Policy Making in the Public Sector PDF

POLICY MAKING IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES Administration and Management 2 (AMP260S) Bachelor of Environmental Health (BPENVH) Senior Lecturer: Dr MHA Agenbag Contact details:...

POLICY MAKING IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES Administration and Management 2 (AMP260S) Bachelor of Environmental Health (BPENVH) Senior Lecturer: Dr MHA Agenbag Contact details: Telephone: 021 – 4603206 Email: [email protected]  Arrangements Attendance register Self-study questions (slide 24)– homework Assignment – legislative hierarchy (slide 33) – Due 04 June 2024 (Test 2) (Dependent on Test date) – Presentation (groups) – 10 minutes per group - Example – Food control Gr- 1: Pollution control Gr- 2: Surveillance of premises Gr -3: Water quality monitoring Gr-4: Disposal of the Dead (DoD) Gr-5: Waste management Rubric 2 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 ‘Tuma Mina’ - I wanna lend a hand – Send me” (Hugh Masekela) Lecture Framework & Progress to date Public Session 4 Administration Policymaking and & Management implementation Organising Need for public policy Policy making in Purpose and nature of the public sector Financing public policy Levels of policy Welcome / EH Orientation & My EH Career What is EH Session 2 Factors influencing policies Sessions 1 Staffing Political and legislative aspects of policymaking Work methods Generic Policy processes and Procedures Administrative Role players in public policy Processes making Control Systems Policy implementation & delivery functions Legislative Framework © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 33 Learning outcomes (Thornhill, 2012 -Chapter 6 pp. 123-163) “Identify concepts in policy making in the public sector.” The student will be able to: Identify the need for policy to serve as guideline for officials within which they have to provide services. Explain the relationship between political office bearers and the officials in executing government policy. Identify the most significant factors influencing the determination of public policy. Justify the need for the evaluation of policy implementation. Discuss the role of commissions of enquiry and pressure groups in policy formulation and evaluation, and Define the role of civil society in evaluating the outcomes of public policies. 4 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Purpose of module The results of governmental decisions are manifested in policies that covers the ruling party’s visions. These broad frameworks are translated into executive policies which can be implemented by the executive institutions (Political and Administrative executive institutions – Departments). (Thornhill, 2012 p.123) 5 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Module content Environmental Administration and Management - Policymaking and implementation 6 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Introduction (Thornhill, 2012:124) Policy function and processes always frontrunner in Public Administration Policy is much more than a decision Policy process: policymaking, implementation, monitoring & evaluation, and analysis Policy decisions taken by: – Policymakers when formulating policies, – Executive institutions during implementation, and – Policy Analysists during policy analysis 7 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Policymaking and implementation This module deals with: Need for public policy Purpose and nature of public policy Levels of policy Factors influencing policies Political and legislative aspects of policymaking Policy processes Role players in public policy making Policy implementation & delivery functions 8 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Need for public policy (Thornhill, 2012:124) Human beings start living together in communities and then as societies in nation states. Communities no longer self sufficient – Then and now? Woodstock – Needed goods and services that they could not provide. Create institutions to: – Provide goods and services to make living in closer settlements. – Reconcile the conflicting interests of individuals and groups. Services and control is essential to create societies and secure their wellbeing. > 200 states constitute world society, and International institutions care for relations among states – i.e. United Nations and African Union. Mega Cities – urban accumulation with >10 mil inhabitants 9 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Purpose and nature of public policy State – Defined as “demarcated geographical area with a ‘permanent’ population governed by a legitimate governing body”. – Comes into existence when people (legislators) undertaking processes to formulate policies. Policies culminate into a constitution for the state (Act 108 of 1996) Constitution is first supreme policy statement of the state and most difficult to reach agreement. Republic of South Africa – 1st interim Constitution – 209 of 1993 past by former Parliament. – Newly constituted Parliament – Constitutional Assembly passed the new RSA Constitution – 108 of 1996 and Constitutional Court certified it. Constitution is a policy statement because: – Declares what action to be taken by institutions and office bearers within prescribed procedures. – Provide prescribed guidelines of conduct and values – i.e. Bill of Rights Ch. 2 10 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Main characteristics of policy (Thornhill, 2012:124-125) Declaration of intent to: – Perform an action(s), or – to have specific institutions or functionaries undertaken an action(s) in a prescribed manner. Institution performing its functions, for survival of a state need successive policy statements to direct all its activities. Policy statements or directives is not static (successive) – human society is always in flux – i.e. development, urbanisation, mega cities, regime changes, influx of foreigners – need service and other needs, and service improvements - state departments and municipalities to continually revise their policies Public institutions policymaking - complicated and time consuming – political and administrative executive must follow legislative directives. 11 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Main characteristics of policy (Cont.) Policymaking and law making is part of same process. – Not all provisions in a policy become act of Parliament. – Law making not always acts of Parliament but also: provincial legislation or municipal bylaws, administrative rulings, and court of law decisions to augment legislation (acts of Parliament, bylaws). Informal but binding policy expressions in form of customs or conventions that influence the conduct of populations, members of legislators, political office bearers and public officials. 12 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Levels of policy (Thornhill, 2012:126-131) Fig. 6.1 Hierarchy of institutions Legislative e.g. Parliament, provincial Every state has its own legislator and municipal institutions councils structure of public institutions. e.g. the Cabinet, Provincial Always have a hierarchy Political Executive Councils and executive Executive mayor / Executive committee of municipal of institutions, institutions councils With a hierarchy of functionaries Administrative State departments and public executive entities institutions 13 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Levels of policy (Cont.) (Thornhill, 2012:126-131) Self study Policy directives to regulate activities of each functionary employed in public institutions are issued i.t.o.: – Legislation (e.g. NHA, 61/2003 - s80 -Authorisation of “Health Officer”; s81 “Duty of Health Officer”; s82 “Routine Inspections”; s83 “Env. Health Investigation”; s84 “Entry and search with a warrant”) – Regulations (Enacted and comments) Overview – Proclamations Leg. – Circulars – System of Delegation – Bylaws – Local Government – s156 of Constitution, 1996 – Instructions by superiors (hierarchy of functionaries & instructions – Organisational structure) 14 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024  Levels in hierarchy of policy (Thornhill, 2012:126-131) Political policy level – Policy of ruling political party is highest policy level in public sector. – ANC’s Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP) – 1994 Growth, Employment and Redistribution (GEAR) Policy Accelerated and Shared Growth Initiative (ASGISA), 2006 New Economic Growth Path (NGP), 2010. National Development Plan (NDP), 2011 - 2030 – Governing party set objectives (policy) to direct authorities for society. – Implement through new or revised legislation, budget provisions such as Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF). Political implementation policy – Policy implementation involves “Generic administrative processes” Administrative executive implementation policy – Political policy state e.g. 20,000 houses to be build in financial year. – Minister could influence the implementation of the policy which could overlap roles between Political Executive and Administrative Executive functions e.g. the building of houses by Department of Public Works - own staff or outsourcing Operational policy – Supervisors at implementation level also take decisions regarding the implementation of policies such as communication methods to interact with role-players 15 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Levels of policy (Cont.) (Thornhill, 2012:126) Fig. 6.2 Hierarchy of institutions and functionaries for a state department Legislative Parliament Governmental/political executive office Minister bearers Deputy Minister Director-General Executive Director Circular Top management (administrators) Pub. Serv. Deputy Director-General Chief Director Vacancies Director Middle management Deputy Director Assistant Director Junior management Supervisors Delivery staff Operating employees/production workers 16 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Levels of policy (Cont.) (Thornhill, 2012:126) Fig. 6.3 Hierarchy of institutions and functionaries for province Parliament Legislative Provincial legislature Head of state: President Cabinet Governmental Deputy President Ministers of State departments Provincial Premier Members of Provincial Executive Council Bulletin Administrative Chief Executive Officer: Premier Heads of departments Top management Chief directors Directors Middle management Deputy directors Assistant Director Junior management Supervisors Delivery staff Operating employees/production workers 17 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Levels of policy (Cont.) (Thornhill, 2012:127) Fig. 6.4 Hierarchy of institutions and functionaries for municipality Parliament Legislative Provincial legislature Municipal council Cabinet Head of government: President Ministers of State departments Provincial Premier Governmental Members of Provincial Executive Council Municipal council Executive mayor / Executive committee of municipal council Municipal manager Administrative Heads of departments Top management Executive directors Directors Middle management Deputy directors Junior management Assistant Director Mun Supervisors Posts Delivery staff Operating employees/production workers 18 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Factors influencing policies (Thornhill, 2012:132-136) Circumstances – Technological developments occurring at increasing tempo – e.g. Renewable energy and eWaste. – Population increases and urbanisation – Cities Network (SoCR 2016) – Crises, natural disasters, war and depression – Strong Cities Network – International relations – Policy integration of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) – Economic and industrial development – Renewable energy, Western World dump toxic material in developing countries Needs and expectations of society Policies of political parties – e.g. ‘Expropriation of land; Job Creation Activities and representations of interest groups – e.g. ‘Free tertiary education’ Personal view of political executive office bearers Research and investigations as well as the views and experience of public officials – e.g. Norms and standards – exposure limits 19 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024  Political and legislative aspects of policymaking (Thornhill, 2012:132-136) Legislation and other directives can never provide complete policy statements for all eventualities. – Dissatisfaction from individuals or interest groups (pressure groups), opposition parties, members of legislative institutions, public officials and so forth. Policy making process very complicated, costly and time consuming. Disagreement about policy proposals are usually vociferous (Vocal / Enthusiastic) when: – large number of people are affected; – Large amounts of money is involved; – Vested interests, and – Values seems to be adversely affected. Political office bearers (e.g. President, Ministers, Provincial Premiers, Executive Mayors and Chairpersons of Committees) obtain approval from conferences and caucuses to propose changes to legislation. Most proposals to amend the policies on routine activities of the administrative executive institutions will come from officials. Officials usually formulate draft legislation and political executive submit to Cabinet. Government publishes draft legislation (e.g. Bill or draft bylaw) for public comment. – Period of public comment? – follow legislative process 20 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Policy processes (Thornhill, 2012:138-145) Policy making – Ideal-type models for rational policy making – Descriptive models for policy making – Prescriptive models for policy making – Marketing of policies – Values and policymaking Policy analysis and evaluation processes – Bardach’s (2009) eightfold Public Policy Analysis – useful approach (A practical guide for policy analysis). – Summative / Retrospective policy impact analysis (ADEPT model – Analysis of Determinants of Policy Impact) Monitoring and evaluation – Formative assessments/evaluation – Summative evaluation 21 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Monitoring and evaluation (Rabie & Cloete, 2018) Every stage from policy development to policy implementation are subjected to a policy analysis or evaluation. Design phase, a formative assessment tests the viability and feasibility of the envisaged outputs, outcomes, and impacts. Identify options with highest probability of success. Implementation phase: – formative evaluation - reveals strengths and weaknesses of execution. – Summative evaluation, or retrospective evaluation (i.e., impact evaluation), measures the actual performance of programmes emanating from the policy. Focusing on the outcome of policies. Explores the “impact it (brings) to the real-life conditions”. Also functions as a public accountability measurement to show the extent to which policies support and guide service delivery. 22 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Role players in public policy making (Thornhill, 2012:145-158) Role of civil (society) in policymaking Individuals Interest or pressure groups (associations) Legislative institutions Political executive institutions (Cabinet) Cabinet secretariat Political executive office bearers National directive, research and coordinating institutions Commissions of enquiry Departmental and interdepartmental committees International institutions Officials Newspapers and other news media Other states: International influences 23 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Policy implementation & delivery functions (Thornhill, 2012:158-162) Setting aims, missions or objectives Planning Programming Marketing of policy missions, aims and objectives Requesting clarification of policies, mission or aims Evaluation and feedback 24 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Self-study questions 1. Describe the role of Parliament in policy authorisation. 2. Identify at least three (3) factors influencing policy making in South Africa. 3. Discuss the role of officials in policymaking. 4. Define the influence of Ministers of the Cabinet in policymaking; use a specific example to prove the statement. 5. Which department in the administrative executive has the responsibility for food control? 6. Provide examples of policy directives that inform political and administrative executives with regards to food control that should prevent the outbreak of Listeriosis. 25 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Governance Structures in Republic of South Africa National Sphere Provincial Sphere Local Sphere (3 types of municipalities) Chapter 7 - Constitution Cat. A – Cat. C – District Metropolitan Mun Mun Cat. B – Cat. B – Cat. B – Local Mun Local Mun Local Mun 26 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Woodstock – 1899 and Today industrial area – ‘Development’ Source: http://www.getaway.co.za/photography/historical-cape-town/ Year Population (Stats SA) – Cape Town 1970 1,114,000 2011 3,740,026 2018 4,477,365 (Estimate) 27 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024  World becomes more urbanised! (Source: World Urbanisation Prospects 2014 [Revised] – UN) South Africa more urbanised 54% urbanised (64%) (World) - 2015 19th - 21st Century? – 28 Mega - cities (>10 mil) Victorian era - Industrial revolution Urbanisation, Migration, Birth rate - Disease outbreaks Poor law – Public Health Act (1848 & SA 1919) Basic (Municipal) Services - ‘Determinants of health ‘Rebellion of the poor’ - slums – Quadruple burden of disease 28 SAME DYNAMICS? – 19th Century © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 28  What should be regulated? ‘Determinants of health’ 2015 World population 7.3 billion SA population was 54 million 98% growth - developing countries Mainly urban areas Source: Ford, 2011 and World Bank, 2013 & 2015 29 29 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Communities not self sufficient - Need services and development – Organised way 30 30 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 People work, live & recreate: Need space, resources and generate by-products - Requires services Water supply WWTWs Industrial zone Waste site 31 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Megacities in the World (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megacity) - 2016 Year Number of Megacities 1950 2 – New York and Tokyo 1995 14 2014 22 Lagos, Nigeria – 2017 47 2025 Asia alone – 30 mega cities Fastest growing megacity in world Rank Megacity Population (Million) 11.2 mil (2011) 1 Tokyo (Japan) 38.1 2 Shanghai (China) 34 3 Jakarta (Indonesia) 31.5 4 Delhi (India) 27.2 8 Manila (Philippines) 24.1 9 New York (USA) 23.8 1 Policy South Africa 55 Charact. 32 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024  Proclamations / Notices / Circulars/ Rules Subordinate (delegated) legislation By-laws Municipality Regulations Any policy issue to be Draft Most common addressed in long example of term gets enacted. 117/ subordinate Effective dates Acts 1998 legislation & Uniform Numbering detailed 3 x Readings Bills Committee stage Becomes Act Constitution, Highest Act 1996 all other must Overview of the legislative be aligned Schedules process and hierarchy Health Political & Leg. Amend Health Amend Aspects 33 Bill© Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Integrate legislation – MHS 34 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Organisational structure Ex Mayor Ex Deputy Speaker Mayor Ex Mayco Com. Ex Mayco Com. Ex Mayoral Councilors Member Member Committee (17) Admin & Com. Serv Finance Technical Serv. Municipal Manager Dir. Admin Dir. & Com. Dir. Finance Technical Serv Serv. 35 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Organisational structure - Admin Municipal Manager Dir. Admin Dir. Admin Dir. Admin & Com. & Com. & Com. Serv Serv Serv Chief Fire Senior Mx Mx. Admin Disaster Mx Officer EH Reg. Mx EHP Reg. Mx EHP Reg. Mx EHP Reg. Mx EHP Mx Air Quality Swartland Cederberg Matzikama Saldanha 36 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Politicians / Councilors Municipal Organisational structure - Admin Manager Top Management Dir. Admin & Com. Serv Middle / Chief Fire Senior Mx Mx. Admin Disaster Mx Senior Mx Officer EH Reg. Mx EHP Reg. Mx EHP Reg. Mx EHP Reg. Mx EHP Mx Air Quality Matzikama Cederberg Saldanha Swartland Senior EHP Saldanha EHP EHP EHP Hopefield & Saldanha (x2) Langebaan (x2) other (x2) 37 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Ideal-type models for rational policymaking (Thornhill, 2012:141) Policymakers always claim they are rational in their policymaking function. Not possible due to predictions of future eventualities - unknown. Process of rational policy making: – Information gathering – Determining all possible options to meet demands or needs or dysfunctional situation to be eliminated. – Identify and assessing possible consequences of each option. – Evaluating each option and its consequences against the values to be respected. – Selecting and justifying the best option to deliver most economic, effective and efficient results Ideal model cannot provide final answers – values to be used are influenced by society, politicians and so forth. 38 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Descriptive models for policymaking (Thornhill, 2012:141-142) Because Ideal-type models for rational policymaking cannot provide final answers, policymakers merely describe real-life policymaking. Adaptations and piecemeal adjustments (referred to disjointed and incrementalism) rather than fundamental changes to bring new policies. Policymakers keep policies vague – do not commit to specific objectives. Policies usually product of contributions from institutions, political office bearers, officials and interest groups through negotiations, conferences, bargaining and compromise. Policy mostly product of consensus through negotiations 39 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Prescriptive models for policymaking (Thornhill, 2012:142) Search for rational policymaking aims to obtain prescriptive models – failed. No simple model for policymaking yet developed. Every policymaker and policy analysist has to examine every need for a new policy afresh. End result can never be a scientifically reasoned policy, but the authorities can implement it in a way for public accountability. 40 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024  Marketing of policies (Thornhill, 2012:142-143) Once policy is approved the policymakers must market the policy. Must promote its acceptance among individuals and communities it affects. When policies are marketed, should explain: – What needs policy is to satisfy and how it will meet the needs. – What will happen if the public do not cooperate. – What goods and services are to be provided. – Expected time of implementation and operationalisation of programmes to implement. – Which institutions will implement the policy. – What monitoring and evaluation mechanisms are to be used (e.g. Ministry of Performance monitoring – Presidency) – Marketing aligned with public relations activities. 41 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Values and policymaking (Thornhill, 2012:144) Policymaking functions are always directed by values. Constitution provides specifically for “basic values” (Bill of rights – Ch. 2) and “principles to govern public administration”. Values in Constitution is divided in two groups: – Abstract values: e.g. tenets (legislators and offices bearers positioned not to abuse the authority entrusted on them for their own benefit) – Concrete values: e.g. economic use of labour and material Concrete values are the ones that should direct policymaking. Concrete values come to the fore during policy implementation and delivery activities. 42 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Bardach’s Eight fold Public Policy Analysis Process Step 1: Define the problem Step 2: Assemble some evidence Step 3: Construct the alternatives Step 4: Select the criteria Step 5: Project the outcomes Step 6: Confront the trade-offs Step 7: Decide Step 8: Tell your story (Marketing) 43 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Summative Policy Analysis Model (Rabie & Cloete, 2018: 276) The summative evaluation, or retrospective evaluation (i.e., impact evaluation), measures the actual performance of programmes emanating from the policy. Focusing on the outcome of policies, it explores the “impact it (brings) to the real-life conditions” (Herman, Morris & Fitz-Gibbon, 1987, in Rabie & Cloete, 2018: 276). The summative evaluation also functions as a public accountability measurement to show the extent to which policies support and guide service delivery, efficiency, and effectiveness. 44 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 The ADEPT model (Rütten, Gelius & Abu-Omar, 2010) (Analysis of Determinants of Policy Impact) Determinants Policy Impact Goals Obligations Output Outcome Resources Opportunities 45 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024 Interplay between ADEPT variables and policy output and outcomes (Rütten et al.2003; 2010) ADEPT Variables Policy Impact Interplay Output Outcomes Goals X Goals and resources are not significant single predictors of policy outcomes but have a two-way interaction exist Obligations X Resources X Opportunities Organisational X Improved collaboration within organisations Political X Political climate and collaboration between different political sectors and levels within the organisation. Public X Greatest coefficient with policy outcomes. 46 © Env. Health – AMP260S – MHA Agenbag - 2024