The Context of Policy Processes in the Third World

If we consider population distribution policy in Third World countries from the point of view of public policy, we must place it within the context of policy processes in Third World nations. Since the early 1970s, such processes have been recognized as different from those in the developed or first world nations. This recognition, arises partly because the process of development or modernization which has flourished and has

been adopted by many Third World leaders since the early 1960s has largely failed to achieve its objectives. Modernization theory in general, and political development theory in particular, have been criticized for their ideological and ethnocentric character. Higgot

(1988: 31) wrote:

Modernization theory came to be characterized as ideologically tainted, methodologically inadequate, and perhaps most important, ineffective as a policy tool.

Public policy analysts have found that in many cases, even though a policy has been neatly formulated at the national or central level, it cannot be easily implemented (Riggs, 1964; Smith, 1973a; 1973b and 1985; Caiden and Wildavsky, 1974; Grindle, 1980; Rondinelli, 1983; Higgot, 1988). Quick, for example, argued that public policies often do not get implemented at all, and those that do manage to get through the tortuous process of implementation often look very different from what their framers originally intended. He explained that:

Policy implementation in the Third World bears little resemblance to the classical understanding of implementation as a process of rationally linking broad goals to specific programatic decisions (1980: 40).

On the assumption that policy processes in Third World countries are different from those in developed nations, appropriate methods for evaluating development activities in the Third World must also be different from those that have been developed to evaluate government

public policies in developed nations. However, just as the ideas of development or modernisation have been largely imported from developed nations, so the approach to policy evaluation also has been based essentially on the experience of developed countries. It assumes, for example, that interest groups and political parties are well-established institutions. In the countries of Asia, Africa, and Latin America, as argued by Grindle (1980: 15) , to a much greater extent than in the political systems of the United States and Western Europe, the process of implementing public policies is a focus of political participation and competition. This arises from the characteristics of the political systems themselves, such as the remoteness and inaccessibility of the policy­ making process from most individuals, and the extensive competition engendered by widespread need and very scarce resources.

Grindle further explained that:

Thus, while in the United States and Western Europe much political activity is focused on the input stage of the policy process, in the Third World a large portion of individual and collective demand making, the representation of interests, and the emergence and resolution of conflict occurs at the output stage (1980: 15).

Development activities frequently take place in an unstable and highly political setting. This will result in changing programs and priorities and in problems in implementing and evaluating development activities. Factors such as high turnover of office holders and bureaucrats, domestic conflict and strife, an inflationary economy, uncertain findings for the budget, changes in the international economic order, famines, and unemployment may mean that development planning is not meaningful, that development activities are not implemented as planned, that changes are made as the activity is implemented, or that the activity never occurs (1978: 126).

Smith (1985: 142), reviewing the literature on development policy evaluation in Third World Countries, suggested that the type of evaluation that best fits the Third World context would be one that is able to identify problems in the nature of the policy and in the program execution process. That form of evaluation, according to Smith, is implementation analysis. The implementation of policy is the crucial phase of the policy process in most Third World Countries. According to Smith :

When a Western political system makes a policy, it is assumed that the policy will be implemented and the results will be somewhere near those expected. This is not the case in many non-Western nations for two reasons. First, there tends to be a great deal of symbolic policy making. Governments formulate policies that are never fully implemented or may not be intended for implementation. Just because a developing nation makes a 'policy' is not an indication that it is a policy in the Western sense of concept. As Fred Riggs points out, in developing nations it is wise to distinguished between goals (which are not usually implemented) and policies (which the government will try to implement). Secondly, even if a government decides to implement a policy with some degree of vigour, the end results of the policy often are not very satisfactory in terms of the goals of the policy (1973a: 246).

Given the concentration of political elements on the implementation process, it is likely that policies and programs will be even more difficult to manage and predict and even more subject to alteration in the Third World than elsewhere. This means that the implementation process may be the major arena in which individuals and groups are able to pursue conflicting interests and compete for access to scarce resources. It may even be the principal nexus of the interaction between the government and the citizenry, between public officials and their constituents. Moreover, the outcome of this competition and interaction can determine both the content and the impact of programs established by governments elites, and thus influence the course of a country's development.

In the population policy literature, implementation analysis is essentially in accordance with the so-called 'comprehensive country-specific' analysis introduced by Korten (1975). Like other policy analysts with extensive Third World experience, Korten aimed to fill the gaps and deficiencies encountered by most studies in their attempt to understand population policies in developing countries. He argued that to comprehend a population policy within a Third World context required an insight into three crucial elements of the policy process: first, the process through which political support or acquiescence is developed for population policies;

second, the dynamic decision making processes through which specific policy choices are made and their programmes designed; and third, the contextual aspects of the implementation processes that are central to the success or failure of a given policy.

Hugo (1985: 6) noted that government policy on population distribution must take full account of the nature of the state in which the policy is to be initiated:

It is not just the contemporary politico- economic context that should be considered but also the historical context. For example, it should be borne in mind that most of the Third World countries we are dealing with here have been subjected for much of their recent history to fundamentally exploitative colonial system designed to expedite the extraction of raw materials and control the local population in the most cost efficient way.

Similarly, Weiner argued that neither can migration policies be considered without recognizing the variety of political interest groups that are affected and the politically charged atmosphere within which policy decisions are often made. He also argued that migration policies can best be understood in the context of the political process:

To consider policy choices only in the context of the quest for more accelerated development, a more satisfactory dispersal of population, or greater equity or any one of a number of desirable objectives is to overlook the hard realities of politics (Weiner, 1975: 69).

According to Korten (1975: 14 6) , one of the great values of intensive observation and analysis of policy processes on a country specific basis is the opportunity to work from the policy maker's perspective and to study the policy in context, exploring in all their rich variety the broad range of variables that may influence the policy outcome. Analysing policy choices and processes in a specific country context can demonstrate the implications of the diverse range of situations in which actions must be undertaken (Korten, 1975: 140) . Through the study of actual decisions, it becomes possible to identify the types of choices open to consideration and the wide range of contextual issues to be addressed. These include, among others, relevant political pressures and, relative to the state, the readiness of the politically-relevant public, unigue considerations of objectives and strategy, the strength and weaknesses of the local institutional infrastructure, and other specific situational requirements relating to such factors as culture, local politics or religion.