Policy Implementation Model

770 Words4 Pages
3.1 Models of Policy Implementation 3.1.1 Top- down model Top-down implementation model is the classical model of policy implementation. Pressman and Wildavsky (1973) were considered the founding fathers of the model. According to the authors as cited Knill and Tosun (2012), a great change and shifts in policy objectives can happen during the implementation process. They argues that, the change in policy objectives might happen if action depends upon a number of the actors who are required to cooperate. According to the proponents of top-down model; policy goals can be specified by policy makers and implementation of policy can by carried out successfully by setting up certain mechanisms (Palumbo and Calista, 1990 as cited by,Paudel, 2009)…show more content…
First, top-down perspective takes policy output as the initial point of analysis and disregards act taken earlier in the policy creation process. Secondly, top down proponents tend to see policy implementation as a simply administrative process that pay no attention to political aspects (Knill & Tosun, 2012). Another criticism is that, it fails to regard as local actors and related circumstances for policy implementation at the street-level. Some aspects of top down model are relevant to the proposed study as Integration policies are approved at the at the parliament level and given to the municipalities for…show more content…
The focus is the individuals and their behavior and in this situation street-level bureaucrats have a central role in the political process. According to Lipsky (2010), street-level bureaucrats are well thought-out to have a better understanding of what customers need as they have straight contact with the public. It is crucial to note that policy implementation happens at two levels. First, there is the macro-implementation level comprising central actor that prepare policy output; secondly, there are local actors at the micro-implementation level reacts to the macro-level policies and develop their own programmes and implement them (Knill & Tosun, 2012). However, there are criticisms of the bottom-up model of policy accomplishment. First, the refusal of the power of policy makers is doubtful in light of typical democratic theory. Policy be in command of should be exercised by actors who authority derives from their answerability to their electorate (Matland, 1995, as cited by Paudel, 2009). Another criticism is that bottom up models exaggerate the level of local self-sufficiency (Knill & Tosun,
Open Document