Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
Public policy-making is rarely a purely rational or technical exercise. It is deeply embedded in the political context, making ‘political feasibility’ a crucial consideration. Political feasibility refers to the likelihood that a policy alternative will gain sufficient political support to be enacted and implemented. This is not a binary ‘yes’ or ‘no’ proposition but rather a probabilistic assessment, varying with each policy option and evolving circumstances. Yehezkel Dror, a prominent scholar of public administration, significantly contributed to understanding this complex interplay between policy analysis and political realities. His work, particularly his concept of ‘imperative policy-making’, provides a framework for analyzing how political feasibility shapes policy choices.
Dror’s Conceptual Framework
Yehezkel Dror, in his seminal work “Public Policy Making Reconsidered” (1983), challenged the traditional rational-comprehensive model of policy-making. He argued that in complex modern societies, comprehensive rationality is often unattainable. Dror proposed a framework centered around ‘imperative policy-making’, which acknowledges the inherent limitations of information and the importance of value judgments.
The Role of the Policy Analyst
Dror emphasized the crucial role of the ‘policy analyst’ in navigating the complexities of policy-making. Unlike the traditional ‘neutral competence’ model, Dror’s policy analyst is expected to be actively involved in shaping the policy agenda and advocating for specific alternatives. This involves not only assessing the technical merits of different options but also evaluating their political feasibility.
Political Feasibility as a Probabilistic Concept
Dror explicitly recognized that political feasibility is not a fixed attribute of a policy alternative. It is a probabilistic assessment, dependent on a multitude of factors, including:
- Political Actors: The attitudes and preferences of key political actors (legislators, bureaucrats, interest groups, public opinion).
- Institutional Context: The rules of the game, including constitutional constraints, legislative procedures, and bureaucratic structures.
- Timing: The political climate and the presence of ‘windows of opportunity’.
- Policy Design: The specific details of the policy alternative, including its costs, benefits, and distributional effects.
Dror argued that each policy alternative has a unique ‘feasibility profile’ that must be carefully assessed. This assessment requires a deep understanding of the political landscape and the ability to anticipate potential obstacles and opportunities.
Dror’s Contribution to Analyzing the Statement
The statement, “The concept of political feasibility in policy alternative is a probabilistic concept and is related to each policy alternative,” is central to Dror’s work. He directly addresses this by:
- Rejecting Determinism: Dror rejects the idea that political feasibility is a predetermined constraint. It is not a static barrier but a dynamic variable that can be influenced by strategic action.
- Emphasizing Context Specificity: He stresses that the feasibility of a policy alternative is highly context-specific. What is feasible in one political environment may not be feasible in another.
- Advocating for Incrementalism: Dror’s framework often favors incremental policy changes, as these are generally more politically feasible than radical reforms.
- Highlighting the Importance of ‘Feasibility Studies’ : He advocated for rigorous feasibility studies that go beyond technical analysis to include a thorough assessment of the political landscape.
Illustrative Example: The National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA) 2005
The enactment of NREGA (now MGNREGA) in 2005 exemplifies Dror’s concept. While the idea of a guaranteed employment scheme had been debated for decades, its political feasibility only materialized under specific conditions: a UPA government committed to social welfare, a favorable political climate, and a carefully designed policy that addressed concerns about fiscal sustainability and administrative capacity. The initial design and subsequent amendments demonstrate how political considerations shaped the policy’s evolution.
Limitations of Dror’s Framework
While Dror’s work is highly influential, it is not without limitations. Some critics argue that his emphasis on ‘imperative policy-making’ can lead to a neglect of democratic values and a concentration of power in the hands of policy elites. Others contend that his framework is overly focused on the role of the policy analyst and underestimates the importance of broader public participation in policy-making.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Yehezkel Dror’s contribution lies in his nuanced understanding of the interplay between policy analysis and political realities. He convincingly demonstrated that political feasibility is a probabilistic concept, intrinsically linked to each policy alternative and shaped by a complex web of political factors. His framework provides valuable insights for policy-makers and analysts seeking to navigate the challenges of policy-making in a politically charged environment. However, it is crucial to acknowledge the limitations of his approach and to strive for a balance between political pragmatism and democratic principles.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.