HOW TO RECOGNIZE GOOD POLICY?
May 26, 2009
Since there is usually not a “right or wrong” policy, how are good policy decisions recognized? The following qualities may assist in defining “good public policy:”
- There is public support. Usually policy adopted by a majority vote of a legislative body is “good” policy. A supermajority vote makes “great” policy. The council does not make policy in a vacuum. Councils rely on ideas from many sources, including staff, citizen’s groups, advisory committees, chambers of commerce, and others. Strong council support for a policy is more likely if there is strong support in the community.
- Policy are just. Good policy is fair and equitable; it does not impose disproportional impacts on interest groups. Policy decisions should be based upon due process that respects the constitutional rights of individuals. Policy-making is not always about what’s popular. Sometimes it means protecting the legitimate interests of minority views too.
- Sound Decision are backed with solid analisys. Good policy analysis starts with clear goals and objectives, considers a range of alternatives, expresses evaluation criteria, and assesses the impacts of alternatives with respect to these criteria. Measure the consequences of policy decisions against the community’s vision, values, and goals.
- Policy are relevant. The decision addresses a problem or issue that is generally perceived as significant to the community.
- Policy can be implemented. The decisions are feasible for local government to implement. The adopted policy has a reasonable chance of working. There are clear assignments of responsibilities for implementation.
- Result are monitored. There is always a risk that policy decisions have unintended consequences, or simply do not accomplish their goals. During the analysis phase it is useful to think about how a policy choice may fail. Good monitoring systems may provide early warning about policy failures or unintended consequences. This would enable policy-makers to alter the policy to increase effectiveness, or abandon it completely.
LIMITS TO POLICY MAKING
No one said that effective policy-making is easy. It is easier to second guess how something might have been done, than to determine what needs to be done. There are many challenges and hazards along the way. Public policy-making involves multiple interests, complex analysis, conflicting information, and human personalities. Listed below are some factors that make public policy a fascinating, sometimes frustrating, but absolutely essential exercise. These are listed to alert the reader about circumstances where extra care is necessary.
- Legitimate community interests have multiple and often conflicting goals. This is the essence of the policy-making challenge. For example, the business community may be motivated primarily by a profit goal in presenting its position on the comprehensive plan. Other community interests may place a higher priority on a goal of preserving as much of the natural environment as possible. These goals may conflict.
- With multiple interest groups and centers of power, there is a tendency to “take a step in the right direction” rather than commit to significant change. Some participants are frustrated because they believe that the policy-making process should produce more dramatic changes than it usually does. On the other hand, seemingly minor changes in the short-term can have enormous long-term impacts.
- Failure to have the right information can impede decision-making. Elected officials are often faced with information overload. Too much information can create uncertainty and weaken decisiveness. When this occurs, all information becomes diluted in its persuasiveness. Decision-makers may then resort to less rationally defensive but more personally satisfying methods of decision-making. Concise, well-organized data and analyses can facilitate the decision-making process.
- Some interest groups may use analysis to rationalize choices they have already made. Research can be politicized. Some people are skilled in using statistics to prove anything. Close inspection of their analysis, however, may reveal serious flaws.
- Many forces that impact local communities are beyond local control. Local governments are subject to federal and state mandates. Income levels of individual jurisdictions depend upon job creation and retention throughout the region. Traffic congestion and air pollution transcend local community borders. Local decision-makers may have limited ability to influence an important community issue.
- It is not always clear or obvious how to implement good policy, even when there is a high level of agreement about a desired direction.
- Resources to implement policy may be limited.
- Mediation may be required to resolve issues where communities are polarized.
MAKING POLICY IS NUMBER 1 JOB FOR LEGISLATOR
The key to avoiding conflicts is to recognize that the general public policy of the city is usually a matter for the legislative body to determine: the Angeles City council, though the latter also has an executive and administrative function. It is also important to recognize that it is not the role of the legislative body to administer this city. The city council sets policy, but it is either the city mayor, or city administrator that actually sees that the policies are implemented. Since the distinction between formulation and implementation is not always clear, open communications between legislators and administrators is absolutely necessary.
Focus on Strategic Policy-Making
Legislative bodies are most effective and are most successful when they focus on strategic activities that guide the future of their communities. Whether it is called goal setting, strategic planning or futures planning, the process of assessing need and establishing priorities is a necessary function of local government. It is a process that can be used to build citizen support, encourage efficiency, and improve productivity. Some observers believe that governments are driven by past decisions and reaction to operational issues and limitations. There is a legacy of prior actions that limits the community’s vision about future possibilities. Policy is about the future of your community, whether tomorrow, next week, or years from now. Policy-making is about visions, goals, choices, and possibilities. Alignment of vision and goals with the community and its local government structures builds trust and community confidence. Limited resources go further where there is alignment and trust.
Key policy-making activities include:
- CREATING A COMMUNITY VISION. This is the “big picture” for your community. A vision captures the dreams, aspirations, and hopes of your community. It is a choice of one future out of many possibilities. Important community values shape this vision. Does your community see itself as a trader in a global village? A place where diversity is cherished? A place where there is peace and harmony between the built and the natural environment? A “vision statement” could provide a benchmark against which all other local government actions are measured. If you don’t know where you are going, any path will do. Communities with vision know who they are and where they are going. Some communities also develop value statements and strategic plans to help implement their vision statements. Those without vision spend considerable energy on wrong or irrelevant issues, bouncing reactively from one topic to another. In short, they cannot see where they are going.
- Community goals & Objectives. identify components of the community vision and provide direction for implementation. A goal statement may grow out of a difficult community problem, for example, a high crime rate. The goal is to find a satisfactory resolution to this problem by implementing policies designed to reduce crime. A goal may also be born of a desire to instill some quality that is not currently part of the community, such as economic growth. Or, a goal may grow from a desire to preserve a valued characteristic or quality that already exists, such as the preservation of small town qualities while accommodating growth. Goals are qualitative statements; objectives are quantitative and measurable.
- The comprehensive plan represents the community’s policy for future growth. The plan assists in the management of the city or county by providing policies to guide decision-making. Prepare comprehensive land use plans under the state’s Growth Management Act. Comprehensive planning usually starts with an inventory and analysis of land, followed by an analysis of population and demographics, economic conditions, amenities, physical conditions, and infrastructure to determine future needs and alternatives. Based upon an agreed amount of growth, the land-use element of the plan maps locations for future development. Zoning and development regulations limit the permitted size of these developments, and govern how various uses must relate to their neighbors. Transportation and public facilities elements of the plan address service levels, locations, and financing of infrastructure needed to support community development. These plans are powerful policy tools that address major pieces of your community’s vision.
- BUDGET AND CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN. These address the allocation of scarce financial resources to achieve the community’s vision, accomplish goals and objectives, implement the comprehensive plan, and provide services. The budget is considered one of the strongest policy-making tools. It defines the spending and service priorities for numerous other policy decisions. There is rarely enough money to do all the things that a community desires. Thus, budgets and capital facilities plans must prioritize. What gets funded? In what order? What does not get funded? How much will be spent to provide desired services? Long-term financial plan projections (5 to 6 years ahead) often help reveal some of the costs or consequences of seemingly “inexpensive” short-term policy decisions. The allocation of resources to competing needs is an important exercise of setting local policy. Deciding what not to do is also an important part of policy-making.
THE POLICY MAKING PROCESS
This research paper has been written primarily for our Professor in Certificate Course on Public Administration and Governance, DR. NOEL H. MALLARI, DPA, local officials of
The policy-making process weighs and balances public values. Often there is no “right’ choice or correct technical answer to the question at hand. That is why policy-making can be an adversarial process, characterized by the clash of competing and conflicting interests and viewpoints rather than an impartial, disinterested or “objective” search for “correct” solutions for policy problems. Because of these value clashes, the policy-making process can get emotional. However, it does not have to be rancorous. If you are a local official, you will be more effective and productive over the long-term if you respect the viewpoints of others – whether you agree with their position or not. Take time to understand your roles and responsibilities. Legislators, for example, are most effective if they focus on policy issues, not administrative matters. And chief executive officers such as mayors, county executives and city managers are most effective when they recognize and support the policy-making responsibilities of their local councilmembers and commissioners.
Introduction
Policy-making is often undervalued and misunderstood, yet it is the central role of the city, town, and county legislative bodies. The policies created by our local governments affect everyone in the community in some way. Public policy determines what services will be provided to the residents and the level of those services, what kinds of development will occur in the community, and it determines what the community’s future will be. Policies are created to guide decision making. Elected council members of cities, towns, and counties have public policy-making responsibilities. County commissioners also set policy, but have an executive role of administering policy as well.
Local policy-making is complex. It demands the very best of local officials. The public policy-making process is highly decentralized. Policy initiation, formulation, adoption, and implementation involve many interests. This process has been characterized as tending to be “fluid, incremental, confused, often disorderly and even incoherent.”
What is policy?
Formally adopted policy generally takes the form of a governing principle, plan, or course of action. In the public sector it generally evolves from a deliberative process, and is adopted by an ordinance or resolution. Legislative bodies make public policy decisions; others perform the administrative task of implementing those policies. The decisions could be the adoption of a vision for the community, a comprehensive plan, a budget, or a policy relating to a specific issue, such as allowing or prohibiting local gambling activities. Policy-making requires political wisdom, diplomacy, and prudence to bring diverse community interests together around a shared purpose. Common usage of the term “policy” also includes the wise and expedient conduct of management; thereby blurring the line between policy and administration and causing confusion in the roles of elected legislators. Public policy is a combination of basic decisions, commitments, and actions made by those who hold authority or affect government decisions. The policy-making process weighs and balances public values. Often there is no “right” choice or correct technical answer to the issue at hand. Policymaking can be an adversarial process, characterized by the clash of competing and conflicting interests and viewpoints rather than an impartial, disinterested, or “objective” search for “correct” solutions for policy issues. The larger and more diverse the constituency, the more difficult policymaking becomes, particularly when addressing regional issues. Democracy is sometimes messy. Since our government is a representative democracy, an effective policy-making process insures that all relevant viewpoints are heard, and that the rights of individuals are protected.
The Policy Making Process
There is no question that effective policy-making requires lots of process. But in the end, it requires decisiveness too. While citizens and interest groups value the opportunity to participate, they also expect efficiency in the process of analyzing issues and bringing them to resolution. “Democratic efficiency” may sound like an oxymoron, but it is a worthwhile goal. Drawn out, inconclusive processes wear out participants and frustrate everyone. Such processes may make citizens less willing to participate in future community activities.
Get issue on the agenda. A city council member has little or no power acting alone. If there is an issue or problem that should be addressed by your city, it has to be put on the public agenda. Some issues are so important that there is a consensus that something must be done. However, your issue may be in competition with others for time and attention. The support of other members of the legislative body is needed to commit time and resources to study the issue. The same is true for the chief executive. A budget is needed to carry out the studies and conduct the processes needed to bring resolution to important policy issues.
There are many catalysts for new or revised public policies. An economic calamity, such as the closing of a mill in the community, might generate a need for a new economic development policy. Technological innovations, such as networked computers and the Internet, are raising a myriad of technology policy issues for local governments today. Ecological shifts brought about by dramatic growth and development threatens Salmon species, requiring governments to respond. On some issues the community may have no choice but to act because of federal or state requirements like the Endangered Species Act and the Growth Management Act. On other issues, there may be local discretion to address them or not. These policy issues will need the consent and support of other elected officials to place them on the local agenda.
The policy-maker must be prepared to explain why action is necessary and why this issue is more important than other issues that compete for time, attention, and resources. What is the problem that needs to be solved? What are the implications of not acting? What is at stake? Why is government involvement or action required? Can someone else, such as a non-profit entity, address this problem?
Document Existing Condition. Issues become part of the public agenda when there is a shared perception that a problem must be solved, an issue resolved, or an opportunity realized. Explain the problem and recognize that everyone does not share the same definition of problem.
Existing conditions provide a reference point against which possible actions are compared. The task of documenting existing conditions will probably be assigned to staff. Council members must recognize that resources need to be budgeted for these staff activities.
Define Goals and Objectives. Policy action requires public support, or at a minimum, a working majority of the legislative body. The development of goals is an important part of the search for agreement. Conceptually, the idea is to move from the more general to the specific: first reaching agreement on broad principles before getting to specific means.
Goals are qualitative in nature, for example:
- Create a community where people can live, work, and play in an environment that is safe, vibrant, and aesthetically pleasing.
- Preserve greenbelts and natural areas.
- Provide for the efficient and safe movement of people and goods.
Objectives are quantitative, providing yardsticks to measure goal achievement. Some examples are:
- Create 1,500 new affordable housing units by the year 2005.
- Acquire outright or purchase the development rights to preserve 1,000 acres of greenbelts by the year 2005.
Goal development can be a time-consuming process that requires the full attention of the governing board. All members should participate. There will need to be give and take among the participants. Goals should reflect what the governing board wants to accomplish. Avoid getting too detailed. Let staff figure out how to achieve goals. Organizations cannot do everything at once. Setting goals helps prioritize where time, energy, and resources go.
Generates Alternatives. What options are there for attaining the policy-making body’s goals? It is important to consider a range of reasonable alternatives. If alternatives favored by an influential interest group are excluded, it will be very difficult to reach a decision that has strong support.
- Do not prematurely lock into one choice. That will impede your ability to build a consensus and to bring other interests over to your position.
- Be respectful of costs to government. All levels of government are expected to do more with less. This is especially true for local government. Are there low or no cost solutions? Think creatively.
- Be mindful of ongoing costs. These have to be budgeted. For example, if the city spends money to purchase land and develop a park, it also needs to pay for ongoing maintenance.
- Think of what it will take to implement your solution, including administrative costs. Policy that cannot be implemented is ineffective. The more complex a solution, the more likely it is to meet with resistance.
Identify Key interest Groups. This is an important step in defining criteria for evaluating alternatives. Who else cares about this issue? How will they be impacted? Will they be positively or negatively affected by various solutions? Which interest groups are logical allies? Who is likely to oppose the action(s)?
Evaluate Alternatives. This task will likely fall mainly to staff, and will often be addressed through formal process requirements such as the preparation of environmental impact statements. Some key considerations are:
- Address the costs and consequences of doing nothing.
- Recognize that there are tradeoffs and costs to others. Anticipate criteria that are important to others. You lose credibility if they are ignored. The same weight does not have to be placed on other interests’ criteria, but the real impacts cannot be ignored. In many cases, there are legal requirements to address the impacts.
- Test the sensitivity of assumptions. How would the findings and conclusions change if the assumptions were modified?
Decide. Even if everything is done right, some decisions are hard because they address a difficult issue. A few points they consider are:
- Recognize constraints, such as budgets, laws, and authority. Balance dreams with the reality of what needs to be changed. Small changes can have major impacts through time.
- Recognize that there are often more than two positions on an issue. This makes it difficult
- to get a majority, much less a consensus.
- Think about how alternatives might be combined into “win-win” solutions that address needs of multiple parties.
- Treat all parties with respect.
Implement and Monitor. Even if you have done a great job in involving all the parties,
analyzing alternatives, and achieving consensus, the process is not complete. Too many well-intentioned plans sit on a shelf and collect dust. Make sure that implementation responsibilities are clearly assigned.
Policies often have unintended consequences. Monitor the implementation of policies and revise them as necessary. It is better to discover (sooner than later) that the assumptions were not correct so that early corrective action can be taken. Unintended consequences can create bigger problems down the road. Consider sunset ordinances that require formal policy review after a set time period, especially if the council embarks on an untried innovative policy direction.
just my own point of view
