectives and general provisions, but almost
never specify the management process of implementation.
Formal rules and regulations are therefore developed by the
bureaucracy and they normally have the force of law. They
are guided by the principles of administrative law, such as
just administrative action. In the USA they are published in
the Federal Register. These rules and regulations are the real
source of the institutional power of a bureaucracy, because
they are not dependent on ratification or review by the
legislature. Courts usually do not overturn them unless they
exceed the authority granted by law.
(2) Bureaucratic adjudication. Adjudication is usually the pre-
rogative of the judiciary. However, public officials, often
have to decide whether a person, an organisation, a business
or an association has complied with laws and regulations. If
they have not, they also need to determine the sanctions in

PLC202-V/1 63
 the form of penalties or corrective actions. Such an
adjudication is conducted in terms of established procedures
for investigation, hearing, decision and appeal. Adminis-
trative hearings are less formal than court proceedings but
they can also be enforced. In undemocratic or autocratic
situations bureaucratic adjudication almost invariably re-
places judicial adjudication and therefore is a practice to be
used cautiously and in a restricted manner. Tribunals of a
military regime constitute the form of adjudication that
deviates most from the norm.
(3) Bureaucratic discretion. Though most of the work of public
officials is administrative routine and directed by formal
rules and regulations, it almost invariably requires on the
part of officials discretionary powers in performing even the
routine tasks. Individual cases do not always fit the
established procedures and here officials have to determine
which procedures are the fairest in order to attain the same
objectives as those attained in the conventional cases.
Discretion does not mean to take decisions only on
procedural aspects, but also on the merit of cases. An
example is a procedure of tendering.

A tender call for a project is normally advertised and tenders

are submitted in accordance with a specified and formal
procedure. When the tenders are considered, predetermined
criteria and procedures have to be applied in selecting the
preferred provider of the required service. The choice
between the options is a decision about the merit of each
tender proposal and is also a discretionary decision. Policy
implementation is often characterised by such choices.

ACTIVIT Y 3.5

Do you think that the prominent role of the bureaucracy in the imple-
mentation of policy and the fact that they have discretionary decision-
making powers effectively erodes the democratic notion that it is the
responsibility of elected representatives to make policy?

FEEDBACK
It is a modern tendency that policy issues become so technical that legisla-
tors determine a general, enabling policy in which principles are encapsu-
l a te d b u t l e ave i t to th e te c hn o c r a t s to d e ter min e th e ac tu al
implementation. The political executive (cabinet) is a critical link because it

64
 has to take the executive responsibility for the implementation of a policy
and account for it in the legislature. The bureaucracy is therefore in the first
instance accountable to the political executive but secondly the most senior
public officials are quite often also directly accountable to the legislature as
accounting officers of their departments ö especially for financial manage-
ment matters.

3.7 EVALUATION OF POLICY IMPACT (stage 6)

policy evaluation Acccording to Anderson (1984:134), policy evaluation is concerned
with the estimation, assessment or appraisal of policy. It can occur
throughout the policy-making process and should not be treated as
the final stage in the process.

Evaluation tends to be associated only with policy output, normally

measurable and presented in the form of data. It tells us little about
policy outcomes or the impact of the policy on the political
environment. Thus, the focus should be more on policy impact than
on outputs, and therefore on all the consequences of a policy.
Anderson and Dye identified the following five conditions of policy
impact (they will be discussed later):

Š the impact on the target situation or group

Š the impact on situations or groups other than the target
Š the impact on future as well as immediate conditions
Š direct costs and benefits in terms of resources devoted to the
programme
Š indirect costs and benefits, including loss of opportunities to
do other things

Government or public policy output merely measures government

activity. It is therefore confined to empirically or factually based
assessments in which quantitative considerations are paramount.
Typical examples are tables with data of policy results. On the other
hand, if the impact of a policy is determined, qualitative
considerations are more important, and normative judgments are
necessary. A typical question then is: How did the policy improve
the quality of life of the target environment, groups or individuals?
or: ``To what extent did it promote or consolidate the values on
which the particular policy was founded? In other words, policy
evaluation must identify the positive (and unintended negative)
changes in society that can be linked directly to the government
policy.

PLC202-V/1 65
 Next we shall pay attention to the problems encountered in policy
evaluation, three major considerations in the process of policy
evaluation, and two types of impact of policy.

problems 3.7.1 PROBLEMS IN POLICY EVALUATION

Policy evaluation is neither easy nor simple and therefore the

following complicating factors should be kept in mind when one is
engaged in evaluating policy (Anderson 1984:139±143):

(1) Uncertainty over policy goals. Amongst other criteria, we

have defined public policy as a programme with targets or
goals. If those goals are not clearly defined Ð especially if
the policy is not articulated in a comprehensive and
systematic document Ð it is hardly possible to evaluate
the success or failure of the policy in terms of its goals.
Policies defined primarily by government actions and
inactions and not articulated, are almost impossible to
evaluate in terms of their initial intention.
(2) Causality. The correlation between cause and effect is
always difficult to verify. In the case of policies, the
environment in which they are applied cannot be isolated
and controlled by the policy implementors. Therefore, factors
outside the ambit of a particular policy can make an impact
on the target groups of the policy and deliver results in line
with the defined policy goals. In such a situation the policy
cannot receive the credit for the positive results. Therefore a
causal relationship between the policy implementation and
the results need to be ascertained Ð which mostly constitu-
tes quite a challenge.
(3) Diffuse policy impacts. Policy actions may affect the target
groups identified by the policy goals but may also
unintentionally affect other groups not identified for the
purpose. A policy analyst is not always aware of the side
effects of a policy, because he or she is focused on the target
areas. Especially if the side effects are negative and go
unnoticed, policy evaluation is incomplete and therefore
unreliable. The challenge for any analyst therefore is to
accept that the impact of any policy is most probably diffuse
and that such diffuse impacts have to be identified.
(4) Difficulties in data acquisition. Reliable empirical data are
critically important for all policies with especially a socio-
economic focus. Policy evaluations that depend on quanti-

66
 tative analyses must have access to such reliable data. In
societies where the infrastructure for collecting such data is
limited or absent Ð such as in developing states Ð or where
the nature of the policy issue makes data collection very
difficult, valid policy evaluations will not be possible.
Examples of doubtful data are official inflation (consumer
price and production price indexes) figures compared to the
general perception of what they should be, fluctuations in
unemployment figures depending on how the informal
economic sector is treated, and population census statistics in
states such as Nigeria or South Africa. A census is critically
important for designing development policies and if it is not
reliable, policy targets can be absolutely unrealistic.
(5) Official resistance. Given our dual use of policy analysis,
resistance can be experienced in both instances. If policy
evaluation is undertaken by a researcher/observer, the
programme officials will be concerned about the political
consequences of a negative evaluation. This may affect the
policy programme, their influence or their careers. Therefore,
their participation in the evaluation will depend on a
number of conditions.
Policy evaluation from within the policy process can also be
resisted if results may have a divisive effect within the
implementing unit. Evaluation also holds the possibility of
changes to be made to policies. Organisational inertia
normally resists change.
(6) Unrealistic time perspective. Policy evaluators can run the
risk of concluding too soon what the results of a policy's
impact are. Policies in the public sector should be given
rather a longer period to show results. Examples of a
premature declaration of a policy's failure are the Recon-
struction and Development Programme in South Africa and
the New Deal's resettlement programme in the 1930s in the
USA to provide land ownership opportunities for black
sharecroppers.

3.7.2 CONSIDERATIONS IN THE PROCESS OF POLICY

EVALUATION

three considerations The following three considerations should be included in assessing

the impact of policies.

PLC202-V/1 67
 (1) Short-term or long-term policies. Before a policy is assessed,
the evaluator should have clarity about the intended
duration of the policy Ð in other words, when is it realistic
to expect the policy to deliver results, when will the policy
reach its optimum peak and what is the duration specified
by the policy objectives? Impact studies have shown that in
some cases a policy programme has produced short-term
positive results but that they disappeared as the novelty and
enthusiasm of the new policy wore off. Other policies
experience difficulties in the beginning but produce im-
pressive results in the long run and receive widespread
acceptance.
(2) Net benefits and costs. Cost-benefit analysis is a popular
approach to determining the impact of a policy. It is,
however, truly difficult to determine the net costs and
benefits, because the analysis should include both the direct
or tangible costs and benefits and the symbolic or indirect
ones, plus the short-term and long-term effects. It is easier to
specify a particular aspect of a policy, such as only the direct
costs and benefits of one or two elements of a policy. To
undertake an analysis of the totality of a policy is very
complex and time-consuming and this is therefore seldom
done in the public sector.
(3) Indirect and symbolic benefits and costs. Direct costs and
benefits are normally determined by a cost-benefit analysis.
Indirect and symbolic results are, however, much more
difficult to identify. It includes perceptions about the success
or failure of a policy. Often the best guide is political
intuition and not measurable or empirical assessments.

two types of impact 3.7.3 TWO TYPES OF IMPACT OF POLICY

The three considerations to be accounted for lead us to acknowl-

edge two types of impact: direct or tangible, and symbolic.

1. symbolic (1) Symbolic impact is directly related to the perceptions of

individuals about, and their attitude towards government
action. Even if a policy or programme does not succeed in
terms of its direct impact, the public appraisal can be
positive. A policy is often judged by its good intentions
rather than its direct accomplishments. The opposite can also
be the case, with effective but unpopular policies.
2. tangible (2) Direct or tangible impact is judged by a multitude of means,
such as hearings and reports, site visits, output measuring,

68
comparison with professional standards, evaluation of the
public's complaints, auditing and budgeting, and special
commissions (Dye 1998:342±343).
(a) Hearings and reports. The bureaucracy is expected to
report regularly to the executive and to the legislature
on the programmes for which it is responsible. This
reporting takes the form of annual reports, testimony
before a parliamentary committee or a minister's
answering of questions in the legislature posed by the
opposition. In the South African Parliament the Joint
Standing Committee on Public Accounts is a very
important mechanism for demanding financial ac-
countability and therefore determining the impact of
policy from a financial point of view.
(b) Site visits. Occasionally public officials, consultants,
legislators or other evaluators can decide to visit the
implementors of a policy or conduct inspections on
the sites of the implementation. Thereby they can
develop impressions of the actual delivery of policy
outcomes.
(c) Output measuring. The data generated by government
departments about a policy programme are normally
an indication of policy outputs and not impact. Policy
outputs are not absolutely irrelevant and can be used
as an instrument for evaluation. It should, however,
not be the main or sole instrument.
(d) Comparison with professional standards. Professional
associations and research results have developed
standards of excellence and identified benchmarks
against which policy results can be measured and
evaluated. Examples of such standards are acceptable
ratios between a medical doctor and patients,
between a teacher and pupils, the rate of infant
mortality, illiteracy, or the professional standards and
qualifying examinations of chartered accountants,
engineers or law students. Again, this provides more
information on policy outputs and not impact, but it is
still an important evaluation instrument.
(e) The public's complaints. The discussion of public opinion
(section 3.2.1) already showed us the problem areas
regarding its reliability and identification. Complaints
from the public, who are on the receiving end of policy

PLC202-V/1 69
 programmes, can provide anecdotal and impressionistic
information about policy results, but are not reliable as a
measuring instrument. They can, however, highlight
problems and prompt investigations into aspects of the
policy that otherwise would have been neglected. Public
opinion is important to determine the symbolic impact,
but not the tangible impact.
(f) Auditing and budgeting. If we approach auditing from
a broad perspective, we can say that public financial
management is assessed also from a point of view of
cost-effectiveness and the degree to which policy has
achieved its objectives. Forensic auditing in particular
can produce such results. In the public sector the
Auditor-General can play an important part in policy
evaluation by determining the effectivity of policies.
Budgeting is normally treated as part of the policy
formulation stage. However, budgeting practices such
as zero-based budgeting require public officials to
evaluate their policies each time a budget is prepared,
in order to be able to justify the continuation or
increase of that budget item. It forces public officials
to evaluate the policies thoroughly. In South Africa
the practice of applying a three-year rolling budget
plan and preview (the Medium Term Expenditure
Framework) requires that planning is done at least
three years in advance and that policies are con-
tinuously evaluated during those three years.
(g) Special commissions. Governments can appoint special
commissions to investigate a particular policy or
aspect of a policy, or government performance in
general. Their reports can constitute a form of policy
evaluation. Examples are the complaints investigated
by an ombudsman (the Public Protector in South
Africa), judicial commissions of inquiry, a specially
appointed commission (such as the commission
appointed by the European Commission of the
European Union to investigate fraud, favouritism
and nepotism, which led to the European Commis-
sioners resignation in March 1999), and the work of
Amnesty International, Freedom House, Greenpeace
and other international monitoring agencies.
South African examples are the Presidential Review

70
 Commission ([Link]
[Link]) that included a report on how government
is working, the Human Rights Commission and other
statutory commissions, the Heath Unit on corruption,
the Public Complaints Directorate of the police and
the Financial and Fiscal Commission.

ACTIVIT Y 3.6

Please do a policy evaluation of the following information provided to

you:
The policy objective is that the diplomatic relations of state A must be
improved in order to enhance its prestige in the international commu-
nity and to make it a more attractive economic proposition for inves-
tors and trade partners. The policy results were that it increased its
diplomatic representation in other states from 45 to 95, including the
USA and China. The majority of new representatives are stationed in
Latin America and North Africa.
The result of the new diplomatic initiative is that stateA was elected as
chair of the regional economic organisation in its region and as a rotat-
ing member of the Security Council of the United Nations. It failed,
however, to reach an agreement with its main trading partners on a
free trade area and therefore no substantial gains were made in the
past year in terms of trade relations or improved trade.

FEEDBACK
You should first distinguish between policy outputs and the impact of the
policy. Secondly, you should determine the impact as far as possible in terms
of the stated policy goals.
The increase in the number of diplomatic missions is a numerical policy out-
put and does not tell us much about its impact or significance in terms of
enhancing the state's international prestige and reputation. The fact that it
includes the USA as a superpower and China as an emerging power, is sig-
nificant from a qualitative or impact point of view, and should be treated as
meeting the goal of enhanced international status. However, the fact that the
majority of new missions are in states not treated as major powers and which
are not important economic or trading partners indicates that state A has not
yet reached the policy [Link] output of increased numbers looks good
but the quality of the ouput or impact (ie that they are not major international
powers) is not yet satisfactory.
Secondly, the fact that state A failed to reach a free trade agreement with its
main trading partners means that on this score it has not yet reached the
policy objective, and the impact of the policy in this regard is unsatisfactory.

PLC202-V/1 71
 The evaluation of policy impact concludes the policy-making
process. It can be treated as a form of policy analysis, while David
Easton presented it as a feedback process. You are reminded that
the policy-making stages are not mechanically applied. In reality,
the process is much more diffuse and untidy. However, the reason
for discussing it here in such a systematic manner is to enable you
to recognise the policy-making stages when you are involved in
such a process.

3.8 SUMMARY

In this study unit we have concentrated on the stages that can be

isolated in the public policy-making process. The stages are
identified for analytical purposes and do not always follow on
each other in the sequence in which they are discussed. The purpose
it serves is, however, for you to understand the different
dimensions of developing a policy.

From most perspectives public policy is a never-ending process or

cycle, because by evaluating the impact of a policy, deficiencies and
loopholes can be identified that require a new policy formulation or
that identify new policy problems. The theoretical knowledge of
public policy-making will assist you in understanding the process
but it cannot replace practical experience. Experienced policy-
makers can, however, also benefit from this theoretical knowledge
by structuring their approach better and by being more conscious of
what they are engaged in.

In the next study unit we concentrate on the dilemmas normally

encountered by policy-makers.

TEST YOURSELF
You will find
the answers The following questions are based on all the sections of this study unit.
to this self- Use them to assess your understanding of these sections.
assessment
at the end (1) Is the following statement TRUE or FALSE?
FALSE
of the study
A process can only denote a linear progression and cannot be
guide
repetitive or cyclical.

72
(2) Please fill in the missing words in the following passage about the
identification of policy problems:
Not all problems become policy problems. Two indicators are useful
to identify them, namely public opinion and (i) ............. opinion. A (ii)
.................. is the most reliable instrument to determine the public
opinion on a particular issue. The (iii) ................ theory states that
the selfish personal interests of the bureaucracy in particular are
more important than their vicarious personal interests when policy
issues are identified.

(3) Which one of the following is not a relevant approach for agenda
setting?
a corporatism
b elite theories
c bureaucratic decision-making
d pluralism

(4) Which one of the following groups is mostly the initiator of policy
proposals?
a the judiciary
b policy-planning organisations
c legislators
d the executive

(5) Is the following statement about policy legitimation TRUE or

FALSE?
FALSE?
Policy legitimation concentrates on the role of proximate policy-
makers, that is the public officials, interest groups and think
tanks, who work behind the scene to prepare the policy proposals.
Once the policy proposals are handed to the executive and
legislators, the public officials no longer have a role to play in the
policy-making process.

(6) Identify the one pair that is irreconcilable in the two columns
dealing with policy implementation:
a judiciary responsible for implementation
b bureaucratic adjudication undemocratic practice
c bureaucratic discretion procedural aspects and merit
of cases
d political executive controls implementation

(7) Which one of the five conditions of policy impact is represented by

the following quotation?
``Individuals, groups and whole societies frequently judge public
policy in terms of its good intentions rather than its tangible
accomplishments. The general popularity and public appraisal of a
program may be unrelated to its real impact in terms of desired
results'' (Dye 1998).
PLC202-V/1 73
 a the impact on situations or groups other than the target
b direct costs and benefits
c the impact on future as well as immediate conditions
d indirect costs and benefits

(8) Please fill in the missing words in the following passage about the
problems encountered in policy evaluation:
The correlation between cause and (i) .... is always difficult to
verify. Policy evaluations that depend on quantitative analyses
must have access to reliable (ii) ..., but in most developing states
their acquisition is difficult. Policy evaluation is associated with
change. Change is often resisted by (iii) ... .

(9) Which one of the following considerations in assessing the impact

of a policy is associated with a cost-benefit analysis?
a short-term or long-term policies
b net benefits and costs
c indirect and symbolic benefits and costs

(10) Which type of policy impact is described in the following?

``The data developed by government agencies themselves generally
cover policy output measures: the number of recipients in various
welfare programs, the number of persons in work-force training
programs, the number of public hospital beds available, ... . But
these program measures rarely indicate what impact these
numbers have on society'' (Dye 1998).
a direct or tangible impact
b indirect and symbolic impact

REFLECTION
Now that you have worked through this study unit, you should be able to
Š identify the most important stages in the public policy-making
process
Š explain each of the stages in the process
Š diagnose in which of the stages the process is if you are
confronted with an actual policy-making process
Š advise how to approach or structure a policy-making process

SOURCES
Anderson, James E. 1984. Public policy-making. 3rd edition. New York:
Holt, Rinehardt & Winston (also 1994 edition).

74
Dunn, William N. 1994. Public policy analysis. 2nd edition. Englewood
Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Dye, Thomas R. 1998. Understanding public policy. 9th edition. Upper
Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
Lane, Jan-Erik. 1995. The public sector: concepts, models and approaches.
London: SAGE.
Schmitter, Phillipe. 1974. Still the century of corporatism? Review of
Politics. 36(1).
Venter, Albert (ed.) 1998. Government and politics in the new South Africa.
Pretoria: Van Schaik.

PLC202-V/1 75
 STUDY
UNIT 4

POLICY-MAKING: DEALING
WITH DILEMMAS
(Compiled by Susan Botha)

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study unit is to provide you with the necessary
knowledge and skills in order to demonstrate an understanding of
the dilemmas that policy-makers have to deal with. In order to be
able to do so, it is important to answer the following focus
questions:

FOCUS How should the private and public domain be demarcated?

QUESTIONS When is there a need for public policy?
What difficulties can be encountered when making policy in the
absence of sufficient information?
What difficulties can be encountered when making policy on
highly technical issues?
What difficulties can be encountered when making policy that
could affect the ruling party's constituency negatively?

PLC202-V/1 77
 How can conflicting interests and values affect policy-making?
How can a lack of resources affect policy-making?
What are the possible unintended consequences of public
policy?

4.1 HOW SHOULD THE PRIVATE AND PUBLIC DOMAIN BE

DEMARCATED?
The demarcation between the public and the private domain
involves two separate issues, namely:

Š To what extent may the state interfere in the private lives of

individuals?
Š What goods and services should be provided by the public
sector?

PRIVATE LIVES OF INDIVIDUALS

The issue at stake is whether the state has the right to interfere in the
private lives of individuals. In other words, do the policy-makers
have a right to formulate policy that could negatively affect the
freedom of the individual? If yes, when, to what extent and in what
areas?

The answer to the above question will depend on the way in which
power and/or authority are exercised in the state, and on the values
and ideology that prevail in that society. However, the value system
of that society will also determine what the accepted functions of
the state are. The functions of the state can be divided into two basic
categories, namely the original function and the destination
function. The original function (ie the reason for the existence of
politics) can be classified into two categories, namely order and
protection. The destination function, in turn, can be classified into
the provision of essential goods and services on the one hand, and
the provision of goods and services that will contribute towards the
welfare and development of society on the other.

78
 FUNCTIONS OF THE STATE

ORIGINAL FUNCTIONS DESTINATION FUNCTIONS

Order Protection Essential goods and services

Development and welfare

liberal democracies The liberal democracies are generally based on the notion that the
individual should be allowed freedom of choice and that the role of
the state in the lives of individuals should be restricted. Freedom of
the individual should, however, not impact negatively on the
freedom of another individual. Therefore public policies in liberal
democracies set guidelines that aim mainly at ensuring order and
protecting the interests of the individual. In states that follow a
socialist socialist ideology the interests of society enjoy priority over the
interests of the individual. Note that, though the role of the state in
a socialist state is important, a socialist state is not necessarily a
totalitarian totalitarian state. In totalitarian states every aspect of the
individual's life is usually controlled and regulated by the public
sector. The following are examples:

Š In a liberal democracy medical doctors will be allowed to

practise where and when they like. However, the training
and registration of medical doctors may be controlled by the
public sector in order to protect the interests of the patient
and of the profession in general. In a state that follows a
socialist ideology, most doctors will be employed and
controlled by the state. Often doctors are not allowed to go
into private practice. Socialist states are, however, not
necessarily totalitarian. In a totalitarian state every aspect
of the medical profession will probably be controlled by the
state.
Š In liberal democracies the individual is allowed extensive
freedom to decide for himself or herself what he/she will
read and what he/she will wear. A socialist state may or
may not interfere with the reading and dressing habits of its
citizens. However, in a totalitarian state strict control is often
exercised over what the citizens may or may not read and
what they may wear in public. Note, for example, that in
some Islamic states women are obliged to wear a chador (a
black cloak-like dress) in public.

PLC202-V/1 79
 ACTIVIT Y 4.1

Read the following paragraph and then answer the questions.

Two people (who did not wear life-jackets) drowned after their
rubber boat had capsized while participating in a white-water
event. This incident was followed by a widespread call on the gov-
ernment to ban all white-water rafting.

(1) Are you of the opinion that the government has the power to
ban white-water rafting?
(2) Should the government, in your opinion, ban all white-water
rafting? Give reasons for your answer.
(3) How would you feel if the government decides not to ban white-
water rafting, but decides instead to make the wearing of life-
jackets compulsory? Give reasons for your answer.

The correctness of your answer will be determined by the

prevailing values of the society of which you are a member. The
underlying principle is whether the state has the right to prescribe
how we should lead our lives. How do you feel about this issue?

WHAT GOODS AND SERVICES SHOULD BE PROVIDED BY THE PUBLIC

SECTOR?
At this stage it is important to distinguish between the concepts
public sector and private sector. How do we distinguish between
the two? The public sector usually refers to the institutions of state
and their activities. The private sector, on the other hand, refers to
those institutions that function in the market place and are usually
operated by private individuals and not government officials. It is
important to take note of the terms usually associated with the
concepts ``public'' and ``private''.

PUBLIC PRIVATE
central control free-market
hierarchy competition
budget allocation market allocation
planning laissez-faire
collectivistic individualistic
public ownership private ownership
authority freedom

There are two basic methods of providing goods and services in

80
society, namely profit management (market) and bureaucratic
management (budget-making). These ultimately involve exchange
and authority, competition and hierarchy, laissez-faire and plan-
ning, market economy and demand economy, capitalism and
socialism, and freedom versus authority (Lane 1995:19). Therefore
what goods and services should be provided by the public sector
and what goods and services by the private sector?

Different criteria are used by different scholars in their work on this

topic, that is: What goods and services should be provided by
whom? In his book The public sector (1995), J E Lane focuses on the
so-called finance models that mainly use economic criteria. In
ideologies, on the other hand, the focus is usually on what is
considered to be the norm for a just society and not necessarily on
what is economically feasible or attainable.

Lane comes to the conclusion that the two collective choice

mechanisms, namely the market and budget-making, each have
their own spheres in which they operate best. ``The problem of
choosing between a planned economy and a market economy does
not exhaust the possibilities of mixing the public and private
sectors'' (Lane 1995:23). He subsequently discusses criteria that
could be used to determine what goods and services should be
provided by the public sector and what should be provided by the
private sector, but these criteria will favour neither planning nor the
market in all circumstances.

Some of these criteria are:

Š Nature of goods. There are goods and services, such as

protection services (military and police) and the legal process
that ``... have to be provided by means of public policy,
because they have properties that the market as an allocation
mechanism fails to meet, since they are indivisible'' (Lane
1995:23)
Š Preferences of citizens. Citizens may prefer that certain goods
and services be provided by the public sector. For example,
in Britain health care is provided by the state, while in France
it is provided mainly by the private sector (Harrop et al
1993:1)
Š Values in a particular society. The values will largely be
determined by the prevailing or ruling ideology. However,
as already indicated, ideologies do not always take
cognisance of the economic implications of their values.
``... we must also recognize the cost of implementing public

PLC202-V/1 81
 policy in some institutional set-up ... What matters is not that
public policy should do what markets cannot do at all, but
the relative balance of the two sets of institutions in terms of
both pros and cons. Instead of possibility we must look at
efficiency'' (Lane 1995:25±26).

Certain trends in the provision of goods and services can be

identified. In the era of classical liberalism the function of the state
was that of a minimal state, ie the public sector was mainly
involved in the provision of protection services. In modern
liberalism, however, the function of the state has been extended
in order to include the provision of goods and services that are
regarded as essential and will contribute towards the development
of the individual (eg welfare services). In socialist states the public
sector is involved (either alone or in cooperation with the private
sector) in the provision of most goods and services. However, in
states that follow a communist ideology the provision of goods and
services is the sole responsibility of the state (maximal state).
roll back the state However, at present, there is a tendency to roll back the state, that
privatisation is to reduce the role of the state and to privatise many of its
accumulated functions. (Privatisation may be defined as the transfer
of the provision of goods and services from the public sector to the
private sector.)

4.2 WHEN IS THERE A NEED FOR PUBLIC POLICY?

The need for policy is often determined by the accepted functions of

the state and by the demands of particular ideologies. For example,
adopting a policy that addresses safety and security would not be
problematic in terms of the what of the policy, though differences
might exist on the how of the policy. Likewise, if the prevailing
ideology has as its ideal the value of ``equality'', programmes
designed to promote that ideal will also not be controversial.

Governments may, from time to time, be confronted with the

unexpected and the question arises: How should governments
determine whether to adopt a policy that will address a particular
issue?

82
ACTIVIT Y 4.2

Read the following paragraph and answer the questions.

In 1982 the first two deaths of an unknown cause were reported
in South Africa. The announcement also made reference to the
fact that it would appear as if the cause of death was similar to
that of the unexplained deaths that occurred among homosex-
uals and drug addicts in other parts of the [Link] government
spokesman mentioned that these two deaths were, however,
only isolated cases of two people who had travelled overseas
and that there was no reason for concern.
Today we know that the cause of death has been established and
that the disease (AIDS) is becoming a major health crisis in South
Africa.

(1) Would you say that the government in South Africa took too
long to act on the issue of AIDS?
(2) Should every death be regarded as a potential epidemic?
(3) If the government today is faced with another two unexplained
deaths, what would you advise them to do?

With hindsight we now know that the government should have

taken the apparent appearance of AIDS in South Africa more
seriously. An overreactions could, however, also have been a
problem. Many people die of diseases that never take on epidemic
proportions. Therefore it is not always easy to determine when
there is a need for a policy to address a particular issue and when
not. Thus the timing of a particular policy is often crucial, but not
always easy to determine.

4.3 MAKING POLICY IN THE ABSENCE OF SUFFICIENT

INFORMATION

Part of the reason for not addressing the issue of AIDS timeously
was that governments lacked the necessary information and
knowledge about the disease. Until the causative agent, namely
the HIV virus, was isolated, it was not clear what caused the
disease, nor were the etiology of the disease and the way in which it
was spread known. ``Lack of knowledge about the disease (and
indeed ignorance about what is not known) pose very real
problems for decision-makers. It can incline them to do nothing,

PLC202-V/1 83
 until all the facts are known. Or, alternatively, it can provoke panic,
as ignorance allows the spread of irrational fears'' (Greenaway et al
1992:69).

The problem of a lack of knowledge and sufficient information is

even greater in developing countries. That is probably part of the
reason why the disease is becoming a major health problem in
many developing countries.

The issue of AIDS is one of these issues where lack of knowledge

was an important factor in delaying the making of a much needed
public policy.

In the developed world it is regarded as the responsibility of

governments to ensure that they have control over the process of
acquiring knowledge within a state. Lack of knowledge could be an
indication that not enough money is spent on research or that there
is an unwillingness to listen (see Greenaway 1992:69±70). (For a
detailed discussion of formulating policy on the issue of AIDS in
Britain, see Greenaway et al 1992:69±91.)

4.4 MAKING POLICY ON HIGHLY TECHNICAL ISSUES

Policy-makers are often faced with the dilemma of having to

formulate policy on issues they themselves have very little
knowledge of.

ACTIVIT Y 4.3

Read the following and answer the questions:

You are a member of the executive and have been instructed by
your colleagues to oversee the planning of a nuclear power sta-
tion and to decide on the type of nuclear reactor to be used. You
are told that there are several possible reactors that could be con-
sidered, for example an Advanced Gas-Cooled Reactor, Steam
Generating Heavy Water Reactor, Light Water Reactor and the
Pressurised Water Reactor.

(1) How would you rate your knowledge on nuclear power (excel-
lent, average, poor, no knowledge at all)?
(2) If asked, what reactor will you recommend? Give reasons for
your answer.
(3) Do you think that the current members of Parliament and the

84
 executive have enough knowledge to make an informed deci-
sion?
(4) Should a referendum be held on the type of nuclear reactor, do
you think that the average South Africa will be able to cast an
informed vote?

Even though we, the parliamentarians and the members of the

executive may have some knowledge of nuclear power, it is
doubtful whether that knowledge would be sufficient to make a
sound and defensible decision. However, unlike in the case of
AIDS, the expert knowledge does exist, but among the scientific
community and not among the decision-makers. Therefore in order
to make a decision, the decision-makers will have to rely on the
advice provided by the nuclear scientists.

This may, however, cause certain individuals to exploit lack of

expertise in order to further their own interests. Lack of expertise
may also cause governments to rely too heavily on the intelligence
community, which may indeed also try to further their own
interests. This is cited as a reason for the Cuban Missile Crisis. Lack
of expertise among the general population in a democracy may
imply that the ordinary citizen's role in the formulation of public
policy is indeed limited.

4.5 MAKING POLICY THAT CAN AFFECT THE

GOVERNMENT'S CONSTITUENCY

It is accepted as a general principle that governments should take

note of public opinion. No government, even in a totalitarian state,
can afford to ignore the wishes of the public in the long term.

In a democracy, where governments are voted in and out of power

by the electorate, the interests and opinions of the electorate are
crucial in the making of public policy. However, a government can
be forced by circumstances to make policy that would negatively
impact on the very people that voted the government into power.

ACTIVIT Y 4.4

Read the following paragraph and answer the questions:

PLC202-V/1 85
 You are the President of state X and the leader of the Labour
Party. Your constituency (supporters) is made up of members of
very active trade unions that are affiliated to the Labour Party.
Over a number of years the economy of state X has shown a
steady decline. A commission of inquiry, that included several for-
eign economic experts, tabled a report that put most of the
blame on trade union activity. The commission further recom-
mended that legislation be introduced that would curtail the ac-
tivities of the trade [Link] realise, however, that such a move
could cost you many votes.

(1) Explain how you would handle the recommendations of the

commission of inquiry.
(2) Do you think that it is necessary to curtail the activities of the
trade unions? Give reasons for your answer.
(3) What do you think would be the long-term consequences of fail-
ing to follow the recommendations of the commission?

The above may seem to be a hypothetical example, but in reality this

was the scenario that several British governments had to deal with in
addressing trade unions whose actions were, to a large extent, respon-
sible for the economic difficulties that Britain at one time had to face.

Dealing with policy that can negatively affect a government's

constituency constituency (supporters) is problematic, but failure to do so might
harm the position of the government in the long term. This was one
of the reasons why the Labour Party in Britain was ousted from
power by Margaret Thatcher and the Conservative Party in 1979.
(For a detailed discussion on trade union policy in Britain, read
Greenaway et al 1992:164±182.)

4.6 DEALING WITH CONFLICTING INTERESTS AND

VALUES

4.6.1 INTERESTS

The discussion on trade unions gives an indication of the dilemma

that a conflict of interests may hold for the policy-maker. Pluralist
theory and group theorists have as their point of departure the idea
that the role of government is to act as a referee between the
conflicting interests of various groups. In corporatism, however, the
role of interest groups in policy-making is also emphasised but the
government is accorded a greater role than that of a referee.

86
Whatever the role of the government is with regard to dealing with
a conflict of interest, what is crucial is that a failure to recognise and
to address conflicting interests may lead to political instability. This
is particularly the case whenever conflicts of interests coincide with
other societal dividing lines such as race, ethnicity and religion. A
conflict of interests is fundamental to the political conflicts in
Northern Ireland and Israel. Other examples of conflicting interests
are employers versus employees, nature conservationists versus
developers, groups that are pro Libya, Iran and Cuba versus groups
that are opposed to these states.

These are only a few, even simplistic examples. In reality,

conflicting interests have to be reconciled in the making and
implementing of virtually every policy. A failure to do so may have
serious long-term implications, not only for the government, but
also for society as a whole. On the other hand, the government
should also take care not to become a hostage of particular group
interests Ð this could be the case when governments become too
afraid of losing votes.

4.6.2 VALUES

A conflict of interests may coincide with a conflict of values Ð

especially when conflicting interests involve religious groups.
However, conflicting values may surface in most policy issues.
An example in this regard is the issue of AIDS in South Africa. On
the one hand, the values of the right to privacy and non-
discrimination have prevented government from making AIDS a
notifiable disease. On the other hand, the fact that it is not a
notifiable disease may conflict with other members of society's right
to life. The policy on abortion is another indication of a conflict of
interests.

ACTIVIT Y 4.5

Read the following paragraph and answer the questions:

You are a political adviser to the government in state X (a democ-
racy). You are asked by the government to provide a political opi-
nion on the possibility of making voter registration and elections
compulsory.
PLC202-V/1 87
 You are aware that certain freedoms and fundamental rights are
fundamental to democracy such as the freedom to associate or
not to associate, and the freedom to form political parties. For ex-
ample, section 19 of the Constitution of South Africa states that:
(1) Every citizen is free to make political choices which includes
the right
(a) to form a political party,
(b) to participate in the activities of, or recruit members for, a
political party; and
(c) to campaign for a political party or cause

(2) Every citizen has the right to free, fair and regular elections for
any legislative body established in terms of the Constitution.
(3) Every adult citizen has the right ö
(a) to vote in elections for any legislative body established in
terms of the Constitution, and to do so in secret, and
(b) to stand for public office and, if elected, to hold office.

(1) In your opinion, will a policy that makes provision for compul-
sory participation in elections conflict with other values on
which the idea of democracy is based? Give reasons for your
answer.
(2) Why do you think the government of state X wants to introduce
compulsory voting? Give reasons for your answer.
(3) Explain what your advice to the government in state X would be.
Discuss the arguments on which your advice is based.

The above is an indication of how conflicting values may arise

when dealing with particular policy issues. During the years of
apartheid, the policy of conscription (that is compulsory military
service by all white males residing in South Africa) conflicted with a
variety of other values that prevailed in society. The National Party
government, however, ignored all pleas to amend its policy in this
regard. At present affirmative action and nondiscrimination is
another set of conflicting values within the South African context.

4.7 LACK OF RESOURCES AND FUNDS

The success of a policy does not depend only on its proper

formulation on paper and in all the required policy documents. The

88
 outcome of a policy will largely depend on its successful
implementation. However, the successful implementation will
depend on whether the necessary resources and, notably, funds
and skilled personnel are available.

No health policy aimed at improving the general health of a society

can succeed without the necessary trained health workers and
medical doctors. Health services are costly and require funds.
It is usually in the area of the availability of resources that many
policies fail in developing countries. The irony facing developing
countries such as South Africa is that there is usually a need for
policies that will improve the standard of living of the population.
per capita income On the other hand, the per capita income (an indication of the value
of the goods and services each individual earns on average in a
country) in many developing countries is so low that it is
impossible to fund these policies. There is usually an extremely
small tax base (that is people that earn enough to pay taxes). Even
in South Africa the tax base is extremely small in comparison to
developed countries, though South Africa has one of the highest per
capita incomes on the African continent. In developed countries
more extravagant policies may be implemented at a lower tax rate,
while developing countries find it difficult to implement essential
policies at a far higher tax rate.

It is important to bear in mind that shifting the spending of the

income in a state from the private to the public sector (an attractive
option for many governments in the developing world) does not
increase the per capita income in that state.

Lack of resources may also influence other policy areas, for example
foreign policy. Japan, one of the states with the highest per capita
incomes in the world, only has limited natural resources and for this
reason international trade and foreign policy are extremely
important to the Japanese economy.

4.8 UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES

A policy usually sets particular objectives. The implementation of a

particular policy may, however, have an effect on society and other
policy areas that was neither intended nor anticipated by the policy-
makers. A number of factors may play a role in this regard.

Policy issues are often interlinked. A policy may result in a change

in the allocation of funds. Reduced spending on education in order

PLC202-V/1 89
 to be able to provide more welfare services could have serious long-
term effects in the sense that the future economic productivity of the
population could be adversely affected. This could result in an
inevitable decline in the economy and an increased demand for
welfare services.

Instead of alleviating a problem, a policy may indeed exacerbate a

particular problem. For example, research by Charles Murray has
indicated that welfare services, instead of providing a solution to
poverty, often create a dependency on welfare services.

A policy may lead to the institutionalisation of particular interests

which may make it difficult to change or reverse that policy. An
example in this regard is the attempt to curtail nuclear weapons, in
particular in Russia. Reduced spending on the development on
nuclear technology has led to many out of work nuclear scientists
that are now finding employment with governments that are often
opposed to Western interests.

4.9 TRANSPARENCY

It is often alleged that in a democracy all policy should be

transparent Ð in other words, the electorate should be fully
informed. However, this is not always possible. Making a particular
policy transparent may, in fact, impact negatively on that policy.
This is particularly true of foreign and security policy. For example,
if the public had known of the South African government's
interference in the Lesotho election issue, things might have turned
out differently. Premature insight into a policy may, for example,
cause panic.

However, so-called hidden policy agendas may have disadvan-

tages. Policies may be formulated and implemented without the
knowledge of, or input from the citizens. In fact it may even happen
that policies are formulated and made that do not have the
approval of the citizens. During the Struggle in South Africa, most
of the whites in South Africa were unaware of the government's
policies in dealing with the Struggle.

4.10 SUMMARY

Making policy is a complex process in which the policy-makers

90
often have to deal with a variety of dilemmas. Some of these
dilemmas may have more serious consequences than others. The
fact is that for policies to succeed, it is important that policy-makers
pay attention to these dilemmas.

TEST YOURSELF
The following questions are based on all the sections of this study unit.
Use them to assess your understanding of the unit.
Write down all the dilemmas that were discussed in this study unit.
(1) Discuss each of these dilemmas in 50 to 100 words.
(2) Try to write down South African examples of these dilemmas.
(3) How would you deal with these dilemmas if you were a policy-
maker?
(4) In your opinion, which of these dilemmas is the most important?
Give reasons for your choice.
(5) In your opinion, which of these dilemmas is the least important?
Give reasons for your choice.

SOURCES
Anderson, JE. 1997. Public policymaking. 3rd edition. Boston: Houghton
Mifflin.
Greenaway, J, Smith, S & Street, J. 1992. Deciding factors in British politics: a
case studies approach. London: Routledge.
Harrop, M (ed). 1993[1992]. Power and policy in liberal democracies.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lane, JE. 1995 [1993]. The public sector: concepts, models and approaches. 2nd
edition. London: Sage.

PLC202-V/1 91
 T H E M E 3

POLICY ANALYSIS

Study unit 5: Theoretical frameworks for policy analysis

 STUDY
UNIT 5

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS
FOR POLICY ANALYSIS

OBJECTIVES

After you have completed this study unit, you should be able to
Š identify the main approaches toward and theories of policy analysis
Š distinguish between them to determine which is the most appropriate for which
particular purpose
Š apply each approach to its intended purpose

5.1 PURPOSE OF THIS STUDY UNIT

Normally you will find a discussion of approaches, theories or
models in the beginning of textbooks on public policy. They
constitute a major portion of any discussion on policy, but seldom
their relevance or purpose is explained for a person who is directly
involved in the making of policy. Therefore, in this course we used
another approach.
We have already mentioned the two uses of policy analysis. For the
purpose of this study unit we shall deal with them in the form of the
research or analysis of an observer or policy researcher. (In study
unit 3 the discussion of policy evaluation included the bulk of

PLC202-V/1 95
 approaches and instruments used by policy analysts who are direct
participants in the process.) The approaches and instruments of the
observer are not always clear Ð hence the idea to transform the
conventional approaches and theories used mainly for purposes of
description into approaches and theories used for explanation and
analysis. The incentive for this edeavour comes from the fact that
most of the time policy-makers are not aware of those theories and
are therefore not consciously influenced by them. Thus, we cannot
argue that policy-making was designed on the basis of a particular
approach and that such approach would therefore provide an
explanation of the process if applied as a descriptive framework.
Instead, the analyst should be able to characterise and classify
policy actions on the basis of available theoretical knowledge. This
implies that the researcher or analyst should move from the present
to the past in order to determine what considerations and
assumptions were used in the policy-making process, who was
involved in the process, what procedures or stages were followed;
what were the policy options and many more. To achieve it, what
happened in the past had to be reconstructed (synthesised) but at
the same time also analysed. On the basis of it and with the
assistance of a theoretical understanding of policy-making, predic-
tions can be made.
Accordingly, we have to identify the theoretical frameworks and
approaches that can assist the policy analyst in conducting a proper
analysis. A host of approaches and theories are available, of which
the following is a selection:

Š rational choice theory (and game theories)

Š public choice theory
Š collective choice theory
Š corporatism
Š neostatism (new institutionalism)
Š organisational process
Š bureaucratic politics
Š ``garbage can''
Š government politics
Š systems theory and pluralism
Š incrementalism
Š group theories
Š elite theories

In this study unit we shall summarise a few of them.

96
ACTIVIT Y 5.1

You should summarise the following models in Cloete and Wissink

(2000: chapter 2):

Š the elite/mass model

Š the group model

Š the institutional model

Š the social interaction model

Š the systems model

Š the policy network and communities model

Š the chaos, complexity and quantum models

Also summarise the discussions in Allison and Zelikow (1999) of the

Š rational actor model

Š organisational behaviour model

Š governmental politics model

After you have also studied sections 5.2 to 5.6 in this study guide, you
should determine how the above-mentioned models overlap with, or
differ from, the theoretical frameworks discussed in these sections.

5.2 RATIONAL CHOICE THEORY

The rational choice theory or rational actor model is currently one of

the most popular theoretical frameworks in Political Science,
though it is a target of severe criticism by post-modernism. Part
of the criticism is that rationalism is associated with an empirical
orientation which is presented as scientific, because it is ostensibly
value-free. Post-modernism emphasises the relative nature of
science. Rationality in the sense used here is built on two
cornerstones, namely the role of logic and the ability to verify
actions. Anthony Downs (Greenaway et al 1992:16) identified
rationality in terms of the following five assumptions:

PLC202-V/1 97
 (1) Persons can always make a decision when confronted with a
range of alternatives.
(2) Persons rank the alternatives facing them in order of their
preference.
(3) The preference ranking is transitive (ie if A is preferred to B,
and B is preferred to C, then logically A will be preferred to
C).
(4) Persons will choose the highest ranking alternative from
their preference ordering.
(5) Persons always make the same decision each time they are
confronted with the same alternatives.

For public policy the rational choice theory assumes that a rational
policy is one that achieves maximum social gain, that is gains to
society that exceed costs by the greatest margin. It has the following
two implications:

(1) A policy should not be adopted if its costs exceed its benefits.
(2) Decision-makers should choose the policy that produces the
greatest benefit over costs, in other words maximise the
benefits.

The five assumptions of rationality can be applied to public policy

as the following assumptions about policy-makers:

(1) They have a complete understanding and knowledge of

society's value preferences and their relative weights or
importance.
(2) They are aware of all the available policy options.
(3) They are informed about all the consequences (advantages
and disadvantages) of each of the policy options.
(4) They can determine the costs and benefits of each option.
(5) They will select the most benificial, efficient and cost-
effective option.

It is difficult to give practical content to these assumptions, because

they imply that the decision-makers have full knowledge of the
value preferences of a society as a whole and not only of particular
groups. They also imply that the policy-makers are informed about
the order of preference or importance of these values. Moreover, the
assumptions require full information about all the available options
plus their likely consequences (costs and benefits). That predictive

98
 capacity is seldom available, owing to incomplete information and
insufficient theoretical instruments for predictions (Dye 1998:14±
25).

Two further implications of the rational choice theory for policy-

making are that it assumes clear-cut stages in the policy process and
that policies are made by a hierarchy of decision-makers. The
implied stages on which rational choice depends are, first,
identifying the nature of the policy problem, then determining the
overriding policy objectives and assessing the likely consequences
of each, and finally selecting the option best suited to attaining the
overriding objective.

Rational choice also assumes a leader at the apex of a hierarchy.

However, in reality most decisions are the responsibility of a
collectivity, such as a committee, cabinet, agency or parliament
(Greenaway et al 1992:16±17).
The theory furthermore assumes that policy-making is concerned
maximising utility with maximising utility. Utility is a common good Ð in other words,
a general interest that benefits the greatest number of interested and
affected parties and that is supported by them. Once again, a
number of assumptions are made to support it:

(1) Utility is a measurable good, in other words its outcomes can

be determined and measured.
(2) A set of well-defined and mutually exclusive policy options
are available from which to choose.
(3) The decision-makers are able to calculate the amount of
utility to derive from each option.
Cost-benefit analysis is the best means used so far to determine the
utility of an option.

Related to the maximisation of utility is the approach lately

win-win policy analysis promoted by the Policy Studies Organisation, of a win-win policy
analysis or of Super-Optimum Solutions (SOS). This approach, of
which Stuart Nagel is a prominent proponent, can be related to
some of the principles (discussed later) of maximising payoffs,
followed in game theory. An SOS public policy is typically capable
of achieving conservative and liberal goals simultaneously without
striking a compromise between them. A super-optimum solution is
considered to be a special form of a win-win solution in the sense
that its gains exceed the best initial expectations of each side.

game theories Game theories are a special variation of rational choice theories. Their

PLC202-V/1 99
 distinguishing feature is that they include a condition of competi-
tion or contestation. Two or more participants are involved and
have choices to make. The choice made by one depends on the
choices made by the other, or what choices are expected to be made
by the other. For policy-making this means that there is no
independent best or most cost-effective policy option, but the
``best'' also depends upon what the others do.

The idea of a game is useful to denote the fact that decision-makers

are confronted by choices that are interdependent or interrelated.
Policy-makers (``the players'') must adjust their conduct to reflect
not only their own preferences, desires and abilities, but also their
expectations about what the others would do. Game theory does
not describe how persons actually make a decision, but rather how
they would make a decision in competitive conditions if everyone
involved were acting completely rational. The rational outcome of
policy decision-making is therefore dependent on what the other
participants do.

According to Dye, a key concept in game theory is strategy. It refers

to decision-making in which a set of moves is designed to achieve
optimum results (similar to Nagel's super-optimum solutions) after
considering the opponent's, possible strategy. In terms of the
diagram below four options are possible, namely mini-max, max-
mini, mini-mini (lose-lose) or max-max (win-win):

B
+ 7

7 1 2 mini-mini

A 7 + 7 7

4 max-max 3

+ + + 7

Mini-max refers to a strategy that minimises the maximum loss,

maxi-mini is to maximise the minimum gain, mini-mini is to
minimise the minimum gain and max-max is to maximise the

100
maximum gain (Dye 1998:29±31). The diagram represents two
persons, parties, countries or any other political actors. They each
have two options: to respond positively (+) or negatively (7) in a
particular circumstance. Square 1 is a situation in which A responds
negatively and B positively and in square 3 it is exactly the
opposite. In square 2 both A and B respond negatively, while in
square 4 both A and B respond positively (the win-win situation).
All four possibilities can be viewed in terms of a payoff or reward
or the value that each participant receives as a result of the positive
or negative choice they have made. The following is an example:

B
+ 7

7 5; 71 7 8; 78

+ 73; 73 7 1; 75

Depending on the expectation of what the opponent's choice will

be, the risks that the decision-maker is willing to run and the payoff
or positive rewards the decision-maker expects, one of the four
options will be preferred. So far we have worked with examples of
two sides involved in a situation (2-persons game theory), but it is
also possible to use n-person game theory, where n represents any
number more than two. Multiparty negotiations or the choices of
the parties in Parliament on a particular policy issue or legislation
are examples of such a situation.

The best-known variations of game theory are the Prisoner's

Dilemma, the Battle of Avranches, Chicken and the Battle of the
Sexes. They are now briefly explained:

(1) PRISONER'S DILEMMA: Two arrested persons are accused

of the same murder but they cannot communicate with each
other. Both were implicated in the murder and will therefore
be convicted but no sufficient evidence exists to determine
the actual murderer and the one who will receive a heavier

PLC202-V/1 101
 sentence than the other. A confession by one would be
sufficient to determine it. The second diagram represents the
four options. The worst option is when neither of them co-
operates and they are both sentenced to eight years. If both
co-operate, both will receive three years, but if one co-
operates and the other refuses, the co-operative accused will
receive only one year. Co-operation can therefore result in a
conviction of either one or three years, depending on what
the other accused does, hence the dilemma.
Such a dilemma is found quite often in political situations,
especially in diplomacy and international crisis situations.
The Cuban crisis of 1962 and Saddam Hussein's occupation
of Kuwait in 1990 are examples.
(2) BATTLE OF AVRANCHES: On 31 July 1944, close to the end
of World War II, the Americans and Allied troops under
Bradley broke through the German defences commanded by
Von Kluge at Avranches, the gateway from Normandy into
Brittany, in German-occupied France. This battle provided
us with another scenario which emphasises the minimisation
of maximum potential losses (min-max). More dangerous
and risky options under conditions of war (or high-risk
political situations in which the main objective is to minimise
losses) are max-max (to maximise potential gains) and max-
min (to maximise minimum gains).
Bradley had two options: to maintain his status quo position,
which he had entrenched, that was relatively safe and, if he
were to be attacked by the Germans, would result in losses
but also a victory over the Germans, or to move eastwards
with a better chance for a victory but at a higher price of
losses. Von Kluge also had two options: to attack the Allied
troops and suffer huge losses or to withdraw and consolidate
his forces. The costs would be the following:

102
 Von Kluge

attack withdraw

eastward

7 4; 78 7 3; 72

Bradley

status quo 7 2; 7 10 7 1; 72

If both sides applied the mini-max rule, Bradley would have

preferred the status quo and Von Kluge would have
withdrawn. However, Hitler interfered and ordered the
Germans to attack (the max-max option), which failed and
caused the worst outcome for the Germans.
(3) CHICKEN: In political terms this variation is associated with
brinkmanship. It includes a number of games premised on a
test of nerves. These games usually involve two persons
facing each other in a highly risky or dangerous confronta-
tional situation in which the one who first pulls out is a
coward or ``chicken''. It highlights the max-max rule in
volatile or highly risky situations but where maximum gain
is a priority. Diplomacy and international crisis situations are
often characterised by the Chicken options.
(4) BATTLE OF THE SEXES: This variation represents the
options that encourage compromises and negotiation. Two
persons with different preferences (a husband and wife)
want to visit friends and attend a sports event at the same
time. The two options are mutually exclusive but they want
to do it together. The most rational compromise would be
that they attend the sports event on one night and visit the
friends at another time. If one of them insists on her/his
preference, either the other will lose everything or, if they
cannot reach a compromise and stay at home, both will lose
everything. Many situations in politics are similar, especially
those characterised by negotiations or deal-making.

PLC202-V/1 103
 If you are interested in reading more about rational choice, you can
consult the following books.

FURTHER READING
Dye, Thomas R. 1998. Understanding public policy. 9th edition. Upper
Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
Greenaway, John et al. 1992. Deciding factors in British politics: a case-studies
approach. London: Routledge.
Lane, Jan-Erik. 1995. The public sector: concepts, models and approaches.
London: Sage.
Meehan, Eugene. 1981. Reasoned argument in social science: linking research
to policy. Westport, Conn: Greenwood.
Nagel, Stuart (ed). 1998. Applications of super optimizing policy analysis. JAI
Press.

5.3 PLURALISM

Pluralism is premised on the prevalence and desirability of

diversity and plurality. It is related to the free market that values
competition and unimpaired initiative as the driving forces of
humankind and as a guarantee against authoritarianism and
unchecked centralisation. It is also associated with the libertarian
concept of an open society.

Philippe Schmitter (1974:96) describes pluralism as follows:

Pluralism can be defined as a system of interest representation in

which the constituent units are organised into an unspecified number
of multiple, voluntary, competitive, nonhierarchically ordered and
self-determined (as to type or scope of interest) categories which are
not specially licensed, recognised, subsidised, created or otherwise
controlled in leadership selection or interest articulation by the state
and which do not exercise a monopoly of representational activity
within their representative categories.

Pluralism thus prescribes a spontaneous formation of associations, a

numerical increase in associations, horizontal expansion in associa-
tions or interest groups and competitive interaction between them
depending on the desirability of such interaction. The focus is
therefore on the role of individuals and interest groups in policy-
making. The state (or government) is not considered as an active

104
participant in the interactions of policy-making. Its main function is
to act as a referee or arbiter between the interest groups. It should
therefore be non-partisan in the political process and does not have
interests of its own.

The systems approach of David Easton and Gabriel A Almond is

closely associated with pluralism. They treat public policy-making
as part of the political system, based on inputs (demands and
support), conversion of the inputs, outputs or rule application and
rule adjudication, and feedback. According to the pluralist's
viewpoint, the input process is open and accessible to any political
actor (individual or interest group), and these actors are therefore
free to participate in the policy-making process. Inputs from society
(for example, in the form of public opinion) should therefore be a
critical factor in the process.

Corporatism and neostatism are critical of pluralism's assumptions.

They do not accept the openness of the process and the state's
disinterest in it.

For further reading you can consult the following publications:

FURTHER READING
Almond, Gabriel A. 1983. Corporatism, pluralism and professional
memory. World Politics (35).
Dahl, Robert A. 1967. Pluralist democracy and the United States: conflict and
consent. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Dahl, Robert A. 1978. Pluralism revisited. Comparative Politics 10(2).
Easton, David. 1953. The political system. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Schmitter, PC. 1974. Still the century of corporatism? Review of Politics
36(1).

5.4 CORPORATISM

Conventional (liberal) democratic theory assumes that policy is

made by elected members of the legislature and the executive after
they have received inputs from society, individuals and groups. It is
a simplistic version of the pluralist approach. However, patterns of
policy-making are not always so linear and sometimes particular
interest groups are more intimately involved in the process.

PLC202-V/1 105
 Corporatism is one of these special relationships between govern-
ment and interest groups in policy-making.

Philippe Schmitter (1974:93±94) in 1974 started to describe a

corporatist relationship between government and a selected interest
group that it has recognised or licensed and ``granted a deliberate
representational monopoly within their respective categories in
exchange for observing certain controls on their selection of leaders
and articulation of demands and supports''. In other words, interest
groups are no longer entirely autonomous but receive a privileged
status in the policy-making process in exchange for the govern-
ment's influence in them.

Alan Cawson (quoted in Ponton and Gill 1982:197) described

corporatism as follows:

Corporatism is a politico-economic system in which the state directs

the activities of predominantly privately-owned industry in partner-
ship with the representatives of a limited number of singular,
compulsory, noncompetitive, hierarchically ordered and functionally
differentiated interest groups.

Cawson pointed out that corporatism places the emphasis on the

reciprocal relationship between the government and organised
interests in society in respect of the formation and execution of
public policy. Both the descriptions of Schmitter and of Cawson
make it clear that government remains dominant in the relation-
ship.

The implication of corporatism is that in certain circumstances the

modern state no longer reflects the pluralist ideas of freedom of
association and participation. A corporatist system presumes that
all important functional groups are involved in negotiations on any
or all important aspects of policy within a structure of incorpora-
tion. It is therefore a closed structure in which certain interest
groups and the government have a vested interest in certain areas
of policy, and in which access to these areas by others is precluded
by means of a closed policy network. According to Andrew Cox,
such a situation is very difficult to maintain in societies with a
capitalist and liberal-democratic political structure. It should,
however, not be seen as inherently undemocratic, because Austria
is best known for its corporatist relations. Nedlac in South Africa
also exhibits corporatist characteristics.

For the purpose of policy analysis, corporatism is an important

analytical instrument, especially in situations where interest groups

106
play a larger than normal role in policy-making. By `'normal'' we
mean the role ascribed to it by pluralism, of providing inputs or
being involved in lobbying. Especially if one interest group or
group of interest groups appears to be dominant and having special
access to the policy-making process, corporatism can be used as a
framework.

FURTHER READING:
Almond, GA. 1983. Corporatism, pluralism and professional memory.
World Politics (35).
Cawson, A. 1978. Pluralism, corporatism and the role of the state.
Government and opposition (13).
Cawson, A. 1986. Corporatism and political theory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Cox, Andrew. 1988. The Old and the New Testaments of corporatism: is it
a political form or method of policy-making? Political Studies 36(2),
June.
Lehmbruch, Gerhard & Schmitter, PC (eds). 1982. Patterns of corporatist
policy-making. Beverley Hills: Sage.
Molina, O & Rhodes, M. 2002. Corporatism: the past, present, and future
of a concept, in Annual review of political science, vol 5, edited by NW
Polsby. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Review:305±331.
Ponton, G & Gill, P. 1982. Introduction to politics. Oxford: Martin
Robertsen.
Schmitter, PC. 1974. Still the century of corporatism? Review of Politics
36(1).

5.5 PUBLIC CHOICE THEORY

Public choice is about applying economic principles to non-market

decision-making, especially applying economic analyses to public
policy-making. The distinction between private and public interests
as separate versions of human motivation is therefore pertinent.
Public choice theory challenges the notion that individuals act
differently in politics than they do in the economic market place. It
argues that all political actors seek to maximise their personal
benefits in politics as well as in the market place.

The following two notions underlie all public choice theories:

(1) Public sector actors behave as if they maximise their own

interests (interest maximisation).

PLC202-V/1 107
 (2) All social entities are fundamentally sets of individual actors
(methodological individualism).

The doctrine of selfishness as the basic motivational force of

individuals is problematic in the presence of collective actions.
Public wishes are somehow a function of the aggregation of
individual wishes about more than only their own interests.
Therefore Jan-Erik Lane (1995:209±210) argues that selfish personal
interests must be weighted up against vicarious personal interests
in cases of collective actions. According to him, ``the doctrine that
individuals somehow maximize some utility function consisting of
their own evaluations does not imply that they necessarily seek
their own well-defined economic interests in every activity''.

Individualism assumes that all social aggregates Ð ranging from

groups to huge social formations Ð are nothing but sets of
individual human beings Ð exactly the opposite of holism. The
interests of social aggregates are therefore reducible to the interests
of the individuals constituting the aggregate. In practical terms, it
implies that the individuals prominent in the public domain watch
their own well-defined economic interests and therefore are mainly
concerned about re-election, and maximising their salary, power
and prestige.

The logical implication of the discussion so far leads us to the

question: Why do we need a public sector if the economic market
place is already there for the maximisation of self-interests?
According to Dye (1998:32±33), government must perform at least
two functions that the marketplace is unable to handle: providing
public goods and intervening in externalities.

Public goods are goods and services that an individual cannot

afford but that have to be supplied to everyone. The market cannot
provide them, because their costs exceed their value to any single
consumer, and the individual recipient of the goods cannot prevent
others from using it. National defence is an example: protection
from foreign intervention is too much for a single person to buy,
and no-one can be excluded from its benefits.

An externality occurs when an activity of one (individual, group or

association) imposes uncompensated costs on others. Environmen-
tal issues such as pollution or smoking, where a polluter imposes
costs on others, are an example of this. Government, in line with its
obligation in terms of a social contract, has to respond by regulating
the activities or imposing penalties.

108
Public choice theory also explains why political parties and
candidates generally do not offer clear policy proposals in an
election manifesto but are more interested in winning elections. The
interests of politicians and bureaucrats are separate from those of
the voters in the sense that they are interested in being re-elected,
gaining greater authority and prestige and expanding the power of
government.

How would you explain the relevance of the public choice theory
for policy analysis? Consider who is identified as critical players in
the policy-making process: the individual as basic unit, the
bureaucracy, interest groups, and government. Whose interests
are considered in the process of public policy-making? Individual
selfish and private interests, or public interests and the common
good. What is the dominant motivation for policy decisions? The
maximisation of interest. These are all useful indicators for a policy
analyst when, for example, environmentalist policies have to be
analysed.

For further reading you can consult the following books:

FURTHER READING
Dye, Thomas R. 1998. Understanding public policy. 9th edition. Upper
Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
Lane, Jan-Erik. 1995. The public sector: concepts, models and approaches.
London: Sage.

5.6 NEOSTATISM

Neostatism is part of a broader school of thought known as New

Institutionalism. It is often placed opposite pluralism, because of its
ostensible lack of emphasis on the state as a political actor. In
defence of pluralism, David Easton identified the following four
reasons for the revival of the statist concept:

(1) It serves to understand the failure of the countercultural

movement of the sixties and seventies to establish a more
prosperous society. The concept was found in the revival of
Marxist intellectual thought.
(2) In the search for a form of order and stability in social life,
the state is a strong locus of power.

PLC202-V/1 109
 (3) The state could be used as a ``scapegoat'' to be blamed for
social problems.
(4) In the state, the policy analysis movement of the seventies
and eighties found a collective term useful in identifying the
source of public policy, which is relevant for our purposes.

In the eighties neostatism received a boost with the publication of

Bringing the state back in, in which Theda Skocpol was quite
prominent. The main criticism against pluralism was that it
explained the state's actions on the basis of interaction of interest
groups or social classes. The government is primarily regarded as
an arena in which economic interest groups or other associations
compete or co-operate to determine public policy. These decisions
are regarded as allocations of benefits to competing groups. The
government or state itself is not regarded as an independent actor in
the political process.

In contrast, neostatism makes the following assumptions:

(1) The state is a political actor in its own right and is potentially
autonomous; it is not a neutral referee.
(2) The state has interests of its own.
(3) A distinction should be made between the state and
government.
(4) The emphasis should be on the government's function of
governing and controlling, and less on pluralism's focus on
the allocation of resources.
(5) Individuals' behaviour is restricted by institutional restric-
tions. The structure of the state and government limits their
perception of what their own interests and political resources
are.

The relevance of neostatism for policy analysis can be described as

follows:

One of the most challenging tasks of policy analysis is to determine

who is involved in policy-making and what is the contribution of
each participant in the process. The appropriateness of pluralism,
corporatism and neostatism depends on the particular circum-
stances in which each is used, but they can all provide an answer to
the above question. (Rational and public choice explain how
decisions are made.)

Accordingly, neostatism can be used for determining the sources of

110
public policy and for the implementation of policy. The bureaucracy
plays a very important role in the framework of neostatism, and
therefore it can also be linked to the public choice theory. In view of
the dominant role of government in a corporatist policy-making
process, neostatism can also be related to corporatism. These are all
factors to be taken into account when determining why neostatism
is not only a state theory but also applicable to approaches toward
public policy.

Neostatism is criticised from different perspectives. Pluralists do

not accept the criticism that the state is not granted due recognition
for its role as an independent political actor. JS Migdal is also critical
of the fact that neostatism apparently focuses too much on the state
and that state-society relations suffer as a result.

If you would like to read more about it, you can consult the
following publications:

FURTHER READING
Almond, Gabriel. 1983. Corporatism, pluralism and professional memory.
World Politics (35).
Almond, Gabriel A. 1988. The return to the state. American Political Science
Review 82(3).
Evans, D, Rueschemeyer, A & Skocpol, T (eds). 1985. Bringing the state back
in. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Migdal, JS. 1988. Strong societies and weak states: state-society relations and
state capabilities in the Third World. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
Press.
Nordlinger, EA, Lowi, TJ & Fabbrini, S. 1988. The return to the state:
critiques. American Political Science Review 82(3).
Yudelman, David. 1984. The emergence of modern South Africa. Cape Town:
David Philip.

5.7 SUMMARY

In this study unit we have looked at five frameworks (approaches

or theories) that you and other policy analysts can use to assess or
evaluate a policy by determining how decisions were taken and by
whom. An assessment or analysis of the outputs and impact of a
policy was the focus of section 3.7 in this study guide.

PLC202-V/1 111
 You are reminded of the two uses of policy analysis. In this study
unit we applied it to the work of an observer or researcher of the
policy process. These theoretical frameworks can be used irrespec-
tive of your own position regarding the policy-making process
(either as an observer or as a participant), depending on which
aspect of the policy has to be analysed.

We have not paid attention to practical exercises in applying these

fundamentals or other aspects of analysing policy. These will be the
subjects of some of your assignments. We would like to advise you,
however, to design exercises for yourself and take a critical stance
towards the appropriateness of these frameworks for the task of
analysing a practical situation.

REFLECTION
Now that you have completed this study unit, you should be able to
Š explain which of the theoretical frameworks for policy analysis are
most appropriate for the tasks facing you
Š distinguish between the frameworks and show that you under-
stand the purpose of each of them, so that you can select the
most appropriate ones to help you with the task at hand
Š apply each of them as they are intended to be used, but to make
adjustments to them when necessary

112
 STUDY
UNIT 6

CASE STUDY: SOUTH AFRICAN

MACROECONOMIC POLICIES

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study unit is to integrate all the foregoing study units into the form of
a practical application. Hence, after completing this study unit you should be able to do
practical policy analysis by
Š identifying and using the main sources of a policy
Š identifying the main participants in the policy process and analysing their role in
the processes
Š understanding the influence of the external environment in the process and
incorporating it into an analysis
Š performing policy evaluation in terms of identifying the policy objectives and
using them as reference points for an impact analysis and determining the
outputs of a policy

6.1 BACKGROUND

The African National Congress (ANC) came to power in South

Africa in April 1994 as the first democratically-elected government
after the apartheid era. One of its primary objectives as a liberation
movement was to implement a radically new approach to

PLC202-V/1 113
 development Ð especially socioeconomic development (see, for
example, the Freedom Charter, 1955, as a blueprint for develop-
ment). Development needs were determined by the fact that
apartheid produced a systemically or structurally skewed state of
development. Some people referred to it as First World and Third
World components in one country. (The South African Communist
Party, for example, refers to it as ``colonialism of a special type'',
whereas Neville Alexander calls it ``racist capitalism''.) It means
that the levels of development are unevenly distributed.

Moreover, in general, South Africa finds itself in a context of

development as part of the African continent and the South Ð
hence the double burden the country has to contend with in respect
of development.

In view of this context, the ANC as the government-in-waiting

before the 1994 general election, had to enter a process of
developing policies that would address the needs explained above.
In the rest of this study unit we shall look at how they went about
this, and the results of their actions.

ACTIVIT Y 6.1

Before you get to the essence of the case study, you should read about
policy evaluation and other case [Link] following are a few titles:
Cloete, Fanie & Wissink, Henry (eds). 2000. Improving public policy.
Pretoria: Van Schaik (especially ch 10: ``Policy evaluation or as-
sessment'':210 -237).
Allison, Graham & Zelikow, Philip. 1999. Essence of decision: explain-
ing the Cuban missile crisis. 2nd edition. NewYork: Longman.
(This is a case study of the Cuban missile crisis in October 1962. It is
an example of policy evaluation of a foreign policy. It applies various
theoretical frameworks, notably the rational actor/choice theory, orga-
nisational behaviour model and governmental politics model.)
Greenaway, John, Smith, Steve & Street, John. 1992. Deciding factors
in British politics: a case study approach. London: Routledge.
(A number of case studies are discussed in this book. Although it is
focused on British policy issues, it provides a wide spectrum of exam-
ples, such as the Falklands war and HIV/AIDS.)

FEEDBACK
Allison and Zelikow (1999) are acutely aware of how decisions are made,
who are involved in those decisions and how they can be analysed in theore-
tical frameworks or models. This work will help you to understand more fully

114
the relevance of study unit 5. Greenaway et al (1992) are more concerned
with the political considerations and do not really place the case studies in
a theoretical setting. The two books read together therefore complement
each other admirably.
The work by Cloete and Wissink (2000) is a general introduction to policy
analysis, with a South African frame of reference, and most of you should
therefore find it useful.

6.2 HOW DOES ONE ANALYSE THIS POLICY?

We said earlier that policy analysis can mean two things: (1) the
way in which an observer or researcher looks at all the dimensions
of the policy process; or (2) the role of a participant in the process,
conducting an analysis about a particular aspect of the process, such
as evaluating the impact of a policy. We shall combine the two as
much as possible in this study unit.

This means that we shall concentrate on the following questions:

Š What are the main policies or policy frameworks directing

socioeconomic development in South Africa?
Š What are the main sources of these policies?
Š Who are the main participants in these policy processes?
Š What does the external environment that we have to
incorporate into our analysis look like?
Š What are the main objectives of the policies that we can use
as criteria for our analysis?
Š How does one determine the impact and outputs of the
policies? (This includes identifying the most appropriate
theoretical framework available for such an analysis.)

In this case study we will not analyse stage 3 (see study unit 3),
namely the policy-formulation and decision-making stage in the
policy-making process. In other words, we will not look at all the
policy options considered by the decision-makers, and how they
ultimately selected their preferred option. In this case study we are
already confronted by a formulated policy (or chosen option), and
we shall therefore concentrate on stages 4 to 6 Ð in other words, the
analysis focuses primarily on the implementation and results
(outputs and impact) of the policy. In other policy case studies

PLC202-V/1 115
 such as those dealing with foreign policy issues (the Cuban missile
crisis analysed by Allison & Zelikow 1999 is a case in point), it is
important to look at all the options available to the decision-makers.
You should therefore not interpret this case study as an absolute
blueprint for policy analysis, because the approach may differ from
one case to the next.

We shall now proceed with the analysis of South Africa's

macroeconomic policies since 1994.

6.3 THE MAIN POLICIES

The two main policies that have been used since 1994 are

Š the Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP)

from 1994 onwards
Š the Growth, Employment and Redistribution (GEAR) policy,
announced in 1996

There are differences of opinion about whether GEAR replaced the

RDP or whether it is in fact an extension of the RDP. Government
members responsible for macroeconomic matters such as President
Mbeki and the Ministers of Finance (Trevor Manuel), Trade and
Industry (Alec Erwin), Public Enterprises (Jeff Radebe) and Public
Service and Administration (Geraldine Fraser-Moleketi), defend
GEAR as a continuation of the RDP. Critics on the left (such as the
trade union federation, Cosatu, and the South African Communist
Party [SACP]) see it as a break with the RDP philosophy and as a
deviation towards neoliberal economic views.

The question about the relationship between the RDP and GEAR
can be the focus of policy analysis on its own, but we shall not
concentrate on it here.

Now that we know what the main policies are, the next question is:
Where can we find information about the exact and specific
contents of the policies?

6.4 MAIN SOURCES OF THE POLICIES

In the case of macro-economic policies we are fortunate that a

116
number of comprehensive policy documents are in fact available,
namely

Š the original RDP document prepared before the April 1994

election by the ANC and its Alliance partners
Š the RDP White Paper, adopted by the Government of
National Unity in September 1994
Š the GEAR document prepared by a technical team of the
Department of Finance (1996)
Š two policy and strategy documents prepared in the Office of
the President, namely
Ð Urban Renewal Strategy
Ð Rural Development Strategy

Please return to study unit 2 (``The sources of public policy'') where

you will find a discussion of other sources applicable to our
analysis. These include the following:

(1) The election manifestos. The ANC is the dominant party in

government and its election manifestos for the elections in all
three spheres of government are therefore worth consulting.
Such a manifesto often articulates what a party wishes to do
in the next government's term. In other words, it sets policy
targets or policy objectives for the majority party. These
targets are, however, regularly revised during a govern-
ment's term of office.
(2) Official discussion documents and white papers. The documents
listed as the main sources of policies (sec 6.4), suit this
category. They are the basic documents and therefore enjoy
high levels of authority.
(3) The budget. Every year the Minister of Finance tables the
national budget in Parliament. A budget provides a clear
indication of how the government allocates priorities to its
different policies. In the early period after 1994, the RDP
Fund was used as the main financial source of the RDP. Since
the introduction of GEAR, the emphasis has shifted to the
main budget. While formal policy documents seldom
change, the budget is more flexible and each year adjust-
ments can be made to the way in which a policy item is
funded and implemented. A specific aspect of GEAR which
has a direct bearing on the budget, is the policy objectives
regarding budget deficits. (The fiscal deficit is the difference

PLC202-V/1 117
 between a state's income Ð mainly taxes and tariffs Ð and
its expenditure, expressed as a percentage of the Gross
Domestic Product.) The policy goals were as follows:

1996 Ð 5,1%
1997 Ð 4,5%
1998 Ð 4%
1999 Ð 3,5%
2000 Ð 3%

To achieve these goals, the government had two options:

(a) to increase income, including tax increases
(b) to decrease government spending, that is, reduce the
budgets of departments and provinces

Another budget-related source is the Medium-term Expen-

diture Framework, normally announced by the Minister of
Finance in Parliament towards the end of the year. Its aim is
to provide insight into or an early warning of the
government's fiscal philosophy for the next three years.
With regard to GEAR, it sets certain targets, including
inflation targets. At present, the target of the CPIX (consumer
price index without interest rates) is three to six percent.
(4) Speeches, policy statements and articles. One of the main policy
speeches is the President's ``state of the nation'' speech at the
opening of Parliament, normally in February. The speech is
usually an assessment of the government's achievements in
the past year and also sets out the legislative/parliamentary
programme and policy objectives for the coming year. In the
2003 speech, for example, President Mbeki said the follow-
ing:
... we have, for some years, implemented GEAR, among
other things to generate the resources for us to address
the social needs of our people. As a result of our
successes in this regard, this year will see a further
expansion of services to the people.
This will cover a number of areas including old age and
disability pensions, the child support grant which will
be extended progressively to cover children up to the
age of 14, the school feeding scheme, food and nutrition,
education, health, water and electricity ... .

118
 Policy statements are often made by ministers and other
senior government officials. An important example of such
statements is the Cabinet lekgotla held in January each year to
plan for the coming year. A follow-up lekgotla is usually held
in the middle of the year to assess the government's
performance up to then. At the conclusion of such meetings,
public statements or press releases are normally made. Policy
matters are generally the focus of attention, and therefore
also important for our purposes regarding GEAR.
Policy statements made by the ANC but not in its capacity as
government are related to official policy statements. In some
instances, the views of government and those of the ANC
may differ. (A case in point is the statement made by the
ANC Secretary-General at an antiwar demonstration in
February 2003 to the effect that the USA could attack South
Africa if it wanted to take control of its mineral wealth. The
Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs repudiated him and
conceded that some ANC statements could be out of line
with the government's official policy.)
The ANC's highest policy-making body is the National
Conference. It convenes every five years. Between confer-
ences, the National Executive Committee (NEC) implements
Conference decisions and is the highest decision-making
body. The National Working Committee meets every two
weeks and is a type of management committee. For our
purposes, the discussion documents prepared for the
National Conference and the policy resolutions adopted
there are of vital importance. NEC statements are equally
important, although not all of them deal with policy matters.
One statement in particular, is the NEC's annual 8 January
(ie the ANC's anniversary) statement in which not only ANC
matters but also policy issues are raised. Announcements
made in this statement are often elaborated on in the
presidential ``state of the nation'' parliamentary speech.
(5) Actions of policy-makers. Policies can also be made through the
actions or inaction of policy-makers and by the implemen-
tors of policies. In other words, this is not something one
reads about in a policy document or statement. By observing
the conduct of persons involved in the policy one learns
more about the policy itself. For example, in the context of
GEAR, large budget allocations have been made to social
welfare (eg old-age pensions). The policy is therefore clear Ð
it is a priority for government. However, in several

PLC202-V/1 119
 provinces, at the end of the financial year, substantial
amounts of money had still not been distributed. The reason
for this could be a lack of capacity to distribute the money or
a deliberate policy decision. You, as a policy analyst, have to
establish the reason for it, and whether it has policy
implications. (Two of the best-known policy areas which
rely on the actions of policy-makers are the government's
policy towards Zimbabwe and on HIV/AIDS.)

ACTIVIT Y 6.2

A critical factor in all forms of policy is the question: How do we take

decisions? Decisions (or making choices) are the essence of policy -
making, implementation and evaluation. Study unit 5 makes a sug-
gestion in this respect: decisions are taken rationally. This rationality
is, in some instances, based on economic market analogies (public
choice). Another variation is Eugene Meehan's notion of ``reasoned ac-
tion''.
If you would like to read more about Meehan's notion, consult his book:
Meehan, Eugene J. 1981. Reasoned argument in social science: linking
research to [Link], Conn: Greenwood.

His ideas about ``choice''are most relevant for reasoned action. Choice,
according to him, is a set of outcomes or consequences available to a
specific decision-maker. Political theories can be used to predict
those outcomes in future situations. Choice entails identifying the pre-
ferred outcome. For the purpose of such a choice, the following two
instruments are necessary:
(1) the transitive arrangement of available options (the same as
assumption 2 in the rational choice theory ö see sec 5.2)
(2) a policy which correlates the generalised structure with a parti-
cular action

According to Meehan (1981), patterns of preference are assumed and

tested against the experience of living with these preferences. There-
fore, the test of both preferences and choices is the willingness of
those who have chosen them, to continue using them in full knowledge
of the available alternatives ö once again, a reaffirmation of the ra-
tional choice assumptions.
Once you have mastered Meehan's ideas, you can choose any policy
issue, such as housing or health, and apply the concept of ê reasoned
action to the process of making policy in that area.
(PLEASE
PLEASE NOTE:
NOTE Meehan's book and ideas are not compulsory study

120
 material ö they are intended for students who are interested in the
topic and wish to do further reading.)

6.5 MAIN PARTICIPANTS IN THE POLICY PROCESSES

In the previous section a number of participants emerged: the

governing political party and various institutions of the state. It is
important that we know who is involved in the policy processes.
We shall now return for a moment to study unit 5, and specifically
to the discussion of pluralism, corporatism and neostatism. The
answer to the question about who is involved, already provides an
indication of which of these frameworks to use for an analysis of the
RDP and GEAR.

In respect of such an analysis, a distinction is often made between

internal and external participants. Furthermore, the environment in
which the policy processes occur also warrants attention.

6.5.1 Internal participants

internal participants With regard to GEAR the following are internal participants in the
policy processes:

Š the ANC as a party

Š ANC-Alliance summits
Š Parliament
Š government
Š Nedlac
Š the Reserve Bank
Š participants in labour relations

[Link] The ANC as a party

The importance of its National Conference and the NEC (including

its annual lekgotla early in the year) have been mentioned. The ANC
has also established a Policy Committee (chaired by Jeff Radebe)
which is responsible for all aspects of policy development inside the

PLC202-V/1 121
 ANC. An astute policy analyst will carefully note what emerges
from this Committee and compare it with official government
policies. Since the ANC came to power in 1994 most of its policy-
making capacity has moved to government, Parliament, the
executive authorities or to private business. Its inability to make
its own contribution to policy development has now been realised
internally, and we can therefore expect it to gradually reassert itself
in this respect.

[Link] ANC-Alliance summits

Before 1994, the Tripartite Alliance (ANC, Cosatu, SACP) and the
South African National Civic Organisation (Sanco) jointly went
through seven drafts of the RDP policy document. Since then the
Alliance has lost its privileged access to policy development. The
emergence of GEAR demonstrated the changed dynamics between
the ANC and Cosatu/SACP, and a more complex relationship than
a simplistic corporatist policy-making partnership has developed,
as many previously predicted. The policy analyst should, however,
still closely monitor the outcome of Alliance summits as well as
publications such as the SACP's The African Communist, Umsebenzi
([Link]/umsebenzi/online/index/htm) and Bua Koma-
nisi. Cosatu's The Shopsteward ([Link]/shop/
[Link]) is also a valuable publication in this regard.

[Link] Parliament

In Parliament many processes that are relevant to policy need to be

monitored. We mentioned earlier the President's ``state of the
nation'' speech and the Minister of Finance's budget speech. The
budget is discussed piece by piece in the budget votes of the
individual ministries. The final product appears in the Appropria-
tion Act, one of several pieces of legislation related to macro-
economic issues. Other important components of Parliament are the
parliamentary committees such as the portfolio committees (for
Finance, Trade and Industry, Agriculture, Public Enterprises, etc),
select committees and joint standing committees (eg the Standing
Committee on Public Accounts). (For your convenience you may
consult the Parliamentary Monitoring Group at [Link]
regarding parliamentary committees.)

122
[Link] Government

Government is the main internal participant in the macroeconomic

policy processes, because public policies are in the first instance
government policies. Macroeconomic policies involve a wide
spectrum of government bodies. It is one of the main tasks of a
policy analyst to identify which participants in government are
involved and what their contribution is to the policies. For our
purposes we can identify the following participants:

Š The Office of the President. Prior to 1996 the RDP was

managed by the Minister without Portfolio (Jay Naidoo) in
the President's Office. Later the Presidency appointed a
number of advisors to deal with GEAR-related matters such
as Prof Wiseman Nkuhlu and Bongani Khumalo. Their
responsibilities included among other things the Urban
Renewal and Rural Development Strategies.
Š The Department of Finance and the national Treasury
([Link]). They are responsible for all aspects
of the government's fiscal policy and therefore also the
budget, state expenditure, the Medium-term Expenditure
Framework and many more financially-related matters.
Š The Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) (DTI)
([Link]). This department is responsible for dealing
with trade policies (including all the regulations and policy-
related matters stipulated by the World Trade Organisation),
encouraging foreign direct investment, negotiating and
managing free trade agreements (such as the one with the
European Union) and other forms of development/trade
opportunities (such as the American legislation known as
AGOA Ð African Growth Opportunities Act). It plays also a
significant role in coordinating South Africa's participation
in the Southern African Development Community (SADC).
The Department of Land Affairs and Agriculture fits into the
same category as the DTI, especially in relation to agricul-
tural exports. Another participant is the organised agricul-
tural sector (eg AgriSA), which is not part of government but
stands in a corporatist relationship indispensable for policy
making and implementation. Organised business, in parti-
cular the South African Chamber of Business (Sacob) and the
National African Federated Chamber of Commerce (Nafcoc),
stand in the same relationship with the DTI.
Š Other departments. Other departments that have a direct

PLC202-V/1 123
 impact on macroeconomic matters include Public Enter-
prises, Public Services and Administration, Social Services
and Public Works.
Š Provincial and local governments. The majority of funds
dispersed by the national budget are allocated to the
provincial and local governments. They are also the
government spheres which provide the bulk of services to
the population. Hence their implementation of policies is of
critical importance. A number of institutions are involved in
coordination between the central and provincial spheres of
government, including the Intergovernmental Forum, sev-
eral MINMECs (a national minister together with the
provincial Members of Executive Council with the same
portfolio) and the President's Coordinating Council, which is
a permanent forum in which the President discusses issues of
national, provincial and local importance with the provincial
Premiers. (See [Link]/structure/[Link] for
more information.)
Š International advisory councils. The government has formed a
number of advisory councils with international experts to
assist it with policy formulation. For the purposes of
macroeconomic strategies, two are directly relevant, namely
the International Investment Council and the International
Marketing Council ([Link]). It is the task of an
analyst to determine who provides advice to the decision-
makers and what their advice is. However, it is generally
difficult to determine this because of the confidential nature
of advisory relationships Ð hence the need for the analyst to
conduct thorough research Ð almost detective work.

[Link] Nedlac (National Economic, Development and Labour

Council) ([Link])

Nedlac is one of the best examples of a corporatist arrangement in

South Africa. It consists of four sectors: government, organised
labour, organised business and organised society (civil society). Civil
society is less involved in GEAR-related discussions than the former
three sectors. Nedlac is a statutory forum in which most macro-
economic issues should be discussed when the government requires
consensus on a particular matter. In some instances, such consensus is
advisable before legislation on the matter in question reaches

124
 Parliament. An example of a significant Nedlac initiative in this
respect is the Growth and Development Summit planned for 2003.

[Link] The Reserve Bank ([Link])

South Africa's central bank is autonomous and is not accountable to

government or the Department of Finance. Its main purpose in
terms of macroeconomic matters is to formulate monetary policies,
in particular interest rates. In this respect, a policy analyst will
closely monitor its Monetary Policy Committee. Monetary policies
depend on macroeconomic data, and it is here that Statistics SA
([Link]) plays a vital role in determining the inflation
rate, household incomes and expenditures, Gross Domestic
Product, Gross National Product, and so on. Equally important
for macroeconomic planning is a reliable and regular national
sensus, conducted by Statistics SA. These are all factors that a policy
analyst has to take into account in a thorough analysis of the
macroeconomic situation.

[Link] Labour relations participants

Another significant factor in macroeconomic matters is the

involvement of organised labour. Collective bargaining for in-
creases in income, new arrangements regarding productivity and
performance management, working conditions, training and related
matters are imperative for the national growth rate, inflation and
other monetary issues. Organised labour also reached an agreement
with government about the restructuring of state assets, also known
as privatisation and commercialisation. This is one of the key
components of GEAR. A number of institutions are involved in
these processes, including Nedlac, the Millennium Labour Council
([Link]) and the Public Sector Bargaining Council.

6.5.2 The external participants

external participants The external participants in the policy processes are diverse and
more difficult to analyse in relation to South African macroeco-
nomic conditions. This is an area in which good policy analysts will
distinguish themselves from average ones. The following are a
number of participants that should be incorporated in an analysis.

PLC202-V/1 125
 Š emerging markets
Š international financial markets
Š the IMF, World Bank group and commercial banks
Š international credit-rating agencies and business confidence
Š the G8, G77, Non-aligned Movement and World Economic
Forum
Š the United Nations
Š the New Partnership for African Development (Nepad)

[Link] Emerging markets

Emerging markets refer to the economies of countries emerging

from underdevelopment and therefore approaching a more
advanced level of development. Examples are Argentina, Brazil,
South Africa, India, Thailand, Turkey and many others. Some of
them have experienced economic crises (notably Argentina, Turkey
and Thailand), which have had a knock-on effect on other emerging
markets.

[Link] International financial markets

Globalisation means that individual states lose some of their control

over their economies Ð in other words, their economic sovereignty.
The price of oil (Brent crude oil) for energy, or the prices of gold and
diamonds are influenced by economic and international political
factors. For example, a crisis in which the USA is involved normally
leads to an increase in the gold price. Crises in the Middle East often
lead to oil price increases. Currency exchange fluctuations are also
important determinants of macroeconomic matters, because they
directly influence imports and exports, GDP and the balance of
payments. These factors need to be taken into account in South
African macroeconomic strategies.

[Link] The IMF, World Bank group and commercial banks

The International Monetary Fund ([Link]) and the World

Bank group ([Link]), especially the International
Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and other major
commercial banks (eg the United Bank of Switzerland) provide

126
the necessary credit and research assistance for the South African
government to finance the shortfall on its budget and other projects.
The World Bank group also offers valuable macroeconomic
research outputs that governments can use for their economic
planning. The IMF and World Bank group play a less prominent
role in South Africa than in many other emerging markets. They
have not yet insisted on an economic structural adjustment
programme, but critics to the left argue that GEAR is a homemade
version of it. Two World Bank representatives were members of the
technical team responsible for GEAR Ð hence the likelihood of
indirect influence.

[Link] International credit-rating agencies and business

confidence

Foreign direct investments (FDIs) in South African are necessary for

domestic growth (GDP), job creation and an increase in foreign
currency investments. FDIs depend substantially on investor and
business confidence. (Sacob is one of the best-known institutions
providing a domestic investor confidence index Ð see [Link]-
[Link]/html/confiden_content.html.) Other actors that influence
these investment decisions are the international credit-rating
agencies. Some of the well-known ones are Moody's Investor
Services ([Link]), Fitch Ratings ([Link]),
Standard & Poor's and Duff & Phelps Credit Rating. An
improvement in a credit rating from, say, a BBB± to a BBB is an
indication of improved confidence in a country's economy, and
therefore more willingness on the part of foreign businesses to enter
the economy. Improvement in South Africa's credit rating means
success in its macroeconomic strategy, while no changes mean less
success.

[Link] The G8, G77, Non-aligned Movement and World Economic

Forum

Since 1994 the South African economy has been integrated into the
international economic processes. This means that an analysis of its
macroeconomic strategies has to be sensitive to developments in the
world economy. In this respect the G8 (USA, UK, France, Germany,
Japan, Italy, Canada and Russia) play a critically important role in
determining international economic trends. Regional formations

PLC202-V/1 127
 such as the European Union or the North Atlantic Free Trade Area
(Nafta) should also be included in such analyses. The international
economy is increasingly divided between the industrialised North
and the developing South. Groupings representing the South, such
as the G77 and the Non-aligned Movement (NAM), exert
increasingly more influence on international economic trends and
decisions. For South Africa, as the de facto leader of the South in
many instances, these factors have to be included in a macro-
economic analysis. GEAR is export-oriented and its success there-
fore largely depends on the South African economy being
integrated into the world economy. To this end, the annual World
Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, is a significant event for
analysts wishing to determine South Africa's standing in relation to
other economic actors.

[Link] The United Nations

The United Nations as an international organisation has become

increasingly involved in development matters. An example is the
work of the UN Development Programme. In 2002 it also convened
the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in Durban.
This followed the Rio Summit a decade earlier. It is almost
impossible to see a direct link between these events or activities,
and the South African economy. An analyst should, however,
incorporate them in a policy analysis as environmental or
contributing factors.

[Link] The New Partnership for African Development (Nepad)

South Africa, Nigeria and Algeria took the lead to present a

development plan for Africa to the rest of the world. It has been
embraced by the African Union and also enjoys the support of the
G8. The Nepad Secretariat is located in Pretoria, and the Office of
the President (including persons such as Wiseman Nkuhlu) and the
Department of Foreign Affairs are intimately involved in its
operations. Even though it is a macro-design for the continent as
a whole, it can be linked to the macroeconomic strategies of
individual countries. As such, a policy analyst should also include
Nepad as an agent in South Africa's economics.

This concludes our analysis of the agents (internal and external)

involved in the policies. If we return to study unit 2 (``The sources of

128
public policy'') in which many of these agents are mentioned and
study unit 3, section 3.7 (``Evaluation of policy impact'') which
distinguishes between the impact and outputs of policies, this
discussion allows us to look at the impact of the policies. In other
words, the answer to the question: Who is involved and how are
they involved in the policy? provides an indication of the width of
the policy and therefore of its possible impact on society. We have
not yet examined the impact of its policy outputs on society. In the
next section we shall illustrate how policy analysis entails an
evaluation of policy outputs.
outputs

6.6 IDENTIFYING THE POLICY OBJECTIVES

In order to determine how successful a policy has been, it should be

assessed in terms of its own stated objectives. This means that
policy-makers set their own targets and once the policy has been
implemented they like to know the extent to which it has attained
the set targets. The assessment criteria are not objective standards
universally applicable anywhere in the world. They are subjectively
determined by those involved in the policy processes, and
obviously determined by the needs identified during stage 1 in
the policy-making process (ie the identification of policy-relevant
problems Ð sec 3.2). Observers and researchers can add their own
externally determined assessment criteria or standards, some of
which are considered to be international benchmarks, and others
chosen on the basis of certain value judgments about what is
considered ``good''. In some cases the external participants can
become directly or indirectly involved in policy evaluation. For
example, on the basis of one of the membership requirements of the
European monetary union that a national budget may not have a
fiscal deficit of more than three percent, this has become an
international benchmark. It is no coincidence that GEAR has set
three percent as the target for 2000. The IMF and World Bank group
apply similar benchmarking for assistance to national economies.

For the purpose of our analysis we shall identify the following

policy goals and targets set by the GEAR policy from its base
document:

Š accelerated growth of nongold exports

Š a brisk expansion in private sector capital formation
Š an acceleration in public sector investment

PLC202-V/1 129
 Š an improvement in the employment intensity of investment
and output
Š an increase in infrastructural development and service
delivery

The implementation goals of these objectives include the following:

Š a renewed focus on budget reform to strengthen the

redistributive thrust of expenditure
Š a faster fiscal deficit reduction programme to contain debt
service obligations, counter inflation and free resources for
investment
Š an exchange rate policy to keep the real effective rate at a
competitive level
Š consistent monetary policy to prevent a resurgence of
inflation
Š gradual relaxation of exchange controls
Š reduction in tariffs to contain input prices
Š tax incentives to stimulate new investment
Š speeding up the restructuring of state assets to optimise
investment resources
Š appropriately structured flexibility within the collective
bargaining system (labour market)

In more concrete terms, the following specific targets were set or

base scenario projections made for the period 1996 to 2000:

130
 Policy item 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

fiscal deficit
(% of GDP) 5,1% 4,5 4,0 3,5 3,0

real government
consumption
(% of GDP) 19,8% 19,5 19,1 18,6 18,1

real bank rate 7,0% 6,0 5,0 4,5 3,7

real nongold export

growth 9,6% 7,5 6,4 5,5 5,3

GDP growth 3,3% 2,0 2,5 2,9 3,3

inflation (CPI) 8,4% 10,9 9,6 9,3 9,1

new jobs per year

(in thousands) 97 101 84 103 134

6.7 EVALUATION OF POLICY OUTPUTS

A policy analyst now has a set of concrete criteria available against
which the success or failure of the policy outputs can be measured.
Although they do not tell us much about the impact of the policies
on those in need of development initiatives, they are typical of
policy outputs expressed in numerical/statistical terms. In order to
make an assessment of the policies, the analyst has to determine
what the policy output was for each item. For our purposes, we
shall select on the following items to illustrate how this is done:

Fiscal deficit 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

(% of GDP)

Ð policy targets 5,1 4,5 4,0 3,5 3,0

Ð real budgets 5,1 5,0 3,7 2,8 2,2

PLC202-V/1 131
 GDP growth 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Ð policy targets 3,3 2,0 2,5 2,9 3,3

Ð real outputs 4,3 2,6 0,8 2,0 3,5

Since the initial focus period of the policy, the real outputs have
been as follows:

2001 Ð 2,8%
2002 Ð 3,0%

Headline inflation 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

(CPI)

Ð policy targets 8,4 10,9 9,6 9,3 9,1

Ð real outputs 7,3 8,6 6,9 5,2 5,4

Since 2000 there has been an upward trend in inflation:

2001 Ð 5,7%
2002 Ð 10,1%
January 2003 Ð 13,7%
Related to this is another set of targets, namely those for CPIX (the
inflation rate without interest rates) targeted at three to six percent.
The results since 1997, when it was introduced, have been as
follows:

1998 Ð 7,0%
1999 Ð 6,9%
2000 Ð 7,8%
2001 Ð 6,6%
2002 Ð 10,0%
December 2002 Ð 12,4%
January 2003 Ð 11,8%

Several conclusions such as the following are possible:

(1) The fiscal deficit in the national budget has been reduced
quite dramatically but has not met the policy targets. Since
2000, the government has continued to pursue this policy
objective and for the 2003/2004 budget, the deficit will be 2,4
percent, which is below the international benchmark. For
2002/2003 it was 2,2 percent.

132
(2) The GDP growth rate is also below the set targets but has
shown a gradual increase. The outputs in 2001 and 2002
confirm this increase, although they were well below the
targets set in 1996. An important indicator with which the
GDP should be compared, is the population growth rate. At
present the GDP rate is higher than the population growth
rate, which is always seen as a positive sign.
(3) Inflation were reduced in the early parts of the policy period
but then increased again. It is also noticeable that from 2002
onwards it entered a spiral of increases. In the cases of both
the headline CPI and CPIX, the outputs are not close to the
targets. In order to address the volatility of inflation and
make it more predictable for foreign investors, the Reserve
Bank announced a new indicator for inflation targeting,
namely the CPIX (ie the consumer price index excluding
interest rates). The targets were set between three and six
percent.

Some of consequences of the policy in terms of its impact were the

following:

(1) net job losses (instead of job creation as the policy projected)
as a result of privatisation and deregulation and liberal-
isation of domestic private sector markets
(2) increasing demands on social welfare as a result of higher
unemployment, and according to some explanations, also
higher levels of crime
(3) high-income groups enjoying huge benefits from the GEAR
policy, with low-income groups continuing to struggle even
more (little socioeconomic mobility for them to higher-
income levels)

The upshot of all this was the development of an acrimonious

public debate between the government and its Alliance partners,
especially Cosatu and the SACP, to the left. Generally speaking,
however, the international response to GEAR and the macroeco-
nomic strategies has been quite favourable, except for too little
progress in the areas of privatisation and exchange control.

At this stage, the policy analyst needs to draw final conclusions.

This does not necessarily entail only one all-encompassing conclu-
sion, but can be a package of conclusions. For example, the
following conclusions could be drawn about GEAR:

PLC202-V/1 133
 Š It established predictable economic principles which have
been applied consistently over a period of more than six
years.
Š Even though it was successful in reducing the budget
deficits, privatisation is a contentious issue and its outcomes
therefore do not fall within the policy targets.
Š GDP growth is less than predicted.
Š Inflation initially decreased but then flared up again.
Š The social consequences of the policy are detrimental to large
sections of the population, especially in the lower-income
brackets.

Depending on the purpose of the policy analysis, the conclusions

can be followed by new recommendations.

6.8 SUMMARY

The purpose of this study unit was to take you through an

elementary process of policy analysis. You will appreciate the fact
that each and every policy area requires different approaches and
this case study is therefore but one of the approaches that can be
followed.

The material you studied in all the study units was integrated in
this study unit and put into practice. It is only one example of a case
study but hopefully, has given you an idea of how you can do
policy analysis in other policy areas.

FURTHER READING

The following list of sources is included should you wish to read

more about South African macroeconomic issues.

South African Government: [Link] and [Link]

South African Parliament: [Link]
Government Communication Information System:
[Link]
Statistics SA: [Link]
Sacob: [Link]
Nafcoc: [Link]

134
ANC: [Link]
Cosatu: [Link]
Financial Mail: [Link]
Business Day: [Link]
Business Report: [Link]
ANC. 1994. The Reconstruction and Development Programme: a policy
framework. Johannesburg: Umanyano Publications.
Bulger, John. 1996. Growth vs redistribution: the debate on economic
strategy hots up. The Star, 28 October:15.
Cronin, Jeremy. 1998. Why the SACP rejects GEAR. Mail & Guardian, 10±
16 July:34.
Du Toit, J. 1998. The structure of the South African economy. Halfway House:
Southern.
Fitzgerald, Patrick, McLennan, Anne & Munslow, Barry (eds). 1997.
Managing sustainable development in South Africa. 2nd edition. Cape
Town: Oxford University Press.
GEAR. 1996. Growth, employment and redistribution: a macro-economic
strategy. Pretoria: Department of Finance.
Institute for Multiparty Democracy. 1996. Towards democracy (The
government's macroeconomic strategy). 3rd quarter.
KotzeÂ, Dirk. 2000. The political economy of development in South Africa.
African Security Review 9(3):59±72.
MERG. 1993. Making democracy work: a framework for macroeconomic policy
in South Africa Ð a report from the Macroeconomic Research Group
(MERG) to the members of the Democratic Movement of South Africa.
Bellville: Centre for Development Studies, University of the Western
Cape.
Mohr, Philip. 2000. Economic indicators. Revised edition. Pretoria: Unisa
Press.
Nattrass, Nicoli. 1994. Politics and economics in ANC economic policy.
African Affairs 93(372), July:343±359.
Nattrass, Nicoli. 1994. Economic restructuring in South Africa: the debate
continues. Journal of Southern African Studies, 20(4), December:517±
543.
Pierce, Douglas. 1993. Checking the risks?: World Bank urban development:
policy choices for a transitional South African government. CPS
Transition Series: Research report 34. Johannesburg: Centre for
Policy Studies.
SACP National Political Education Secretariat. 1996. A critique of
Government's macro-economic strategy: Growth, employment and
redistribution. Debate: voices from the South African Left, (1):26-31.
Vavi, Zwelinzima. 1996. With no apologies. Business Report, 30 April:3.

PLC202-V/1 135
 World Bank. (published since 1978). World Development Report. New York:
Oxford University Press for the World Bank.

REFLECTION
Now that you have completed this study unit, you should be able to

Š identify the agents involved in public policy processes and use

them for the purposes of a policy analysis
Š identify the objectives of any policy and use them as criteria for an
evaluation
Š determine the outputs and impact of a policy
Š draw conclusions on the basis of an analysis of the policy area, and
make recommendations when required

136
CONCLUSION
In the introduction you will have noted that the purpose of this
course is to introduce you to public policy as a discipline. The
intention was never to present to you a complete and exhaustive
course, because policy studies is a well-developed discipline with
many facets and specialised fields. However, the foundation has
been laid for you to continue on your own if you have a special
interest in this field.

We have approached this course mainly from a descriptive and

explanatory point of view. All of the aspects discussed here are,
however, the subjects of debates, questioning, sometimes intense
criticism and continuing research. We have not included the critical
dimensions in the discussions, because the intention was first to
introduce you to the main fields of policy studies. You should,
however, look at it critically once you are satisfied that you have a
solid grip on the subject matter. Jan-Erik Lane's book (1995) can
guide you in taking up a critical position.

In this course we have not paid special attention to public policy-

making in South Africa (or any other country). The priority was to
look at public policy in general. Such an endeavour is normally
distorted by the fact that by far the majority of available
publications in English are American or European. Therefore,
South African examples are often used in the discussions not for
parochial reasons, but because in the publications listed you will
find discussions of other examples.

We trust that this course will have practical value and relevance for
you. Even if you are not yet in a position to make a contribution to
policy-making, the knowledge and understanding you have
developed will hopefully help you in future.

PLC202-V/1 137
ANSWERS TO SELF-TESTING

STUDY UNIT 2
Policy source Who? Where? What? Examples
election Ð political Ð election articulate policy not applicable
manifesto parties manifesto proposals
Ð actors involved documents
in election Ð speeches by
campaign party leaders
during election
campaign and
other
materials
discussion docs Ð departmental Ð Government consultative not applicable
officials Gazette procedure for
Ð ministers Ð departmental preparing legislation
Ð cabinet publications or new policy
Ð Parliament
legislation Ð legislators Ð Second articulate policy Ð Acts of
Ð political reading in goals Parliament
executives Parliament Ð executive
(ministers) (Hansard) proclamations
Ð Government Ð by-laws
Gazette Ð executive
decrees
budget Ð Minister of Ð debates in articulate policy Appropriation Act
Finance Hansard priorities
Ð budget vote of Ð legislation in
each minister Government
Gazette
policy government Ð published in Ð summary of Ð speeches at
statements leaders the media existing policy functions
Ð media Ð contemplated Ð media release
conferences policy revisions at press
Ð text of Ð announce new conference
speeches policy Ð published
article
Ð interview
international Ð government Ð international articulate Ð Universal
agreements officials and agreements international norms Declaration of
ministers Ð debates in acceptable to the Human Rights
Ð Parliament Hansard government Ð Genocide
Ð legislation in Convention
Government Ð Geneva
Gazette Conventions

138
Policy source Who? Where? What? Examples
actions Ð government actions and Ð actions are a Ð Hitler's invasion
officials and inactions by practical of Central
policy decision- governments Ð articulation of Europe
makers no explicit policy policy Ð SA's
documents Ð indicate destabilisation
changes in well- policy
articulated Ð international
formal policies isolation of SA
or Libya

STUDY UNIT 3
1 False
2 (i) elite
(ii) referendum
(iii) public choice
3 c
4 d
5 False
6 b
7 d
8 (i) effect
(ii) data
(iii) organisational inertia
9 b
10 a

PLC202-V/1 139