Policymaking is a complex and complicated procedure that involves many steps and stages. Every step that is involved in the process is sensitive and has many variables which are to be handled with care and concern. The document discusses all the steps of the policy-making and the entire phenomenon which can be linked with the policymaking. Agenda setting, policy formulation, policy implementation, and policy evaluation are the main steps which are taken in order make a new policy and make it effective. It is important to analyze the need for the policy making the possible impacts it can have on the society.
It is also important to analyze the stakeholders in the policy that is to be made. It is important to make sure that all the stakeholders are onboard with the policy formulation and policy implementation. This is done with the help of the agenda setting. Stakeholders, if needed, are manipulated into agreeing with the need for the policy. Circumstances are formed in order to make people feel that they need a policy for a matter. For this purpose the strongest tool of this century is media. Media can change opinions and make people think something which they were not thinking and never going to think. People depend on and trust much more than any other source of information.
Agenda Setting Portfolio
What is agenda setting?
Agenda setting is what actually people think about a specific topic or incident due to the factor of media. Dr Donald Shaw and Dr Maxwell McCombs introduced the agenda-setting theory in 1972. According to this theory, the news propagated through any form of media is very effective in the opinion of the people. It also says that the news might be involved in converting the political speculations into reality. Media gets to decide which problem will get maximum attention and which news deserves more time.
These decisions are important in forming public opinions. The devisors of this theory were also of the view that the media also plays an important role in the forming a campaign of a political candidate. The importance and colour the media gives to the campaign of a candidate form the opinion of the public regarding the political candidate. This can influence the choice of the people in the electoral process and can make sure that a candidate gets an advantage over the others. This is what is called setting an agenda for the political campaign. There are two points when it comes to analyzing the agenda-setting scenario.
Initially, it is important to understand that media plays important role in shaping the opinions and the news presented by the media is not always the right point of view on what is happening or happened. Secondly, it is important to be understood that when media gives importance to any issuing public starts to think that this is an important issue (Protess & McCombs, 2016).
How does agenda setting occur from public problems?
Agenda setting can be for any issue or problem. Every society has some problems on a public level but these issues get limelight when media decides that they are important. There are multiple examples in many countries and nations in which there were some problems but those problems became so important overnight and everybody was trying to solve them like they were the most important problems. If we analyze such situations it is not that difficult to understand what changed over-night. It is always because someone with strong influence decided that this should be the important public issue now and it becomes one. The most important tool used for this purpose is media itself. Media is what makes people think that some problem which they were probably not worried about that much is their biggest problem (Bevan & Jennings, 2014).
Why may public problems not get the attention of the government?
Sometimes government gets so busy in international and national issues it is not in touch with the basic public problems. This is the time when media plays the role of a bridge between the public and the government. Media is what makes the government realize the problems of a common man and it portrays the problems that it finds important. This makes the government focus on those problems more than the others and that gives more importance to those specific issues. As media is one of the strongest links that connect the public with the highest levels of the government it has the power to manipulate the link. When the media decides that some of the public issues are not important they might never reach the government because media had more penetration and focus on the public issues and forms opinions of people about their own issues as well (Orchard & Stretton, 2016).
What are the kinds of agenda?
Mostly the there are four types of agenda. One kind is informational; this kind deals with informing people about a specific topic or issue. This agenda is to make people focus on a piece of information which they might already know or don’t know at all. This agenda if handles in the right way will make the target audience know about the piece of information which is being tried to be transmitted. Another basic kind of agenda is advisory. This is actually advising target audience about a specific issue and topic. This is presented in a form that the opinion is not being manipulated but the audience is just being advised about what is better for them and they should think about it themselves.
This, of course, affects the opinions in a longer run. The third form is problem-solving in which audience is presented with a solution for the problem which might be helpful for them. This solution, of course, manipulates people into thinking that the problem for which the solution is being presented is the most important problem. Asking for help is also a kind of agenda in which targeted audience is asked for help on some issue. It can be either for some individual in the society or a community. This raises some issue gives a message that people should come forward to help the cause. This is also called moral manipulation (ephraimcity, 2016).
What tools are used in policy discussion/argument?
There are a few proven tools that support the argument. First is the proper framing of the argument i-e defining the argument in a clear and effective way and clarifying the key terms in the argument. This also extends to defining the scope and the constraints of the policy being proposed. Clarifying the objectives and criteria makes the argument stronger. The specification of the criteria and objectives should be made clear with their logical justifications. Data collection regarding the outcomes of the policy is an important tool and can help the argument in the best way. The detailed analysis of the collected data serves an important purpose in the discussion regarding policy making. The predictions based on the analysis of the fact can also help in an argument. Then concluding the argument properly is an important tool to be used when arguing or proposing a policy (Brux, 2015).
What are the models of agenda building and their implications for the agenda-setting?
There are three models of agenda building normally discussed which are used depending on the issue. The first model is outside initiative model. This model deals with the process through which the issue was raised in non-governmental groups and then the issue expanded publically and finally reaches the formal agenda. The second model is the mobilization model which deals with the issues that are raised in the government circles and became a formal agenda on their own. To sort the issues out it is always important to put them on a public agenda.
This model basically comes into play when an issue has already become a part of formal agenda and the issue has to be made part of the public agenda so that it can be focused on sorting out. The third model is inside initiative model and in this model, the issue arises in the government circle and reaches the formal agenda. The difference between mobilization model and inside initiative model is that the authorities do not try to make the issue a part of the public agenda. It is tried to be made sure that the issue is sorted out without involving public in the matter (Wasieleski, 2016).
Who participates in agenda building?
Every entity that can influence the opinion of the public can become a part of agenda building for or against something. The most important and vital role that is being widely played all over the world is by the media. It puts most of the contribution in making an agenda. This involves the public makes the agenda stronger because of the huge level of participants involved in the process. Another strong entity can participate in building many real and fake agendas on the national or global level is the government of a strong country. They can influence the opinions and change the face of the international market to show artificial crisis or relief in the situation. They can change the scenario which makes everyone believe that what they are saying and focusing on is the real problem or the solution to the problem.
How can we predict who will participate in agenda building?
The basic rule to understand who is the main character or the participant in the agenda-building process is to analyze the stakeholders of that agenda. If we find out who is beneficial it is not difficult to figure out the participants on the agenda. If it is to be predicted who is going to participate in building agenda it is important to analyze the goals of the influential entities. It is almost always the case that when the influential entities are trying to achieve some goal favourable conditions start to form around them. It is not as difficult as it sounds to follow the patterns and predicting the participants of the future agenda building.
Why can it be said that agenda building is the most important aspect of the policy process?
The policy process is incomplete without the proper implementation of the policy. There should be a sound plan for the implementation of the policy. Here comes the role of the agenda building. It is important to analyze the situation of the region for which the policy is being made. The situation and the concerns of the area are important when devising a policy and if the policy is for some issue which the society is not focusing at that point of time the issue needs to be highlighted.
For this purpose at times, agendas are built to make everyone focus on the need for the policy and then give the solution so it is accepted with open arms. If the policy is made on some issue which is not being focused at that point of time the policy might not get the due focus and appreciation. That is why it is important to build agendas so everyone can see the importance of the policymaking.
How do we achieve mobilization?
Mobilization is when the issue is raised in the government circle and reaches the formal agenda. Now the goal is to make the issue part of the public agenda. In order to make the agenda public, it is important to raise the issue among the public through different means. The most important tool used to achieve this goal is to utilize the tool of media. Media is a strong mean to convert an official agenda into public agenda. It makes people realize the importance of the issue and sometimes even oversell the issue to increase the intensity and importance of the people. Once the issue becomes a part of public agenda it is easy to work on that with the public support.
Policy Formulation Portfolio Questions/Issues
What is policy formulation and how does it differ from agenda setting?
Policy formulation is far more complex and extensive process than agenda-building process. There are multiple stages in the policy-making at every stage there are a number of activities involved that make the process complicated. These activities involve policy dialogue, advocacy, and analysis of the problem. The part of policy-making where there is the formulation of the policy there is much more to ponder upon than in agenda setting step. In this step, there is an analysis of the all the issues and how these issues can be sorted out on the other hand agenda setting deals with how these issues can be related to the masses or to those authorities the involvement of whom is important for the survival of the policy (Romer, 2014).
Who determines policy formulation? Who participates in policy formulation?
Policy formulation is basically the development of an effective methodology to take actions to achieve the set agendas. There are basically two parts of policy formulation first is analysis and second is the authorization process. The part of formulation where analysis is to be done is completed by the experts in the relevant field. People who understand the problem in detail and understand the root causes which could lead to causing those problems and raising those issues. Then there is a second part which is the authorization part of the formulation. This part is conducted by the authorities. Now for this part, any level of authorities can be the one who is participating in the formulation process depending on the matter and the relevance of the matter to different levels of authority. It can be of the level of a governor or it might go to the president level and involve the whole machinery of the government (Hill & Varone, The public policy process, 2016).
Explain why problem definition is important in the policy formulation process?
Problem definition is important for the proper analysis of the problem. Problem analysis is the first and important step of the policy formulation. Without understanding the problem it is almost impossible to devise a strategy to coop it. Problem definition is what makes the problem and its intensity clearer to the authorities. Problem analysis is based on the problem definition because it helps the experts to understand where to look for the solution of the problems and also it helps them in understanding the causes and devise safety measures against them to propose to the authorities.
Without the basic knowledge, it is almost impossible to formulate an effective policy for the problem. If the policy is not effective enough the authorities might not authorize the policy which is the second stage of policy formulation. This is because if the authorities are not impressed by the analysis they would never come on board with implementing a policy with uncertainties (Puterman, 2014).
Who are policy entrepreneurs and what is their role in problem definition?
Policy entrepreneurs are the ones who are not part of the government formally and officially but still they become part of the policy-making process one way or the other. They are the ones who come up with some innovative and good ideas at times and translate them to the authorities and make them see their valid points. These are the ones who not only come up with the idea but also help authorities in translating that idea into in reality. They help the authorities in the implementation of the ideas that are linked with public practice. Their role in the problem definition is very crucial at times. They are the ones who come up with the basic idea and therefore have enough information on the origin and causes of the problem that helps in the refining process of the problem (Mintrom, 2013).
What are top-down models of policy formulation and how do they differ from the bottom-up model?
Top-down model of policy is when the policy is made by higher management. This can be the executive order or court decision which has to be implemented. No one else has a say in such matters because of the authority of the policymaker cannot be challenged and there is no space for objections in such situations. On the other hand, the bottom-up policy is when the policy is being proposed by the lower scale policymakers or advisors. This model is less of a policy-making and more of policy advising. The people who are involved in this policy formulation can be over-ruled by the higher authorities. The major difference is that when the policy is made by top-down approach it is often made in a way that there is low or no resistance from the other side but when it comes to bottom-up approach the policy makers are used to of facing the resistance and are not upset by that more often (Mishra & Bisht, 2013).
What is the difference between rational comprehensive model and the incremental model of policy formulation what are the strengths and weaknesses of each?
The basic difference between the rational comprehensive and incremental model is the fact in rational comprehensive approach all the rational steps and decisions are taking to make policies but on the other hand, the incremental model makes small increments and changes to the already existing policies. The strength of the rational model is that it is quite extensive and comprehensive process which deals with all the important factors and takes logical steps towards making an effective policy (Stanovich, 2016).
The weakness is that this process is time taking and needs a lot of critical thinking and sometimes might need some bold steps to be taken because they seem logical. On the other hand, incremental model’s strength is that the model is simple and easier to be implemented. This is just about making some improvements or small changes in the already existing policy. The weakness of this model is the less effectiveness of this model as compared to the rational model. This model does not change much in the already existing policy which in many cases might act just as a temporary solution to the problem.
What is target population model and how it’s different from the conventional conception policy formulation?
Target population model is the model which deals with the policy for a specific group of people. This might be a specific city but normally it is at least on a state level. These policies are made because of the special needs of a specific group of people. This is different from the conventional methodology because it is not generalized policymaking. All the communities are not the prime focus in such situations. Even in the target population model, there is a consideration for the rest of the community but the prime focus is on making a specific community comfortable and empowered to be able to do what they deserve (Lorem, Steen, & Wik, 2010).
Who are street-level bureaucrats? What are street-level bureaucracies?
Street-level bureaucracy is basically a subset of a government institution with the civil servants working for it. These civil servants are basically the street-level bureaucrats (Winter & May, 2016). These public servants have direct contact with general public. They make sure that the laws and policies of the government are being enforced and obeyed by the public. This bureaucracy makes sure that the laws are being followed on the smallest scale and the streets are running fine.
How do street-level bureaucrats make public policy?
Street-level bureaucrats are said to be the policymakers in the sense that they have freedom of exercising the law in whatever way they feel right. There is no check and balance on them in the field and they are free in improvising their moves in their field of expertise whenever they need to. Their operations can so complex that they cannot be scripted and that is why they are trusted to take steps according to their judgment at the sight. The discretion and the freedom the oversight of the organization give the street-level bureaucrats a strange power of unexpected policymaking during their operation on the daily basis (Hill, Policy process: A reader, 2014).
Policy Implementation Portfolio Questions/Issues
What is policy implementation?
Policy implementation is a bit complex process that comprises many steps. First of all, there is the need to identify the need for a policy in the society. Next step is to determine what should be the content of the policy. This is delicate and the important part. Once the content is decided the next thing to do is to win the confidence of the stakeholders on the policy that has been derived. It is important to take support from the stakeholders because otherwise, it is really difficult to implement a policy successfully. This part has many variables and there is a need of a strong convincer to bring all the stakeholders to a table and convince them this policy is good for everyone. Once all these steps are followed then the policy can be added to the code or revised accordingly (Hill, 2014).
How does it differ from agenda setting and policy formulation?
Policy implementation mainly deals with the process of implementing the policy and removing hurdles from the way of the execution. The main purpose of the agenda-setting is during the process and starting point of the policy-making process. This is what starts the wheel to move, policy formulation is the process of keeping the wheel moving and policy implementation is what the destiny is. All the work is done to get to the point of implementation and making the thought into a reality. Though agenda-setting helps in this-this but winning the support of the stakeholder is the vital part of the policy implementation process. If the support is not gained due to the agenda-setting or there is some problem with the policy formulation step it is almost impossible to implement the policy successfully.
What is the difference between self-executing and other forms of policy?
Self-executing policies are the one which can be implemented without the need for any legislation. Although there is an indication in the legislation regarding this still there is no potential threat to the implementation of the policy. Normally there is a need for legislation by the authorities to make sure that the policy can be implemented properly and is obeyed by the concerned people as well. This is normally also important to make that the institution which is involved in activity should make sure that the policy is being implemented properly and thoroughly. There is a proper devised procedure in the constitution to pass a policy and make sure it is being implemented properly. Self-executing policies are an exception to these as these policies do not need to get the authorities to hold sessions to make legislation in order to implement the policy and make it effective (Mashaw, 2017).
Who participates in policy implementation? What is the formula for knowing who participates?
There are many stakeholders when it comes to policy implementation process. There are government bodies as well as non-government bodies that are directly or indirectly involved in the implementation of the policy (Palinkas, Horwitz, Green, Wisdom, Duan, & Hoagwood, 2015). The implementation of the policy involves the step of making sure that all the stakeholders are on board with the policy. This is the step that involves all the people who can be affected by the policy and its implementation. Though the participation of all the stakeholders is not direct most of them have a representative who comes and represents the stakes of the stakeholders.
There is a simple rule for finding out who participate in the policy implementation. One should look for the people who have stakes attached to the issue because they are the ones who are going to participate in the policy implementation on way or the other. Whether through their representative or directly if there is some sort of polling for making sure that the stakeholders are onboard with the policy, all stakeholders are involved in the process.
What is the role of the bureaucratic agencies in the policy implementation?
Bureaucratic agencies have an important role to play in the policy implementation. The higher authorities are just concerned with the policy-making process they might even come up with the plan of implementation and execution of the process but when it comes to practical implementation of the process there is always need of bureaucratic agencies to do the job. They are the ones who are making sure that the policies being made by the higher authorities are being implemented properly. If there is any flaw in the implementation process of the policy the effectiveness of the policy reduces which is definitely the preferred condition given there is an extensive procedure to make sure that the important, practical and effective policies are made. This makes the role of bureaucratic agencies vital in the whole scenario (Tummers & Bekkers, 2014).
Why are laws crafted in complex legal language? What is the implication of this for bureaucratic agencies?
Laws are normally crafted in a legal language that is complex because of the possible outcomes of the words written in law are too many. There is a proper language with proper terminologies is derived for the purpose of the lawmaking. This is to make sure that the meaning of the law is not misunderstood. The proper language of the law helps because there is a proper guide devised in order to define the words that are being used. This legal language helps in reducing the ambiguities and makes sure that the agencies who are supposed to implement the law.
This makes it easier for the agencies to understand the laws and implement them when there is a need. There are not always the basic generic situations and direct implementation is not always easy and simple. There is often need of analysis of the situation and the relevant law in order to make sure that the law being implemented is in accordance with the situation. Laws made handle multiple situations in one statement and that is why the statements are often complex and a bit hard for the layman to understand easily (Gibbons, 2014).
What is rulemaking? Why is this important in policy implementation?
Rule-making is basically the process of implementation of the legislation passed by Congress and is made into law by the President of the country. This implementation is done by the federal agencies and not only this but the agencies also engage in the process of rule-making in order for the up gradation and the review of the existing law. This process helps in updating the already existing rules and also helps in making new laws as well. These rules are made on the basis of the needs that the agency feels. Though the authorities are involved in the updates the recommendations of the federal agencies are important and kept in mind while conducting the procedure (Ellickson, 2016).
What are the basic questions involved in policy implementation? How do we know when these questions are answered satisfactorily?
The basic questions and concerns linked to the implementation process of the policy are making sure that the policy that is to be implemented is actually needed. There is also a question of what part of the community needs the policy and what effect it can have on others. There is a concern on the formulation process of the policy that which of the community’s and authority’s representation were involved and which of them were not involved in the process. There is also a question of where and when to implement the policy and which department will have what amount of authority in the process of the implementation.
Another important question that is to be answered is that the limitation of the authority that is to be awarded to the federal agencies to give them the freedom to improvise when operating in the field. All of these concerns are to be addressed in order to make the process of implementation smooth and easy. All these concerns when sorted out all the stakeholders can be satisfied and be taken on board which makes things easier and simpler (McCullough, De Vries, Miller, Becker, Sandberg, & McCarthy, 2014).
Discuss matters associated with management by objectives (MBO), decision tree, and the critical path methods?
Management by objectives is basically when the top management and higher authorities define the specific goals for the future and convey those to those who are working under the top management. Then policies are made in order to achieve those set goals. This process is not that easy always as it sounds. The first part of setting objectives and then communicating them down the hierarchy can be complicated at times. It is important that all the involved personals are involved completely in the process and for that, it is necessary to win their trust. In order to win their trust, there needs to be something for everyone in the policy to attract them to work towards the achievement of the goals (Larsson & Hanberger, 2016).
A decision tree is the graphical representation of the possible situations that can be faced in case of taking a specific decision and the chain of decision that might be needed to be taken in those situations then the outcomes of those situations in the future are also incorporated (Smit, Smit, Botterblom, & Mulder, 2013). Critical path method is basically used for scheduling the process in order to achieve the set goals. This methodology is effective and improves the level of performance of the system and makes the achievement of objective easier.
Discuss the roles of agencies, legislatures, courts, interest groups, etc. in policy implementation?
All the parties discussed above have a strong role play in the process of implementation of policy. Agencies are the one who is responsible for the implementation process of the policies that are made by the government and are made into laws by the President of the country. Legislatures and the courts handle the legal part of the policies. Legislatures are the ones who make the legislation for the new policies and make them legal. Courts play their role when there are some allegations on the policy from some party. Court decides whether the legislation done is legal or not. Court decides whether it is in the interest of the citizens or not. Interest groups are the ones who might have reservations regarding the policy and come out against the policy. If this is the case they might make the implementation of the policy difficult (Dunn, 2015).
Policy Evaluation Portfolio Question/Issues
What is policy evaluation? How does it differ from other policy stages?
Policy evaluation is the process in which the different methodologies are employed to check the validity, application and effectiveness of the policy. This activity helps in understanding every stage of the policymaking in a better way and finds out the effectiveness of those stages as it important. There is a basic difference between policy evaluation and all the stages of the policy-making process. All processes help in designing a strategy and implementing it and making sure that it is effective. This activity keeps a check on them this is not a progressive stage but analyzes the progressiveness of the stages involved in the process and makes sure that they are at their optimum levels. This is important because if the stages are not operating at their optimum level it is probably just waste of time and effort. It can be something more than wastage of time; it can become a cause of restlessness and distress for the society if there is no proper check on each step of the policymaking (Magro & Wilson, 2013).
Why is policy evaluation a necessary step in the policy process?
This step is necessary because this step makes sure that the policy that is being processed is being done in the right way. This step makes sure that the policy that is being made is needed for the place it is being made for. This activity makes sure that the content and the implementation of the process are effective and there are minimum flaws in the process. This step makes sure that the policy is worth making and its merit is up to the mark. This helps in understanding the utility and application of the policy. This activity makes sure that the process of policy making works effectively instead of creating confusions and distress in the society. This also makes sure that the implementation can be done in a proper way where the policy is needed to be implemented as this activity helps in analyzing the needs of the policy (Birkland, 2014).
What are the kinds of evaluation undertaken and how do they differ?
There are five types of evaluation including formative, summative, process, outcomes and impact. Formative is a type of evaluation which deals with the evaluation of the process in the early stages when it is easy to be done. This can be of great help for the process as it can suggest changes at early stages of the process. Summative is a type of evaluation that provides information on the effectiveness of the process being undertaken. This type of evaluation of the process takes place after the process is completed and ready to be tested and implemented. This makes sure that the effectiveness is accordingly as it was desired.
The process is the type of evaluation that focuses on the implementation of the process and makes sure that strategies for the implementation were applied as they were planned. The outcome is the type which deals with evaluating what comes out of the implementation of the policy. This deals with both the long and short-term outcomes and impact due to the implementation of the policy. The impact is the evaluation technique that deals with the long-term changes in the society because of the policy (Lichfield, Kettle, & Whitbread, 2016).
Distinguish between primary, secondary, and tertiary goals.
Primary goals are the ones which are there to tackle the basic needs. These goals discuss the needs and requirements that are basic and inevitable. These goals are what minimum needs to be achieved. These goals can be different in different situations. When it comes to policy making these are the goals that deal with the needs of the society that cannot be left unaddressed. These goals are what the policy needs to address and solve no matter what. These are the actual goals that cause triggering of the policy-making process. Secondary goals are the ones that are linked to the primary goals but they are not as basic and the need is not as intense as it is for the primary goals. These goals are tried to be achieved but these are not as important as the primary ones and therefore can be compromised in situations where it is difficult to be implemented. Tertiary goals are the ones that are the least priority out of all the goals that are set for any process. These are the goals which are defined and are tried to be achieved when the conditions are favourable.
Who determines the standards for success?
Once the goals are defined properly through an extensive thought process and evaluation of the steps it is easy to define a standard for success. The extents to which the goals are achieved define the level of success. If the primary goals are achieved the success rate can be said to be satisfactory when secondary goals are also achieved the success rate is considered to be good and when the policy is even able to serve the tertiary goals as well it can be said to be perfectly successful (Dunn, 2015).
What is the role of bureaucratic agencies in the policy evaluation?
The bureaucratic agencies have an important role to play when it comes to policy evaluation. They are mostly the ones who implement the policy the public level and have first-hand knowledge of the outcomes of the policy. Their experience can help a lot in the evaluation process of the policy (Carpenter & Krause, 2014).
What is the role of courts? What about interest groups?
The role of courts is important in the evaluation because if there are any problems that the policy is causing people turn to the court for making the things right for them. This is when the court has to decide whether the policy is working fine and fulfilling the purpose it was designed for. Interest groups are an important part of the evaluation process. Their reactions are important in analyzing the effectiveness and impact of the policy on the society (Klüver, 2013).
Policies that are not achieving their goals should be discontinued. What are the problems associated with the policy discontinuity?
It is not that simple to discontinue the policy as there are a lot of resources involved in designing and implementing a policy. Evaluation is done not only analyze whether the goals are being achieved or not and if the goals are not achieved properly it is also evaluated what are the reasons behind the lack of working of the policy and those factors are tried to be addressed. If the reason behind the lack of goal achievement cannot be incorporated with the help of variations in the policy then the only option left is policy discontinuity which is a waste of resources. This is also done properly and officially. For this purpose, there are debates held on higher levels and the policy discontinuity is passed (LIU, GU, & CHEN, 2010).
This document deals with all the steps of the policy-making process. From the agenda-setting to policy formulation to policy implementation and the policy evaluation, this document discusses them all. All the important factors that are linked with all of the steps are discussed. The problems and the authorities are analyzed and their role is evaluated on basis of their role in the process. Importance of interest groups in all the steps is also given due importance because they can influence the process. The role of bureaucracy is also given some thought.
The importance of all the stages is discussed and their possible influence on the process is also given a thought in the document. The policy-making process and the flaws that can be a part of the process and how they can be dealt with are all discussed in the document.
Bevan, S., & Jennings, W. (2014). Representation, agendas and institutions. European Journal of Political Research, 53(1), 37-56.
Birkland, T. A. (2014). An introduction to the policy process: Theories, concepts and models of public policy making. Routledge.
Brux, J. M. (2015). Economic issues and policy. Cengage Learning.
Carpenter, D., & Krause, G. A. (2014). Transactional authority and bureaucratic politics. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(1), 5-25.
Dunn, W. N. (2015). Public policy analysis. Routledge.
Ellickson, R. C. (2016). When civil society uses an iron fist: The roles of private associations in rulemaking and adjudication. American Law and Economics Review, 18(2), 235-271.
ephraimcity. (2016). Types of Agendas. Retrieved 11 22, 2017, from ephraimcity web site: http://www.ephraimcity.org/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/_05032016-94
Gibbons, J. (2014). Language and the Law. Routledge.
Hill, M. (2014). Policy process: A reader. Routledge.
Hill, M. (2014). Policy process: A reader. Routledge.
Hill, M., & Varone, F. (2016). The public policy process. Taylor & Francis.
Klüver, H. (2013). Lobbying in the European Union: interest groups, lobbying coalitions, and policy change. Oxford University Press.
Larsson, M., & Hanberger, A. (2016). Evaluation in management by objectives: A critical analysis of Sweden’s national environmental quality objectives system. Evaluation, 22(2), 190-208.
Lichfield, N., Kettle, P., & Whitbread, M. (2016). Evaluation in the Planning Process: The Urban and Regional Planning Series (Vol. 10). Elsevier.
LIU, S., GU, N., & CHEN, X. (2010). Policy Discontinuity, Institutional Environment and Sustainable Growth of Service Sector: Based on Perspective of Provincial Leaders. Turnover. Finance & Trade Economics 10.
Lorem, T., Steen, P. A., & Wik, L. (2010). High school students as ambassadors of CPR—A model for reaching the most appropriate target population? Resuscitation, 81(1), 78-81.
Magro, E., & Wilson, J. R. (2013). Complex innovation policy systems: Towards an evaluation mix. Research Policy, 42(9), 1647-1656.
Mashaw, J. (2017). The rise of reason giving in American. Comparative Administrative Law, 260-268.
McCullough, L. D., De Vries, G. J., Miller, V. M., Becker, J. B., Sandberg, K., & McCarthy, M. M. (2014). NIH initiative to balance sex of animals in preclinical studies: generative questions to guide policy, implementation, and metrics. Biology of sex differences, 5(1), 13-15.
Mintrom, M. (2013). Policy entrepreneurs and controversial science: governing human embryonic stem cell research. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(3), 442-457.
Mishra, V., & Bisht, S. S. (2013). Mobile banking in a developing economy: A customer-centric model for policy formulation. Telecommunications Policy, 37(6), 503-514.
Orchard, L., & Stretton, H. (2016). Public goods, public enterprise, public choice: theoretical foundations of the contemporary attack on government. Springer.
Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42(5), 533-544.
Protess, D., & McCombs, M. E. (2016). Agenda setting: Readings on media, public opinion, and policymaking. Routledge.
Puterman, M. L. (2014). Markov decision processes: discrete stochastic dynamic programming. John Wiley & Sons.
Romer, C. (2014). Policy formulation and evaluation. Policy.
Smit, A. J., Smit, J. M., Botterblom, G. J., & Mulder, D. J. (2013). Skin autofluorescence based decision tree in detection of impaired glucose tolerance and diabetes. PLoS one, 8(6), e65592.
Stanovich, K. E. (2016). The comprehensive assessment of rational thinking. Educational Psychologist, 51(1), 23-34.
Tummers, L., & Bekkers, V. (2014). Policy implementation, street-level bureaucracy, and the importance of discretion. Public Management Review, 16(4), 527-547.
Wasieleski, D. (2016). Agenda-building theory: A stakeholder salience approach for determining agenda placement. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 2(2).
Winter, S. C., & May, P. (2016). Street-level bureaucrats and regulatory deterrence. Understanding Streetlevel Bureaucracy, 133.
Assignment Writing Help
Engineering Assignment Services
Do My Assignment Help
Write My Essay Services