IMPACT OF PUBLIC POLICY AND ITS EXECUTION AT THE GRASS ROOT

ABSTRACT

This research project tends to examine the Impact of Public Policy and Its Execution at the Grass Root (A Study of Napep in Badary Local Government)

Survey design was employed with the use of a well structured questionnaire. Respondents were selected based on simple random sampling technique. Sample size of seventy one (71) respondents were selected.

Three hypotheses were formulated and tested with the use of Chi-Square analysis. The analysis resulted to rejecting all null hypotheses and hence accepting the three alternate hypotheses.

Based on decisions of the tested hypotheses conclusions were reached that; there is a significant relationship between public policy formulation and execution at the grass-root; the various challenges public policy formulation is facing have effect on policy execution at the grass-root; Citizen Consultation and participation aids the actualization of public policy formulation and execution at the grass-root. It was recommended that public policy be it at federal state or local government should be separated from politics.

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.0     BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY

Policies are crucial to the- success of all human endeavours (Ogunsola, 2008). They clarify existing conditions and objectives, and articulate relevant actions and strategies to reach the desired conditions. They also “involve taking the necessary actions, evaluating their outcomes and impacts, drawing lessons to guide future conducts and performances, and varying what is (to be) done in the light of the lessons. It must be realized that the essence of public policies is to improve the living conditions of the people (Akpan, 2000). The incidence of policy failure could be tantamount to a worsening of the said living conditions. This is especially so in the socioeconomic sphere. Nigeria’s poor socio­economic conditions since the attainment of political independence have been ascribed to a variety of causes. Prominent among these is policy failure, which itself derives from a panoply of adverse influences.

These influences include, inter-alia, policy errors and poor implementation of appropriate policies. It has often been advanced that Nigeria has no difficulties with plan and policy formulation, while the problems are usually with implementation. However, one important realization is that both policy formulation and implementation are complementary facets of the policy process.

Unless we cultivate this complementary and take a holistic perspective of the policy process, we can hardly guarantee the desired policy success. In other words, an isolatory good performance in the area without the other translates invariably to overall failure (Nancy, 1991).

At the level of policy formulation, policy errors have been known to occur as a result of inadequate policy analysis and inaccurate and untimely data or outright unavailability of relevant information. In addition, implementation problems traverse a wide range of issues, including. corruption, lack of will to execute, emergence of unforeseen execution difficulties deriving from inadequate analysis, adverse internal and external shocks and sabotage and above all, inadequate materials for reference purposes (Gitu, 2001). Other problems arise from resistance from otherwise beneficiary communities as a result of one-involvement and lack of popular participation, and so forth. The cumulative consequence of the foregoing is the apparent and emergent “Nigerian paradox” of a country that is rich in resources while the citizens are predominantly poor (Keye, 1995).

Policy making can be defined as the elaboration of policy in terms of formulation and implementation. It is the process by which the government or enterprise develops and implements an effective strategy to meet desired objectives (McClure, 2000). In this case, a strategy is the unified comprehensive plan that is developed to reach these objectives. The policy formulation process entails the determination of the policy problem, policy content, design of implementation ‘strategies, and monitoring, review and revision of strategy. For any policy to achieve its goals, it must be predicated on a clearly identified and articulated strategy. While a goal is a statement of what is intended to be achieved, a strategy is a broad course of action or unified comprehensive plan geared towards reaching the objectives. Strategies are broad –statements f “how to” reach the goals: The strategy chosen must derive from the social values or philosophy which informs the policy and must be clearly and specifically linked with the goals of policy (Ekaete, 2001).

Public policies, thus aim to promote societal well-being, good governance and development. Accordingly, they deal with a wide range of societal issues – economic, political, social, cultural, scientific and technological, and environmental – for example, in agriculture, industry, defense: health, population, social welfare, education, transport, utilities, housing, environment, political structures and organizations, law and order, and regulation of economic and social activities (Suberu, 1999).

Local policy-making is complex, demanding the very best of local officials. It is worth the effort. The destiny of a community the fulfillment of its dreams and aspirations – flow out of the exercise of policy-making. The policy-making process weighs and balances public values. Often there is no “right’ choice or correct technical answer to the question at hand. That is why policy-making can be an adversarial process, characterized by the clash of competing and conflicting interests and viewpoints rather than an impartial, disinterested or “objective” search for “correct” solutions for policy problems. Because of these value clashes, the policy-making process can get emotional. However, it does not have to be rancorous (Abubakar, 2004).