{"title":"Agenda to adoption: understanding the mechanisms driving fee-free policy development in Sub-Saharan Africa through policy change frameworks.","authors":"Gabriel Asante, György Gajduschek, Attila Bartha","doi":"10.1007/s11077-022-09473-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Policy change frameworks are commonly used to understand policy development processes. However, few studies have attempted to apply these frameworks to the recent popular fee-free policy education at the high school level in Sub-Saharan Africa. Investigating fee-free policy development through policy change frameworks can assist both in identifying the genesis of past policies, including who the important actors are, how issues are framed and problematised, and how specific solutions are designed, as well as how to interpret unfolding policies. In this article, we review three prominent policy change frameworks: Baumgartner and Jones' \"punctuated equilibrium framework,\" Sabatier and Jenkins-Smith's \"advocacy coalition framework,\" and Kingdon's \"multiple streams framework.\" After reviewing the frameworks, we apply them to two fee-free policies in Ghana which are Progressive Free Senior High School and Free Senior High School policies to understand the drivers of fee-free policy change. From the socio-political background, three main concepts were derived from these policy change frameworks deducing from the basic assumptions of these theories. They are domestic politics, political and policy entrepreneurs, and socio-economic dynamics. The results show that fee-free policies are largely driven by domestic politics and political and policy entrepreneurs in political executive positions. Factors under socio-economic dynamics are only scope conditions that are not significant to trigger the adoption of a fee-free policy.</p>","PeriodicalId":51433,"journal":{"name":"Policy Sciences","volume":" ","pages":"1-24"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9382618/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Policy Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-022-09473-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Policy change frameworks are commonly used to understand policy development processes. However, few studies have attempted to apply these frameworks to the recent popular fee-free policy education at the high school level in Sub-Saharan Africa. Investigating fee-free policy development through policy change frameworks can assist both in identifying the genesis of past policies, including who the important actors are, how issues are framed and problematised, and how specific solutions are designed, as well as how to interpret unfolding policies. In this article, we review three prominent policy change frameworks: Baumgartner and Jones' "punctuated equilibrium framework," Sabatier and Jenkins-Smith's "advocacy coalition framework," and Kingdon's "multiple streams framework." After reviewing the frameworks, we apply them to two fee-free policies in Ghana which are Progressive Free Senior High School and Free Senior High School policies to understand the drivers of fee-free policy change. From the socio-political background, three main concepts were derived from these policy change frameworks deducing from the basic assumptions of these theories. They are domestic politics, political and policy entrepreneurs, and socio-economic dynamics. The results show that fee-free policies are largely driven by domestic politics and political and policy entrepreneurs in political executive positions. Factors under socio-economic dynamics are only scope conditions that are not significant to trigger the adoption of a fee-free policy.
期刊介绍:
The policy sciences are distinctive within the policy movement in that they embrace the scholarly traditions innovated and elaborated by Harold D. Lasswell and Myres S. McDougal. Within these pages we provide space for approaches that are problem-oriented, contextual, and multi-method in orientation. There are many other journals in which authors can take top-down, deductive, and large-sample approach or adopt a primarily theoretical focus. Policy Sciences encourages systematic and empirical investigations in which problems are clearly identified from a practical and theoretical perspective, are well situated in the extant literature, and are investigated utilizing methodologies compatible with contextual, as opposed to reductionist, understandings. We tend not to publish pieces that are solely theoretical, but favor works in which the applied policy lessons are clearly articulated. Policy Sciences favors, but does not publish exclusively, works that either explicitly or implicitly utilize the policy sciences framework. The policy sciences can be applied to articles with greater or lesser intensity to accommodate the focus of an author’s work. At the minimum, this means taking a problem oriented, multi-method or contextual approach. At the fullest expression, it may mean leveraging central theory or explicitly applying aspects of the framework, which is comprised of three principal dimensions: (1) social process, which is mapped in terms of participants, perspectives, situations, base values, strategies, outcomes and effects, with values (power, wealth, enlightenment, skill, rectitude, respect, well-being, and affection) being the key elements in understanding participants’ behaviors and interactions; (2) decision process, which is mapped in terms of seven functions—intelligence, promotion, prescription, invocation, application, termination, and appraisal; and (3) problem orientation, which comprises the intellectual tasks of clarifying goals, describing trends, analyzing conditions, projecting developments, and inventing, evaluating, and selecting alternatives. There is a more extensive core literature that also applies and can be visited at the policy sciences website: http://www.policysciences.org/classicworks.cfm. In addition to articles that explicitly utilize the policy sciences framework, Policy Sciences has a long tradition of publishing papers that draw on various aspects of that framework and its central theory as well as high quality conceptual pieces that address key challenges, opportunities, or approaches in ways congruent with the perspective that this journal strives to maintain and extend.Officially cited as: Policy Sci