THEORETICAL APPROACHES TO PUBLIC POLICY
ABSTRACT
An approach suggests authentic procedures and techniques for the solution of a specific problem.
To analyze the policy-making process, various approaches, theories, and models have been
introduced by social and political scientists. American political scientist Harold Laswell presented
the term ‘Public Policy’ in 1951 initially. Laswell projected a multi-disciplinary innovative
dexterous approach to control the political procedures of industrialized civilizations of Post-World
War II. At present, the study of policy process and analysis has quickly established a higher level
of theoretical framework commonly in the West. The theoretical approaches that are primarily
connected with public policy formulation are rational-choice theory, incremental theory, policy
output analysis, political system theory, and institutionalism, group theory, and elite theory. The
cyclic/stages model offers a systematic framework for the examination of public policies. A
reviewing study of theoretical approaches to study public policy was initiated, which explored the
process of public policy as a cyclic model. The purpose of the study is to learn about the different
approaches to study public policy. The finding indicates that the complex process of public policy
formulation will relatively convert into the easiest mode by following the logical apparatus of the
cyclic model. A good rule for the policy maker is to be eclectic and flexible, and to draw from
theories that seem most useful for the satisfactory and fair-minded description and explanation of
policies. The objective explanation of political behavior rather than the validation of one’s
preferred theoretical approach should be the goal of political inquiry. Each of the theories
discussed, if drawn upon skillfully and selectively, can contribute to a better understanding of
policy-making.
INTRODUCTION
Public Policy is an action plan of the government to acquire the particular goals that empower it
to attain these goals. Public policies are framed by the executive branch and executed by public
and private actors. According to Miljan (2012)1, public policy is produced for the assistance of the
public by the government that empowers the government to attain definite goals by providing an
action plan. The policy is enforced and executed by the public agency which itself is a wide-
ranging action plan formulated to overcome a specific problem and articulated through a precise
political process.
An approach signifies the actual techniques and methods which are applicable to find a specific
task. The philosophical element of a phenomenon is considered a theory. It is determined by the
theory of a subject which approach will be followed by the researcher. Commonly, approaches can
be divided into three main groups that are normatism, behaviorism, and empiricism. These groups
are used as tools for the analysis of a phenomenon (Shafritz & Hyde, 1997).2 The representation
of reality is called theory which can be proved scientifically. A theory is a systematic,
comprehensive, reliable, and consistent prediction and description of correlation amongst
particular variables. The ground for the public policy formulation is provided by the public policy
theories. By the introduction of tools and techniques in the field of public policy for the
improvement of rational decision-making, government practices have been improved (Lindblom,
1968).
The scope and content of public policies will obviously vary from country to country, depending
on the system of government and ideology in force in that country. In most developing countries
where so much is expected of government and where government actions transcend virtually all
aspects of life of the citizens, the range of public policies is usually very broad and almost
unlimited. The theoretical approaches that are primarily connected with public policy formulation
are rational-choice theory, incremental theory, policy output analysis, political system theory and
institutionalism, group theory, and elite theory.3
1
Miljan, L. (2012). Public Policy: Theories, Processes, and Practices.
2
Shafritz, J. M., & Hyde, A. C. (1997). Classics of Public Administration.
3
Lindblom, C. E. (1968). "The Policy-Making Process." In The Policy Sciences, ed. by Daniel Lerner and Harold D.
Lasswell.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Public policy analysis is a multi-faceted field that integrates various theoretical frameworks to
understand how policies are formulated, implemented, and evaluated. This literature review
examines the primary theoretical approaches to public policy, highlighting their key concepts and
contributions.
1. Rational Choice Theory
Rational choice theory posits that individuals make decisions by maximizing utility based on
available information. It emphasizes a systematic, analytical approach to policy formulation,
assuming that policymakers act rationally in pursuit of specific goals. Key works include:
• Downs (1957) explores the dynamics of political decision-making, introducing the concept
of the "median voter" in democratic settings.
• Ostrom (1990) highlights the importance of understanding incentives in collective action
and policy outcomes.
2. Incrementalism
Incrementalism suggests that policy changes occur through small, gradual adjustments rather than
radical shifts. This approach recognizes the complexity of policymaking and the constraints faced
by policymakers. Key contributions include:
• Lindblom (1959) argues that policymakers often resort to "satisficing" rather than
maximizing outcomes, leading to incremental adjustments in policy.
• Eisner (2005) critiques rational choice assumptions, emphasizing the role of historical
context and existing policies in shaping incremental change.
3. Group Theory
Group theory examines the influence of interest groups and coalitions on the policymaking
process. It highlights the competitive nature of politics and the role of organized groups in
advocating for specific policy outcomes. Important works include:
• Schattschneider (1960) argues that the fight over policy is often a struggle among groups,
shaping the agenda and influencing outcomes.
• Truman (1951) explores how interest groups emerge and mobilize to affect policy
decisions.
4. Elite Theory
Elite theory posits that a small, cohesive group of elites holds significant power in shaping public
policy, often overshadowing broader public interests. Key texts include:
• Mills (1956) discusses the interconnections among political, corporate, and military elites
in influencing policy decisions.
• Dahl (1961) critiques the pluralist model by highlighting the concentration of power
among elites.
THEORTICAL APPROACHES TO PUBLIC POLICY
❖ The policy sciences methodology is intentionally normative or focused on values. The
periodic subject of the policy sciences deals with democratic philosophy in various cases.
The placement of value is mostly in response to behaviorism. To comprehend an issue, its
significance apparatuses must be recognized. This research work explores diverse theories
of public policy as follows:
ELITE THEORY
Elite theory posits that a small, organized group of elites holds a disproportionate amount of power
in society, significantly influencing political decisions and shaping public policy outcomes. This
perspective diverges from pluralist theories, which suggest that power is more broadly distributed
among various interest groups. Below are the main components and key figures associated with
elite theory.
Key Components of Elite Theory
1.Power Dynamics
Elite theory emphasizes that political power is not evenly distributed among the populace. Instead,
it concentrates among a small segment of society—typically the wealthy, educated, and socially
connected. This concentration leads to a system where a few individuals and groups dominate
political and economic decision-making processes.
2.Interlocking Networks
Elites often operate within interlocking networks that span multiple sectors, including government,
business, and civil society. This interconnectedness allows them to exert influence across various
domains. For example, individuals may hold positions on the boards of multiple corporations or
serve in governmental advisory roles, facilitating coordinated action that benefits elite interests.
3.The Role of Institutions
Institutions, both formal and informal, play a significant role in maintaining elite power. Political
parties, bureaucracies, and lobbying organizations often reflect elite interests, reinforcing their
dominance in policymaking. Elites can also influence the design and function of these institutions
to further entrench their power.
4.Social Stratification
Elite theory underscores the impact of social stratification on power dynamics. Marginalized
groups—such as the economically disadvantaged, racial minorities, and the politically
disenfranchised—tend to have less access to power and resources. This results in policies that
favor elite interests, often at the expense of broader societal needs.
5.Circulation of Elites
The theory suggests that while specific individuals may change over time (the "circulation of
elites"), the existence of an elite class remains constant. This concept, introduced by Vilfredo
Pareto, indicates that new elites may emerge, but the overall structure of elite power remains intact,
perpetuating systemic inequalities.
Criticisms of Elite Theory
While elite theory offers valuable insights into the nature of power, it has faced criticism:
• Oversimplification: Critics argue that elite theory oversimplifies the complexities of
political power, ignoring the nuances of group dynamics and the potential for grassroots
movements to effect change.
• Determinism: The theory can be perceived as deterministic, suggesting that power
structures are unchangeable and that elites will always dominate. This perspective can
overlook the capacity for social and political transformation.
• Neglect of Agency: By focusing on elites, the theory may neglect the agency of ordinary
citizens and their ability to mobilize for change.
GROUP THEORY
Group theory posits that political power is concentrated in organized interest groups that advocate
for specific policies and influence decision-making processes. This approach emphasizes the
competition and collaboration among various groups in the political landscape, highlighting how
their interactions shape public policy outcomes.
Key Concepts of Group Theory
1. Interest Groups
Interest groups are organized collections of individuals or organizations that share
common goals and seek to influence public policy. They can represent various sectors,
including business, labor, environmental causes, education, and civil rights. The theory
posits that these groups play a crucial role in the political process by representing diverse
interests.
2. Competition and Collaboration
Group theory emphasizes that multiple interest groups compete for influence over
policymakers. This competition can lead to a balancing of interests, where no single
group dominates the policymaking process. However, groups may also collaborate to
form coalitions, pooling resources and influence to achieve common goals.
3. Agenda Setting
Interest groups significantly impact the political agenda by bringing specific issues to the
forefront of public discourse. Through lobbying, advocacy, and public campaigns, they
can elevate certain topics, making them priorities for policymakers. This agenda-setting
function is crucial for shaping the legislative landscape.
4. Access and Influence
The degree of access that interest groups have to decision-makers can vary significantly.
Factors such as resources, connections, and organizational strength can determine how
effectively a group can influence policy. Well-funded and well-organized groups often
have greater success in swaying political outcomes.
5. Pluralism vs. Elitism
Group theory exists in tension with elite theory. While elite theory emphasizes the
concentration of power among a small group, group theory suggests a more pluralistic
approach, where multiple groups contend for influence. This pluralism can lead to more
representative outcomes, but it also risks neglecting the interests of marginalized groups
that may lack organizational power.
Criticisms of Group Theory
While group theory offers valuable insights into the role of organized interests in politics, it
also faces criticism:
• Overemphasis on Organization: Critics argue that group theory can overemphasize the
role of organized interests while neglecting the influence of unorganized or marginalized
groups whose voices may be less heard in the political arena.
• Resource Disparities: The theory often assumes that all groups have equal chances of
influencing policymakers. In reality, disparities in resources—such as funding, expertise,
and connections—can lead to unequal representation in the policymaking process.
• Complexity of Interactions: The interactions between groups, policymakers, and the
public can be highly complex and nuanced. Group theory may oversimplify these
interactions, failing to account for the various factors that influence policy outcomes.
INCREMENTAL THEORY
Incremental theory, often associated with the work of Charles E. Lindblom, posits that policy
changes occur through small, gradual adjustments rather than sweeping reforms. This approach
reflects the reality of policymaking processes, emphasizing the complexities and constraints faced
by decision-makers. Incrementalism contrasts with rational models of policy-making, which
assume comprehensive analysis and large-scale changes.
Key Concepts of Incremental Theory
1. Muddling Through
Lindblom famously described the policymaking process as "muddling through,"
suggesting that policymakers often rely on trial and error rather than systematic planning.
This approach recognizes that decision-makers may not have access to all necessary
information and face significant uncertainties, leading them to make small changes based
on previous policies rather than embarking on large-scale reforms.
2. Bounded Rationality
The concept of bounded rationality, introduced by Herbert Simon, underpins incremental
theory. It posits that decision-makers operate under cognitive limitations and constraints,
which prevent them from considering all possible alternatives. As a result, policymakers
often settle for satisfactory rather than optimal solutions, leading to incremental changes.
3. Policy Feedback Loop
Incrementalism acknowledges that past policies shape future decisions. Once a policy is
implemented, its outcomes can create a feedback loop that influences subsequent policy
adjustments. Policymakers learn from the successes and failures of previous actions,
leading to gradual modifications rather than radical shifts.
4. Limited Resources and Political Constraints
Decision-makers frequently operate within constrained resources, including time,
finances, and political capital. These limitations encourage incremental changes, as large-
scale reforms may require significant investments or face opposition from various
stakeholders. Incrementalism allows policymakers to manage these constraints by making
smaller, more manageable adjustments.
5. Stability and Adaptability
Incremental theory emphasizes the balance between stability and adaptability in public
policy. While small adjustments help maintain continuity, they also allow for necessary
changes in response to evolving circumstances. This adaptability is crucial in addressing
complex societal challenges without causing major disruptions.
Criticisms of Incremental Theory
While incremental theory provides a practical lens for understanding policymaking, it also
faces criticism:
• Inadequate for Major Reforms: Critics argue that incrementalism may not adequately
address urgent societal challenges that require comprehensive solutions. Some issues may
necessitate bold actions rather than piecemeal adjustments.
• Risk of Complacency: Incremental changes can lead to complacency among
policymakers, who may avoid necessary radical reforms. This reluctance to embrace
significant change can perpetuate existing problems.
• Oversimplification of the Process: Critics contend that incrementalism may oversimplify
the complexities of the policymaking process, failing to account for the influence of
external factors, political dynamics, and public opinion.
RATIONAL CHOICE THEORY
Rational choice theory is a framework for understanding decision-making processes in public
policy and economics. It posits that individuals act rationally, making choices that maximize their
utility based on preferences, available information, and constraints. This theory provides a
systematic approach to analyzing how individuals and groups make decisions within the political
arena.
Key Concepts of Rational Choice Theory
1. Utility Maximization
At the core of rational choice theory is the idea that individuals seek to maximize their
utility, which refers to the satisfaction or benefit they derive from their choices. Decision-
makers weigh the costs and benefits of different options, selecting the one that offers the
greatest net gain.
2. Preferences and Choices
Rational choice theory assumes that individuals have clear preferences that guide their
decisions. These preferences can be influenced by a variety of factors, including personal
values, beliefs, and the information available to them. The theory posits that individuals
make consistent choices based on their ranked preferences.
3. Complete Information
The theory assumes that individuals have access to complete information about the
alternatives available to them. This includes understanding the potential outcomes and
implications of each choice. However, in reality, decision-makers often operate with
limited information, which can affect their ability to make fully rational choices.
4. Strategic Interaction
Rational choice theory acknowledges that individuals often make decisions in a social
context where their choices can be influenced by the actions of others. This is particularly
relevant in political settings, where the behavior of voters, interest groups, and
policymakers can affect decision-making processes.
5. Game Theory
Game theory is a subset of rational choice theory that focuses on strategic interactions
among individuals or groups. It examines how individuals make decisions when the
outcomes depend not only on their choices but also on the choices of others. Key
concepts include Nash equilibrium and dominant strategies, which help analyze
competitive and cooperative scenarios.
Criticisms of Rational Choice Theory
Despite its widespread application, rational choice theory has faced several criticisms:
• Oversimplification of Human Behavior: Critics argue that the theory oversimplifies
complex human motivations, neglecting emotional, psychological, and cultural factors
that can influence decision-making.
• Assumption of Complete Information: The assumption that individuals have complete
information is often unrealistic. In practice, individuals may face uncertainty, leading to
bounded rationality, where decisions are made with limited knowledge.
• Neglect of Power Dynamics: Rational choice theory may overlook the influence of
power dynamics and structural inequalities that affect decision-making processes. This
can lead to an incomplete understanding of how policies are formulated and
implemented.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
One cannot authoritatively say which of these theoretical approaches is the best or the most
satisfactory as each approach focuses on different aspects of policy-making, and this seems more
useful for understanding some situations or events than others. It seems wise not to be bound too
dogmatically to one approach. A good rule for the policy maker is to be eclectic and flexible, and
to draw from theories that seem most useful for the satisfactory and fair-minded description and
explanation of policies. The objective explanation of political behavior rather than the validation
of ones preferred theoretical approach should be the goal of political inquiry. Each of the theories
discussed, if drawn upon skillfully and selectively, can contribute to a better understanding of
policymaking.
Public policy formulation is a complex process. In different countries, the content and scope of
public policies may differ in reliance upon their ideologies and governing system. Policy problems
of the developing countries that came into being afterward World War II to be analyzed in the
special perspective of their establishment particularly, in the case of Pakistan which was
established on the basis of an ideology presented by the philosopher-poet Dr. Allama Muhammad
Iqbal. Therefore, no firm assumption can be presented in regard of authenticity of theoretical
approaches. Each approach has its own salient features. The policymakers should be flexible in
selection of these approaches and extract the adequate and suitable explanation and depiction of
policies.
REFERENCES
[1] Abdulsami, I. (1987). The Concept and Process of Public Policy. A paper presented at the
national workshop for chief nursing officers, in Zaria, Wednesday 3 rd. June, 1987.
[2] Anderson, J.E.(1997). Public Policy-Making: An Introduction 3 rd. ed. Boston: Houghton
Miffilin Company.
[3] Braybrooke, D. &Lindblom, E. (1964).A Strategy of Decisions. Free Press of Glencoe, New
York.
[4] Dlakwa, H.D. (2014). Concepts and Models in Public Policy Formulation and Analysis.
Kaduna: PylamakServicies Ltd Nigeria.
[5] Downs, A. (1957). An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper and Row.
[6] Dye, T.R & Zeigler, L.H. (1990).The Irony of Democracy. 8 thedition. Monterey, Califf:
Books/Cole
[7] Hayes, M.T. (1992). Incrementalism and Public Policy. New York: Longman.
[8] Henry, N. (2004). Public Administration and Public Affairs. 9 thed. New Delhi: Prentice Hall.
[9] Latham,E. (1965). The Group Basis of Politics, New York: Octagon Books
[10] Mitchell, W.C. (1982). Textbook Public Choice: A Review Essay. Public Choice, XXVIII.
[11] Mosca, G. (1939). The Ruling Class, (Translated by Hannah D. Kahn), New York: McGrow-
Hill Book Company.
[12] Obi, E.A, Nwachukwu, C.L. and Obiora, A.C. (2008).Public Policy Analysis and Decision
Making. Onitsha: Bookpoint Educational Ltd.
[13] Simon, H.A. (1957). Administrative Behaviour: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in
Administrative Organisation. 2 nded. New York: The Macmillian Company.
[14] Weischler, L.F. (1982). Methodological Individualism in Politics. Public Administration
Review, XL III, May/June.
