I need help to write 20 pages about Public Policy Development

I need help to write 20 pages about Public Policy Development, I will give you files as an example, my notes, and Syllabus. please follow the instructions in the notice, and instructions in Syllabus and example Please read the files.


Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
I need help to write 20 pages about Public Policy Development
Just from $13/Page
Order Essay




Unformatted Attachment Preview

Public policy agenda#1
Class 1
What is rationality? How does it relate to public policy development?
What is Positivism? How does it relate to public policy development?
What is Self-interest? How does it relate to public policy development?
What is Not self-destructor? How does it relate to public policy development?
What is bounded rationality? How does it relate to public policy
How to avoid bounded rationality? How does it relate to public policy
What is the free rider? How does it relate to public policy development?
Public choice theory
Politicians- elected into office
Bureaucrat-brains of the government
Voters-normal people
Private (domain changes)
Public (social problems) requires collective action
Public community-agenda-institutional agenda-public policy (reactionary)
Degree of effect
Dramatic effect
Personal encounter
Social indicators
Public policy comes in three forms
Models of agenda building
Policy discourse
Policy window
Environment of public policy in the us
Policy formulation#2
Policy formulation: What is the best way to understand policymaking?
Rational comprehensive model
Incremental model
Target population model
Street-level bureaucracy
Policy implementation
Policy implement
We discussed self-excutivy (veto)
Action required
Also we discussed the rules and regulation
The legislative
State legislator
City Council
Also the played role by the court in implementing law
1. Interpretation legal
2. Criminal
3. Family law
4. Immigration law
Policy Evaluation
Process: is part of implementation
Outcome: end result
Standard of Evaluation
1. Efficiency
2. Effectiveness
3. Adveuce
4. Equity
Finally goals
1. Primary
2. Secondary
3. Intended consequence
Public Policy Development
Public strategy is the ethical manual for achievements made by the authoritative
official branches of the government in response to different emerging issues, in a way
consistent with law and institutional traditions. The establishment of public strategy is made
out of national protected laws and controls. Additional substrates incorporate both legal
translations and directions which are approved by enactment. Public policy is viewed as solid
when it tackles issues productively and adequately, serves equity, underpins administrative
organizations and approaches, and supports vibrant citizenship.
According to Hill and Varone, (2014), different types of public policies have different
components depending on the areas they address (p. 199). Different researchers characterize
open strategy as an arrangement of administrative measures, laws, and subsidizing needs
concerning a given theme proclaimed by a legislative element or its delegates. Public policy
is regularly typified in constitutions, administrative acts, and legal choices. The process of
policy development involves four stages; agenda setting, policy structure development, policy
implementation and assessment. Every stage requires different resources and is governed by a
set of regulations to achieve the required excellence.
Public policy agenda
Plan setting is the procedure by which the emerging issues and their preferred
solutions lose or gain both elite and public consideration. During agenda setting, different
groups battle to set the agenda because no particular institution is capable of providing
solutions to every problem at a time. For this reason, groups battle to position their issues of
interest in the public policy agenda or to plan for the time when an emergency makes their
issue more significant to the public policy makers. The process of agenda setting requires
information as it guides the selection of problems and solutions. Basic decision-making relies
on upon data collection (Bianco, 2004). Data becomes information after it is processed into a
system of messages about a subject. There are different factors that influence how policy
makers perceive and interpret information. The interpretation of information determines the
effectiveness of the solution to the problem. Policy makers may either apply the rationality or
positivism model in data interpretation.
Rationality is giving meaning to actions. It relates to public policy development
because policies inform standard operating procedures. When societal problems arise,
policies are developed based on the rationale of the suggested solution. During policy
development, policy makers assess the rationality of the procedure as well as the end result.
According to Wittkopf, Jones, and Kegley (2007), rational policies are for the best interest of
the nation (p. 458). In theory, rationalism may provide a perfect framework for policy
development. However, real life situations present different challenges to the making of a
rational policy. One challenge facing rationality is its assumption that policy makers have the
required subjective capacities and information to prepare, translate, comprehend, and decide
the legitimacy of logical proof significant to approach choices (McCaughey, & Bruning
Nonetheless, policy-making studies demonstrated that they may not participate in
complex subjective data preparing when settling on choices regardless of the possibility that
they have access to required data and have pertinent ability. For instance, intellectual
handling research has recognized both limited reasonability and satisfaction as restrictions to
complex psychological preparing. According to McCaughey and Bruning (2010), limited
level-headedness characterizes the circumstance where policy makers are restricted in their
capacities to look for an answer; in this way, they ‘’satisfy’’ by picking the main option that
meets or fulfils least criteria for taking care of the issue instead of proceeding with an
investigation for the ideal arrangement. ‘’Satisfaction’’ options might be liable to various
differing impacts, which reinforce the position that policy makers can be liable to making an
irrational choice due to pressure.
Positivism a philosophical framework that holds that each objectively reasonable
statement can be experimentally confirmed or is fit for sensible or scientific evidence and that
in this manner rejects power and belief in a higher power. Many modern intellectuals
disapprove of positivism, claiming that not all facts are empirically recognizable. During
policy making, positivism is important as it requires information from empirical evidence.
This is particularly essential when developing health policies. The limitation of this model is
that it interprets information outside its context by denying the obvious influence of
supernatural powers at work (Bryant, 2009, p. 39). Additionally, policy maker using the
posivist model tend to consider some types of information and disregard others. For instance,
they are prone to be biased against information based on human experience while favouring
scientific facts. For this reason, their perception of knowledge may lack objectivity resulting
in the development of inefficient policies (Bryant, 2009, p. 42).
Self Interest
Self interest alludes to engaging in activities that inspire the most individual
advantage. Self interest influences different aspects of policy making. According to Goodin’s
book (2006), a person’s perception of self interest depends on culture. However, the
implementation that interest depends on the institution in which he operates. For this reason,
it is important to understand the nature of political systems. For instance, politicians may
develop a policy to improve education quality towards the end of a political term in order to
be considered for a second term. It is also possible that politicians may favour a section of the
constituency over others depending on the number of voters in the favoured region. Finally,
politicians may develop a policy that appears to favour the citizens but actually favours a few
individuals. Policy development ethical guidelines should be applied to avoid making
decisions based on self interest as such policies can only be implemented for as long as the
parties benefit.
Bounded rationality
Bounded rationality is the possibility that when people decide, their objectivity is
restricted by the tractability of the choice issue, the intellectual impediments of their brains,
and the time accessible to settle on the choice. Politicians in this view go about as satisficers,
looking for a tasteful arrangement as opposed to an ideal one. Herbert A. Simon proposed
limited judiciousness as an option reason for the scientific displaying of basic leadership, as
utilized as a part of financial matters, political science and related controls. It supplements
discernment as streamlining which sees basic leadership as a completely level-headed
procedure of finding an ideal decision given the data accessible. Simon utilized the similarity
of a couple of scissors, where one sharp edge speaks to intellectual restrictions of genuine
people and the other the framework of the surrounding, representing how minds make up for
constrained assets by misusing known basic routine in the surroundings.
During policy making, union groups invest heavily in data collection, data processing
and information sharing. Additionally, the mobilize members to take steps to ensure that the
policies made favour their interests. However, there are union members that will benefit from
policy development without paying for it such as members who fail to pay union fees benefit
from policies.
Public choice theory
The communal choice theory was advanced by James Buchanan and Gordon Tullock
in an attempt to describe how public choices are achieved. It forms part of the rational choice
theory. The theory explains the communication among the politicians, the voting public,
political action committees, and the bureaucracy. There are a number of sections to this
The Irrationality of Voting for the Individual
Consider an advantage cost correlation of voting and not voting made by an
individual A. The result of a decision may have a huge effect for individual A. Give us a
chance to state that R is the cash estimation of the advantage to individual of the race turning
out positive to A. Be that as it may, the race result, good or troublesome, is destined to
happen paying little respect to whether A votes or not. The main time it would have any kind
of effect is if the decision was chosen by one vote (Reksulak, Razzolini, & Shughart, (2013).
Give P a chance to be the likelihood of the various voters other than A being similarly
separated. P is probably going to be a little number. The normal advantage for An of voting is
then the result of the advantage of a good outcome times the likelihood of the vote being tied
without A’s vote. On the cost side there is the time and inconvenience of setting off to the
surveys. Also in numerous decisions there is the cost of getting to be distinctly educated
about the issues or applicants. Let us expected that the aggregate cost of voting is C.
Monetary levelheadedness then manages that individual A votes if and just if RP>C.
In races for political office hopefuls are generally headed to an anti-extremist position so
there is not liable to be a lot of contrast in the results for any voter of one competitor being
chosen as opposed to another (Reksulak, Razzolini, & Shughart, (2013). At the end of the
day, B likely won’t be a huge sum. Since P is probably going to be a little amount the normal
pick up from voting is probably going to be little. It is in this way not astounding that the
voter turnout for decisions is low. Open decision scholars then translate the voting that occurs
as confirmation of madness of people in general. There is a substitute clarification.
For instance, Institutional financial aspects holds that it is unusual for individuals to
make profit cost correlation for their decisions. Rather, the institutionalist financial specialists
hold that individuals’ decisions about what they eat, how they dress et cetera are managed by
their way of life. This additionally applies to their voting conduct. Our way of life says that it
really is ideal to vote and we in this manner vote. Most likely microeconomics and
institutionalist financial matters are partly correct. In their book, Reksulak, Razzolini, &
Shughart, (2013) state that there is presumably a struggle between individual selfcenteredness and socially endorsed conduct (p. 43).
The Logic of Elections
During elections for political candidates, it is regularly said that voters are compelled
to vote in favor of the lesser fiendishness. In a two-competitor race that would most likely be
precise, however when there are more than two applicants the system that is constrained upon
numerous voters is more perplexing. In such situations, the voter must carry out
investigations to identify the most evil competitor and after that vote in favor of the applicant
that has the highest chance of defeating him. However, most of the voters do not take time to
investigate candidates and therefore make decisions based on limited information (Reksulak,
Razzolini, & Shughart, (2013, p. 44). In any case, in a closely contested race in which the
“more prominent evil” competitor has a decent possibility of winning the voter might be
headed to bolster a hopeful which is not especially to his or her preferring essentially to crush
a worse malice. Maybe voting in favor of the less shrewd of the main two competitors
legitimately depicts the technique of races.
The reason for this strategy in voting is that the people are hopeful that their chosen
candidate will implement policies without any sense of self-interest motivation. Additionally,
they are hopeful that their chosen candidate will identify their needs and put them up for
discussion during agenda setting.
The Existence of Social Welfare Functions
It would be decent if there was a strategy for finding out the social inclinations of
people in general in some logical way and utilizing the outcomes to settle on choices about
social issues. Kenneth Arrow an early mathematician inspected this matter and demonstrated
a scientific hypothesis, called Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem, that says that it is unusual by
any political intends to infer such a social welfare formula (Arrow, Sen, & Suzumura, 2010,
p. 32).
Later, scientists made alterations to Arrow’s outcome such that if there is adequate
understanding among the inclinations of general society then it is conceivable to determine
empirically a social welfare work. According to Arrow, Sen, & Suzumura, (2010) singular
inclinations don’t need to be indistinguishable, in spite of the fact that it obviously would
ensure the presence of a social welfare work for the gathering (p. 37). For this reason, there
must be sufficient basic view of the choices so that they can be adjusted in a range and every
single individual inclination have the property of single-peakedness; there is some most
favored option and the inclinations drop away monotonically from that most favored option.
Governments as Special Interest Groups
Government officials and civil servants should be representatives of the overall
population and act to its greatest advantage. This is yet an extraordinary instance of what is
known as the Principal-Agent issue; that representatives unless it is to their greatest
advantage may not act in light of a legitimate concern for their principal. The key is to locate
some motivator plot for the representatives so that in seeking after their self-intrigue the
enthusiasm of the chief is upgraded. In business this is accomplished by such plans as
repaying corporate directors with call choices for the stock in the organization so that
administrators in amplifying the estimation of the alternatives naturally need to augment the
estimation of the stock in this manner profiting the shareholders.
According to Ferrell & Fraedrich, (2015), it is not simple to discover answers for the
primary representative issue for governments. For quite a while, financial hypothesis
assumed that if the administration was expected to carry out an assignment, all that was
required was to set up some administration association with obligation regarding
accomplishing that errand. After the improvement of Public Choice Theory this apparently is
a definitive in gullibility. There is inexhaustible confirmation that administrations all through
history and all through the world do not do what they should do (Ferrell & Fraedrich, 2015).
Sometimes, the administration representatives do not do anything valuable. In some
situations, they will not carry out their occupation unless they are paid particularly to do an
assignment. The English dialect calls this payment a bribe however this is a misnomer in that
the word reward is likewise used to assign a payment made to an administration worker to
accomplish something illicit (Ferrell & Fraedrich, 2015). The payment that is said above is
one made to get the administration worker to accomplish something that is lawful as well as
his or her occupation.
Spatial Models of Political Competition
In the 1930’s, Harold Hoteling built up a model of spatial monetary rivalry. The case
utilized by Hoteling was of dessert dealers along a direct shoreline. Hoteling noticed that if
there are two venders the socially productive game plan is have the dealers situated at the
focuses that are a fourth of the shoreline length from every end of the shoreline. He noticed
that opposition would drive the dealers to situate at the midpoint of the shoreline, as opposed
to social productivity. Later on, Anthony Downs linked Hoteling’s model to the opposition of
political gatherings and lawmakers in the political range. Downs research proposed that when
the political procedure is working legitimately the political competitors take the political
position of the middle voter. In their book, Laver, M., & Sergenti, (2011) describe that this
opens up a line of examination in which political decisions are to be based upon the position
of the middle voter.
Policy formulation
Strategy formulation includes creating systems for managing approach issues which
have been put on a motivation. Policy formation takes both the adequacy and the practicality
or worthiness of proposed activities into record. Viability alludes to substantial, workable
systems that address the circumstance, while adequacy alludes to those methodologies which
will probably be put without hesitation. There are different theoretical policy formulation
models. They include; rational comprehensive model, incremental model, and the target
population model. As discussed in the section below, each model can be effectively used in
policy formulation depending on the scope of the problem and the perspective of the policy
Rational comprehensive model
The rational comprehensive model is a theoretical model of how community policy
choices are taken. The decision makers have a wide array of choices to choose from.
According to Fox, Bayat, Ferreira, & Ferreira, (2007) every potential approach to resolving the
setback under investigation is recognised (p. 67). Additionally, the expenses …
Purchase answer to see full

Order a unique copy of this paper
(550 words)

Approximate price: $22

Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages

Order your essay today and save 15% with the discount code ESSAYHELP