Introduction
Over the years political scientists have developed multiple theories to explain political events and
outcomes. These theoretical approaches that will be discussed in this answer include Group
Theory,
Elite
Theory,
Incremental
Theory,
Rational-Choice
Theory,
Systems Theory. Each has a distinct focus and each suggests specific things about political life
and policy
Elite theory
This theory views public policy as the preferences and values of the governing elite. It believes that
people are passive, apathetic, and ill-informed about public policy. Initiative for public policy does
not come from masses. The elite actually shape mass opinion into a policy question. Thus, public
policy really turns out to be the preferences of elites. Public officials and administrators merely
carry out the policies decided by the elite. In this model, policies flow ‘downward’ from elites to
masses, they do not arise from mass demands. The theory allows for the smarter minority of
individuals to be at the helm and thus ensuring the most efficient organisation of society.
Dye
(1981)
summarises
the
implication
of
this
theory
as
indicating that public policy reflects elite values, serves elite ends, and is a product of the elite. The
corollary of this assumption is that the general citizenry or the masses are apathetic and illinformed and do not determine or influence policy through their demands or actions. So stated,
elite theory is a provocative theory of policy formation because policy here, is the product
of elites, reflecting their values and serving their ends, one of which may be a desire to provide in
some way for the welfare of the masses. One other limitation of this model is that it assumes a
highly structured and stratified society. In structurally diffused societies, elite formation and
therefore, elite values and elite identity is relatively undeveloped.
Group Theory
According to group theory, interaction and struggle among different societal groups is
the central facet of political life. Group is a collectivity of individuals distinguished by
some
common
attribute
or
shared
relationship.
As
per this theory, public policy is the product of group struggle. individuals having common interests
and demands join hands with each other as a group to get the desirable policies made by the
governments. The biggest strength of game theory is that the competition
among groups does not permit any group to become absolutely powerful in a system
for all times. They keep on checking the activities of each other.
The group theory relies on the fact that there isn’t a monopoly of resources required to engage in
this group conflict with only one group, while this may be true for some isolated cases, in reality
however,
especially in Africa and specifically in Nigeria, some groups could hold on to power perpetually
and block all conceivable possibility of weaker groups from taking the full advantage offered by
democracy. During actual policy-making, the government tends to tilt towards the groups that are
gaining in influence. By contrast, in this theory, public policy moves away from the demands of
the losing groups. Thus, public policy, at any given time, will reflect the interests of the dominant
groups. The theory is so concerned with the role of groups that it leaves out the individuals and
society in their analysis. While not disputing the fact that politics is a struggle between and among
groups, one can also not forget that the role of particular individuals is a very important variable.
Institutional Theory
According to this view, public policies have their origin in governmental institutions such as
legislatures, executives, courts, and political parties. A policy becomes a public policy, only when
it is authoritatively determined by government institutions. Government gives legitimacy and
universalistic character to a policy. Public policy is authoritatively determined, implemented, and
enforced by government institutions. Thus, the relationship between public policy and government
institutions is very close. Institutional approach is criticized for ignoring the living linkages between
institutions and public policy. With the onrush of the behavioural revolutions in political science,
institutional studies of the policy process were swept aside in favour of studies that relied more on
the group, system, and elite–mass models.
Incremental theory
Incremental decisions involve limited changes or additions to existing policies. According to this
approach, the policy-makers examine a limited number of policy alternatives and implement
change in a series of small steps. There are very real limits of time, brains money etc. on
administrator's
understand
complex problems and make different policies about them. Because of these limitations, the
policy-makers, rationally, accept the past policies that satisfy them as legitimate and suffice to deal
with the issue. Incrementalism is politically expedient because it is easier to reach agreement when
the matters in dispute among various groups are only limited modifications of existing programmes
rather than policy issues of great magnitude. Incrementalism is also realistic because it recognises
that policy makers lack the time resources needed to engage in comprehensive analysis of all
alternative solutions. In a nut-shell, incrementalism utilises limited analysis to yield limited,
practical, acceptable decisions.
Its limitations have been characterised as it being too conservative and antithetical to innovation
and it is impotent under crisis situations, incrementalism does not eliminate the need for theory in
policy-making, are some of the more enthusiastic advocates contend. Unless changes in policy are
to
be
made
simply
at random or arbitrarily, some theory is needed to guide the action and to indicate the likely effect
of proposed change.
Rational Choice Theory
The rational-choice theory involves applying the principles of micro-economic theory to the
analysis and explanation of political behaviour. This approach is based on economic principles
such as the cost-benefit analysis The rationalist model deals with construction of public policies
that
ensure
better
public
policies.
It
thus aims at improving public policy-making process. It is the opposite of incrementalism. The
rationalist model deals with construction of public policies that ensure better public policies. It
thus aims at improving public policy-making process. It is the opposite of incrementalism. The
obvious limitation of this approach is its demand for knowledge (facts and
information) not within the reach of mere mortals. The prospects of the successful application of
this model in developing countries like Nigeria is very dim indeed given the paucity of data needed.
Systems Theory
System approach considers public policy as an outcome of the political system. Public policy may
also be seen as a political system’s response to demands arising from its environment. The political
system comprises those identifiable and interrelated institutions and activities in a society that make
authoritative allocations of values (decisions) that are binding on society