picked out for attention (Bachrach and Baratz, 1970, again) and may
be approached in different ways during the process of decision and
implementation, and then be subsumed into debates on other issues
as time goes by.
Rather than a one-off decision on values, we have already stressed
the extent to which policy making often reflects compromises on
values between different groups. These groups, in turn, may define
‘the problem’ in different ways. As we saw earlier, the question of
whether a problem should be dealt with by the state, the market,
voluntary action or whatever, is a crucial part of many contemporary
policy discussions.
Partly as a consequence of the extended time policy making takes
and the partial nature of the consensus built up behind many policies,
it cannot be assumed that decisions once made will automatically be
implemented. Many agencies, firms and individuals and levels of
government may be involved in realising a decision initially taken at
one level of the state machinery. The outcome may not be recog-
nisable to the initial policy makers. The consequences of the policies
adopted may not, in fact, be as predicted by the original analysis upon
which the policy was based. For these reasons it is sensible that policy
makers set up mechanisms to monitor the success or failure of their
policies so that they may be adapted, refined or indeed abandoned as
appropriate.
Implementing public policy
Public policy is often discussed almost entirely from a central govern-
ment perspective. A problem is identified, a ‘solution’ propounded,
after which the solution to the problem is assumed to be the effective
and efficient implementation of the policy at local level. Indeed many
commentators on public policy – especially in the national press –
scarcely consider the possibility of a gap between policy prescription
and its implementation. Yet, most public policies are implemented by
local agencies at various distances from the central government.
Hood (1976) introduced the concept of ‘perfect implementation’
for a state of affairs in which central policy makers’ prescriptions
were perfectly realised. The likelihood of such an eventuality in the
real world is remote. For instance, studies by the National Audit
Office show that social security payments, being paid through local
POLICIES 225