Public Policy Theories and Models

How many theories or models were discussed?

2 theories, 10 models

What are the theories and models?

1. Elite Theory

2. Group Theory

1. Institutionalist Model

2. Neo-institutionalist Model

3. Streams and Windows Model

4. Game Theory

6. Rational Comprehensive Model

7. Incremental Model

8. Mixed Scanning Model

9. Strategic Planning Model

10. Integrative Model

Elite Theory

Policy as Elite Preference

Elite theory - Definitions

• Argues that public policies are shaped primarily by a small, powerful group of elites, rather than by the general public

• Reflects negative bias against participatory democracy

• Policies flow downward, they do not arise from mass demands.

• Change in public policy is caused by how the elite defines them. Changes are

• incremental.

• Reforms are instituted to preserve the system.

Elite theory - 5 Actors

1. Political elites (top elected officials, party leaders)

2. Economic elites (business leaders, corporations, financiers)

3. Bureaucratic elites (senior civil servants, regulators)

4. Military and security elites

5. Intellectual / technocratic elites (policy experts, think tanks)

Elite theory - 3 Criticisms

1. Underestimates citizen activism and social movements

2. Can be overly deterministic

3. Less effective in explaining participatory or decentralized governance

Group theory

Policy as group equilibrium

Group theory - Definitions

• Explains policymaking as the result of competition and bargaining among organized interest groups.

• Equilibrium reached in the group struggle—reached among competing groups in society.

• Group influence in policy making is determined by their numbers, wealth, organizational strength, leadership, access to decision makers, and internal cohesion (Dye as cited in Mendoza)

• Government doesn’t act independently; it acts as a referee, responding to pressures from these groups.

• Government mediates, negotiates, and arbitrates group conflicts.

• Policy outcomes reflect who is better organized, more persistent, better funded, and more politically connected.

Group theory - 5 Actors

1. Economic groups (business chambers, industry associations)

2. Labor groups (trade unions, public sector unions)

3. Professional groups (doctors, lawyers, teachers)

4. Cause-oriented groups (environmental, human rights, consumer groups)

5. Local and sectoral groups

Group theory - 4 Criticisms

1. Assumes equal access and capacity among groups (not true)

2. Overlooks unorganized or marginalized sectors

3. Downplays the independent power of the state

4. Can ignore elite dominance within groups

System model

Policy as a System Output

System model - Definitions

• policymaking as a continuous process of inputs, conversion, outputs, and feedback within a political system.

• Cyclical and relies on concepts of information theory

• “It also conceives public policy as a response of the political system to forces brought to bear upon it from the environment (Easton, 1957)

  • Government does not operate in isolation. It is constantly being shaped, pressured, and influenced by its surrounding social, economic, political, and international context.

System model - 4 Parts

1. Inputs - the forces

2. Environment - “any condition or circumstance external to the boundaries of political systems”

3. Political system - “is that group of interrelated structures and processes which functions authoritatively to allocate values for the society”

4. Outputs - the public policy

System model - 4 Parts - Forces

Demands – requests for action (e.g., lower taxes, better roads, environmental protection)

Supports – compliance, taxes, votes, public trust

System model - 4 Parts - Environments

• Social forces

  • Public opinion

  • Social movements

  • Demographic shifts

  • Cultural values

• Economic forces

  • Inflation

  • Unemployment

  • Business interests

  • Market crises

• Political forces

  • Interest groups

  • Political parties

  • Media pressure

• International forces

  • Global markets

  • International organizations

  • Geopolitical tensions

  • Climate change

System model - 4 Parts - Political system

• The political system includes:

  • Executive leaders

  • Legislatures

  • Courts

  • Bureaucratic agencies

  • Regulatory bodies

• It is the decision-making structure of government.

System model - 4 Parts - Public policy as Outputs

• Authoritative value allocation

• May be a set of purposive course/s of action or inaction

System model - 6 Criticisms

1. Lacks operational detail

2. Conversion process unclear

3. Assumes equal access to inputs

4. Underplays proactive state action

5. Assumes equilibrium rather than conflict

6. Assumes equilibrium rather than conflict

Institutionalist model

Policy as Institutional Activity

Institutionalist model - Definitions

• Public policy is made, authorized, and implemented only by state institutions.

• Focuses on the three branches of government:

  • Executive, Legislative, and Judiciary.

• Emphasizes the distinct “public-ness” of government policies:

  • Legitimacy – policies are legally binding.

  • Universality – policies apply to all citizens.

  • Coercion – government has the monopoly of legitimate force.

• Concentrates on organizational structures of government (bureaus, departments, agencies).

• Describes official duties, arrangements, and functions.

• Often descriptive, not analytical.

• Gives limited attention to:

  • How institutional structure affects policy content.

  • How institutional changes influence policy outputs.

• 
  

Neo-institutionalist model

Policy as Arenas of Power

Neo-institutionalist model - Definitions

• Emerged from the traditional institutional model but focuses on political institutions and power dynamics.

• Classifies public policies into policy arenas or sub-systems of power.

• Seeks to predict how different policy types can shape political behavior.

• Key proponent: Theodore Lowi

Neo-Institutionalist model - 4 Arenas of power

1. Distributive – allocation of benefits to specific groups

2. Redistributive – transfer of wealth/power between social groups

3. Regulative – restriction or control of behavior

4. Constituent – creation or restructuring of institutions

Neo-Institutionalist model - 4 Arenas of power - Distributive

• Provide direct benefits to specific individuals or groups.

• Examples: scholarships, disaster relief goods, infrastructure projects, government contracts.

• Affect relatively small groups and usually involve little conflict.

• Require minimal government coercion.

• Philippine example: district infrastructure projects through agencies like the Department of Public Works and Highways.

Neo-Institutionalist model - 4 Arenas of power - Redistributive

• Policies involve transferring resources from the “haves” to the “have-nots.”

• Require stronger government coercion due to resistance from affected groups.

• Tend to produce:

  • Ideological debates

  • Lobbying and bargaining

  • Class-based conflicts

Neo-Institutionalist model - 4 Arenas of power - Constituent policies

• Concern the structure and functioning of political institutions and the relationship between government and citizens.

• Do not directly reward or punish individuals but reallocate political power or resources through institutional arrangements.

• Government coercion is generally indirect or minimal, unless corruption or abuse occurs.

• Example: allocation of development funds or legislative institutional arrangements in the House of Representatives of the Philippines.

Neo-Institutionalist model - 4 Arenas of power - Regulative policies

• control or restrict behavior and impose sanctions for violations.

• Examples: traffic rules, pollution controls, anti-drug laws, consumer protection regulations.

• Often involve fines, penalties, or enforcement actions.

• Require immediate government coercion to ensure compliance.

• Example: enforcement of traffic regulations by the Land Transportation Office.

Streams and windows model

Policy as an Intellectual Process of Interaction between and among the Problem, Policy and Political Stream

Streams and windows model - Definitions

• the setting of policy agenda

• Developed by John Kingdon to explain how policies enter the government agenda.

• Policy-making is viewed as an interaction of three largely independent streams.

• These streams flow separately but occasionally converge, creating opportunities for policy change.

• When the streams meet, a “policy window” opens, allowing a new public policy to be adopted.

• Policy change happens when problems, political conditions, and policy solutions align at the right time.

• 
  

Streams and windows model - Illustration

Streams and windows model - Three streams in policymaking

1. Problem Stream

• Social issues gain attention and are recognized as public problems.

• Problems enter the agenda through:

  • Monitoring of social indicators

  • Focusing events (disasters, crises)

  • Feedback from existing programs

• 
  

2.Political Stream

• Involves political forces shaping government priorities.

• Key factors:

  • National mood

  • Interest groups

  • Elections and political actors

• Participants: politicians, media, interest groups, and public opinion.

3.Policy Stream

• Generation of policy alternatives or solutions.

• Developed by the “hidden cluster” such as:

• Policy experts

• Academics and researchers

• Career bureaucrats

• Policy entrepreneurs.

Streams and windows model - Policy window and policy change

• Policy Window

  • A temporary opportunity for policy adoption when the three streams converge.

• Windows open due to:

  • Change in administration

  • Shift in national mood

  • Emergence of urgent public problems.

• Significance:

  • Explains how timing, politics, and ideas interact in policymaking.

  • Considered a comprehensive and empirical explanation of the policy process.

Streams and windows model - 3 Criticisms

1. Overemphasis on Chance and Timing:

   • Policy change may appear too accidental or opportunistic rather than deliberate.

2. Limited Attention to Power and Inequality:

   • It treats actors somewhat equally, even though power relations heavily affect policy outcomes.

3. The model focuses mainly on agenda setting (how issues get attention).

Game theory

The Prisoner’s Dilemma

Game theory - Definitions

• explains policy decisions as strategic choices among competing actors whose outcomes depend on each other’s actions.

• Decision-makers anticipate the behavior of other players and use strategies (e.g., minimax) to maximize gains or minimize losses.

• Although rarely applied perfectly in practice, it helps policymakers analyze conflicts, anticipate reactions, and forecast outcomes.

Game theory in Policymaking

• Strategic interaction among actors: Game Theory explains policy decisions as the result of strategic choices made by different actors (government officials, interest groups, legislators), where each actor’s decision depends on the expected actions of others.

• Anticipating reactions and outcomes: Policymakers evaluate possible strategies and anticipate the responses of other players in order to maximize gains or minimize losses (e.g., the minimax strategy).

• Use in analyzing policy conflicts: Although rarely applied in a perfectly formal way, Game Theory helps analyze bargaining, competition, and cooperation in policymaking and can be used to predict possible outcomes of policy decisions.

Game theory - Help

• Game theory could help leaders predict responses from institutions, interest groups, and the public before making major policy moves.

• Applying game theory could also have helped Joseph Estrada manage conflicts such as the Philippine Airlines dispute with labor unions and tensions with the press by anticipating stakeholder behavior and outcomes.

Game theory - Example

The rejection of the US Bases Treaty during the administration of Corazon Aquino and the failed Charter Change (Cha-cha) initiative under Fidel V. Ramos show how misjudging political actors can lead to policy defeat.

Rational-comprehensive model

Policy as Efficient Goal Achievement

Rational-comprehensive model - Definitions

• views policymaking as a logical and systematic process aimed at achieving the most efficient policy outcome.

• Policies should be rational (based on logic and evidence) and comprehensive (considering all relevant factors in problem solving).

• Policy makers analyze all available options and consequences before selecting the best policy.

• Choose the policy alternative that maximizes societal benefits and minimizes costs.

Rational-comprehensive model - 5 Requirements of Rational Policymaking

1. Know all societal values and preferences.

2. Identify all possible policy alternatives.

3. Understand the consequences of each alternative.

4. Calculate the costs and benefits of every option.

5. Select the policy alternative that achieves the greatest overall efficiency.

6. 
   

Rational-comprehensive model - What are the requirements for?

Meant to ensure that policy decisions are based on complete information, rational analysis, and efficiency.

Rational-comprehensive model - PAS Framework

• P – Problem

  • Full understanding and conceptualization of the public problem.

• A – Alternatives

  • Identification and evaluation of all possible policy options.

• S – Solution

  • Selection of the best policy solution based on rational comparison of alternatives.

Rational-comprehensive model - 3 Criticisms

1. Policy makers may lack complete information.

2. They may not know all societal values or alternatives.

3. Decisions may be influenced by personal or political interests rather than purely societal goals.

4. 
   

Incremental model

Policy as Variations of the Past

Incremental model

• Developed by Charles Lindblom

• Views policy-making as a continuation of existing policies with small adjustments.

• Instead of starting from scratch, decision-makers build on previous programs and decisions.

• Key Idea: Policy change is gradual, conservative, and based on past experience.

Mixed Scanning model

• Proposed by Amitai Etzioni

• Combines the following:

  • Rational model (broad, long-term analysis)

  • Incremental model (small, practical adjustments)

• How it Works:

  • Uses “big decisions” (macro-level) for overall direction

  • Uses “small decisions” (micro-level) for detailed adjustment.

• Key Idea: Balance comprehensive planning with practical, step-by-step decision-making.

Strategic planning model

Policy as a Guided Strategy

Strategic planning model

• A practical application of mixed scanning in real policy-making.

• Integrates both:

  • Rational resources (long-term analysis, forecasting)

  • Incremental resources (existing capabilities, political realities)

• Key Idea: Policy-making becomes goal-oriented and strategic, not purely reactive.

• Key Elements

  • Short-term political analysis (opportunities, threats)

  • Long-term environmental scanning (trends, future conditions)

• Utilizes:

  • Organizational resources (budget, leadership, expertise)

  • Institutional values and past commitments

Integrative policy models - General Definition

• Public policy cannot be explained by a single model

• Various integrative lenses combine different perspectives

• These models emphasize that policymaking is:

  • Complex

    • Multi-dimensional

  • Influenced by structure, process, and politics