Received Jun 24; Accepted Sep 2. This article has been cited by other articles in PMC. Abstract The establishment of policy is key to the implementation of actions for health.
The policy making approach is conceptualised as a process that provides a logical structure and sequence to the complex world of policy making. This essay begins with a description of the use of the policy cycle in policy formulation and examines the structure of the cycle as discussed in Cairneyp.
The essay then provides an analysis of the effectiveness of the policy cycle approach in meeting the objectives of policy makers. Through this analysis it will be shown that the policy cycle model does not entirely achieve its stated aims and objectives.
The policy cycle approach views the formulating of policy as a fluid but logical sequence that provides policy makers a systematic problem solving process.
Cairney, Whilst the description of stages will vary from model to model, common stages that appear throughout many policy cycle models include agenda setting, decision-making, implementation and evaluation p.
At the decision making stage or policy formulation legislation is usually enacted. At the implementation stage, policies are translated into action, and, finally at the evaluation stage, the outcome of polices are assessed.
The rationale for observing each stage separately is that decisions made at each stage affects the outcome of other stages, even when they occur simultaneously.
It also suggests involvement of interest groups whose input, it is argued provides a democratic way to decision making and hypothetically, encourages greater participation and commitment at the implementation stage p.
It also fails to explain how difficult decisions are made BridgmanAn analysis of the Policy Cycle The policy cycle model (also referred to as ‘stages heuristic’ by Sabatier, ) is mainly concerned with the organisation and creation of public policy. The policy making approach is conceptualised as a process that provides a logical structure and sequence to.
Such a policy cycle can variably exist of as little as three steps (problem – solution – evaluation), four stages (agenda setting – policy formation – policy implementation – policy review) with as many as 15 sub-processes, to retrospective policy analyses that yield dozens of policy development instances, phases, and events.
This model provides a basis to understand the policymaking process as a fluid cycle of stages with the key stages being agenda setting, policy formation, decision making/policy adoption, implementation, and . While Sabatier acknowledges the prototypical “Stages Heuristic” of early policy process theoreticians, he finds it critically inadequate for a variety of reasons necessitating exploration of more promising theoretical frameworks.
On the contrary, Parkinson () in his lecture, quite rightly so, argue that the process model resembles a mechanistic tool that describes checklists of “parts” present in the policy making arena; parallel to Nakamura’s () notion of a “textbook approach” (Sabatier, ).
Using the policy cycle heuristic to guide the policy process, the need for a new policy, or new policy provision(s) within an existing policy is identified and 2 For a summarized linear structure of the stages - see Dye () p; and Howlett & Ramesh, () p 3 confirmed (Freeman, ).