Policy Formulation The Impact of Bureaucracy

BUREAUCRACY AND POLICY FORMULATION

The Impact of Bureaucracy on Policy Formulation

Introduction

There are various definitions that have been offered in the past in an attempt to define or describe public policy. Thus, there is no universal definition assigned to the concept of public policy. However, to a large extent, public policy could be perceived as the course of action taken by the government of the day about an issue or problem that is up for consideration and that has an impact on public good and wellbeing. Thus, we could think of public policy in terms of the various local ordinances, decisions, as well as executive decisions, regulations and government laws. The policy formulation phase happens to be very instrumental as it largely revolves around deliberations on how to go about addressing concerns brought forwards as part of the agenda. The role that bureaucrats play in policy formulation has not been properly investigated in the past. This paper concerns itself with the influence of bureaucrats in public policy formulation.

Discussion

Although distinct in their own right, policy implementation and policy formulation are interrelated. This is more so the case given that in addition to being means to the same end, they seek the input of diverse stakeholders within and outside government. Some of the key stakeholders on this front are inclusive of, but they are not limited to, the legislature and the administrative arm of government. As it has been pointed out elsewhere in this text, traditionally, many have had the erroneous assumption that policy is laid down by the legislature with zero involvement of the administrative arm of government. Even in those instances where they are involved in policy formulation, theoretical constructs view them as neutral participants. This is because as per this particular theoretical perspective, their service is not offered to the party in power, but to the government. This text demonstrates otherwise. Indeed, it is clear that bureaucrats are actively involved in giving substance and form to public policies. The influence of bureaucrats in policy formulation is likely to keep growing forward.

From the onset, it would be prudent to note that as Schnose (2015) points out, comparative politics scholars have in the past made the assumption that the most crucial participants in efforts to ensure that the preferences of citizens are translated into certain policy effects or end results are political parties. It should, however, be pointed out that in the words of the author, “the crucial but often forgotten link between preferences, parties, and outcomes is the bureaucracy” (Schnose, 2015, p. 73). In the past, the general perspective has been that the influence of bureaucrats is only felt in policy implementation. As a matter of fact, this has largely been the focus of many studies in the past. Studying bureaucratic influence in the realm of policy formulation is crucial because, to a large extent, the political process happens to be distinctive and separated from bureaucracy.

According to Barrilleaux, Reenock, and Souva (2017), there is nothing linear about the policy formulation process. This is to say that in addition to being impacted upon or influenced by a wide range of stakeholders, it also happens to be an incremental process. As the authors further point out, traditionally, policy formulation has been deemed to be preserve of the legislature. Further insight and research into the dynamics of the policy formulation process, however, indicates that this is an erroneous assumption. In the opinion of Barrilleaux, Reenock, and Souva (2017), owing to the fact that the setting of the policy agenda as well as assessment of policy concerns are crucial aspects of policy formulation, bureaucracy must (almost by default) be roped in to inform meaningful and effective policy articulation. This is the very same assertion advanced by Vasely (2020) who is categorical that the insight of civil servants happens to be crucial owing to their exposure and experience in public service – effectively meaning that they provide the needed orientation in as far as the relevant processes and structures are concerned.

The involvement of bureaucrats cuts across the board. This is to say that both top level as well as mid-level bureaucrats are actively involved in policy formulation. In as far as the role of the former is concerned, it is important to note that as Peters, Capano, Howlett, Mukherjee, Chou, and Revinet (2018) point out, the policy process attracts the attention and involvement of those in the upper levels of bureaucratic setups. In essence, those at this level serve as a crucial connection between political appointees in government and those in the lower levels of the bureaucratic setup. However, their main influence lies in their insightful input. Indeed, as Peters, Capano, Howlett, Mukherjee, Chou, and Revinet (2018) observe, “top echelons of bureaucracy have to also go into the political expediency of the proposed policy, and the viability of proposals in terms of economic conditions” (p. 112). The authors further point out that those occupying higher positions in a bureaucracy are best placed to ascertain whether the proposed policy would be practical from an administrative point of view, as well as whether there are sufficient resources to push the agenda through. Thus, it would be accurate to say that while political appointees in government (i.e. those occupying ministerial offices) have a huge role to play in as far as the advancement of political interests of the government of the day is concerned, bureaucrats (specifically those in higher echelons) lend expertise in relation to the practicability and viability of the proposals. In as far as middle level bureaucrats and their involvement in policy formulation is concerned, there is need to note that in some instances, they are actively involved in a wide range of activities that happen to be of great relevance to policy formulation. The said activities are inclusive of, but they are not limited to; the compilation of white papers, drafting of amendments to the legislation in place, as well as drafting of bills (Moran, Rein, and Goodwin, 2008). Further, they play a crucial advisory role to their seniors – especially in as far as the viability of the proposed policies at the micro level is concerned. It is also important to note that middle rank incumbents also play a crucial innovation role (Moran, Rein, and Goodwin, 2008). In the words of the authors, when necessary, the said officials “suggest alternative strategies that need to be followed” (p. 302).

There are certain common themes that emerge in as far as the influence of bureaucracy on policy formulation is concerned. To begin with, it should be noted that federal bureaucracies have certain functions – some explicit and others implicit. The three explicit roles or functions are; regulation, administration, and implementation (Coen, Gant, and Wilson, 2010). One specific role that is largely unappreciated is the advisory role. Although not explicitly stated, there is a connection between the political class and bureaucrats that makes it necessary for the two to consult on diverse policy options. This is more so the case given that the latter has better knowledge and insight of routine procedures and systems at the micro level. For instance, the insight of civil servants could be required in attempts to further expound on the scope of a proposed policy. Yet another common theme on this front, which is closely related to the first, relates to the wealth of experience and knowledge that bureaucrats possess. Indeed, in the words of Peters, Capano, Howlett, Mukherjee, Chou, and Revinet (2018), bureaucrats possess almost “total monopoly of the knowledge, which they have derived from their educational qualifications and their direct experience with the operation of public policies” (p. 79). As the authors further observe, the fact that bureaucrats are well informed on issues that relate to public administration and management makes them indispensable in matters revolving around policy formulation. For instance, they are better placed to identify the administrative as well as financial issues that would impact certain policies owing to their vast knowledge and experience in this realm.

The third theme which also ought to be highlighted in this text is the relative permanence of the positions that bureaucrats hold. Thus, to a large extent, the influence that bureaucrats exert on policy formulation is rooted in the enduring nature of their service or appointment. Those in political positions come and go. Thus, there are inevitably periods whereby bureaucrats serve as the link between one administration and the next during the policy formulation phase. In such a case, bureaucrats could exert a lot of influence in efforts to put together substantive policies following the exit of a political administration that conceptualized the same.

There is need to note that the influence that bureaucrats exert in policy formulation is not absolute. It is checked by, amongst other things, the laws and processes in place, as well as political commitment to the prevailing agenda. For instance, in as far as the latter is concerned, the influence that bureaucrats have in policy formulation could be sharply reduced by the level of commitment that the political formation in power has towards a certain policy. Further, as Siddiki (2020) observes, bureaucrats and the political class do not necessarily engage in an adversarial manner. As a matter of fact, in the words of the author, “on the contrary, policy makers and bureaucrats frequently develop networks promoting common sectorial interests” (p. 313).

In the end, the extent to which a policy is implementable depends on how realistic it is. Bureaucrats are best placed to determine how realistic proposed policies are owing to their experience and knowledge on issues relating to public service. It therefore follows that the insight that the said bureaucrats offer elected public officials is of great relevance. However, to offer good insight on policy issues during the implementation phase, there is need for bureaucrats to remain apolitical. This should, however, not be taken to mean that they should be indifferent to the agenda of the government of the day.