Mammotsa Makhene
In his assessment of the policy paradigm Galvez Contreras believes that public participation is one of the key ingredients necessary for successful public policy, contending that an important part of the discussion needs to address how public policy theory can engage public opinion more actively. I strongly agree that public participation is an important component for successful public policy making, I also believe that public opinion and involvement in policy making, is already gradually becoming more active, albeit in an informal manner. The question is how do we convert this informal participation to more formal channels so that public policies can include this input?
Kaplan and Rand emphasise that the importance of public opinion has drastically changed the political landscape for autocratic regimes, more so than for democratic governments. “ This new model must be based on a clear understanding about the rise of public opinion, which now matters more to dictators that it does even to democrats. Democratic leaders have only elections to lose if they miscalculate public opinion. Today’s autocrats on the other hand, risk their lives, their power structures, families assets and loyal advisers if they don’t satisfy their publics” (1). They point to recent examples such as that of the Arab Spring and Russia’s annexation of Crimea, which increased Putin’s public ratings and was driven to some extent by public demand and opinion. Through the use of social media, Facebook, Twitter and opinion blogs, the public can now voice their opinion and convey it to others all over a particular region or the world, almost instantaneously. The message spreads quickly and sometimes violently, leaving no room for governments to be ignorant about public perceptions.
What Kaplan and Rand get wrong is their underestimation of the role public opinion plays even in democratic governments. The impeachment in August of Brazil’s president Dilma Rousseff and her replacement by Michel Temer is an example of this. While many citizens in the country hold Rousseff and her administration accountable for Brazil’s ailing economy, there were demonstrations after her impeachment both by her supporters and non supporters. The public opinion of Temer, her replacement, is said to be just about as low as his predecessor's. Having been convicted earlier in the year of campaign financing violations and with links to various corruption allegations, he does not at the moment seem to hold the public's favor. Add to this, Brazil per capita gross domestic product having declined by 9.7 % in the last nine quarters and an unemployment rate of 11.6%, Temer’s presidency will hinge on the recovery of the economy and thus public opinion (S Romero).
Another example, closer to home is the Black Lives Matter movement. By using social media to inform, organise and mobilize people, the movement used public opinion to question and re-examine policies that dictate the use of force by the police. Here public opinion could not be ignored and public opinion turned into public participation which may help change or influence policy in the long run.
Stiglitz favors “ Making government processes more open, transparent and democratic with more participation more efforts at consensus formation is likely to result not only in a process that is fairer, but one with outcomes that are more likely to be in accord with the general interests” (21). In this way he agrees with sentiments to have more inclusive public participation, although he does not specify how exactly in terms of public policy formation.
Public participation I believe is already taking place when it comes to policy formation. While this participation is not formal and is not the traditional way that public participation is viewed, it most certainly does have an impact on policy making. The difficulty is in establishing just how much public opinion translates to public participation that affects policy formation. How do we measure the impact that a hashtag, an image or video on social media influences or informs policy makers? How do we quantify this form of public participation and how do we use it more effectively when making policies.
--------
Works Cited
Kaplan and Rand emphasise that the importance of public opinion has drastically changed the political landscape for autocratic regimes, more so than for democratic governments. “ This new model must be based on a clear understanding about the rise of public opinion, which now matters more to dictators that it does even to democrats. Democratic leaders have only elections to lose if they miscalculate public opinion. Today’s autocrats on the other hand, risk their lives, their power structures, families assets and loyal advisers if they don’t satisfy their publics” (1). They point to recent examples such as that of the Arab Spring and Russia’s annexation of Crimea, which increased Putin’s public ratings and was driven to some extent by public demand and opinion. Through the use of social media, Facebook, Twitter and opinion blogs, the public can now voice their opinion and convey it to others all over a particular region or the world, almost instantaneously. The message spreads quickly and sometimes violently, leaving no room for governments to be ignorant about public perceptions.
What Kaplan and Rand get wrong is their underestimation of the role public opinion plays even in democratic governments. The impeachment in August of Brazil’s president Dilma Rousseff and her replacement by Michel Temer is an example of this. While many citizens in the country hold Rousseff and her administration accountable for Brazil’s ailing economy, there were demonstrations after her impeachment both by her supporters and non supporters. The public opinion of Temer, her replacement, is said to be just about as low as his predecessor's. Having been convicted earlier in the year of campaign financing violations and with links to various corruption allegations, he does not at the moment seem to hold the public's favor. Add to this, Brazil per capita gross domestic product having declined by 9.7 % in the last nine quarters and an unemployment rate of 11.6%, Temer’s presidency will hinge on the recovery of the economy and thus public opinion (S Romero).
Another example, closer to home is the Black Lives Matter movement. By using social media to inform, organise and mobilize people, the movement used public opinion to question and re-examine policies that dictate the use of force by the police. Here public opinion could not be ignored and public opinion turned into public participation which may help change or influence policy in the long run.
Stiglitz favors “ Making government processes more open, transparent and democratic with more participation more efforts at consensus formation is likely to result not only in a process that is fairer, but one with outcomes that are more likely to be in accord with the general interests” (21). In this way he agrees with sentiments to have more inclusive public participation, although he does not specify how exactly in terms of public policy formation.
Public participation I believe is already taking place when it comes to policy formation. While this participation is not formal and is not the traditional way that public participation is viewed, it most certainly does have an impact on policy making. The difficulty is in establishing just how much public opinion translates to public participation that affects policy formation. How do we measure the impact that a hashtag, an image or video on social media influences or informs policy makers? How do we quantify this form of public participation and how do we use it more effectively when making policies.
--------
Works Cited
- Kaplan, Robert D. and Dafna H. Rand, “The Postmodern Autocrat’s Handbook,” Bloomberg View, Feb. 1, 2015
- Romero, Simon. "With Impeachment Over, Brazil’s Next Challenge Is Its Flailing Economy." The New York Times. N.p., 01 Sept. 2016. Web. 5 Sept. 2016.
- Stiglitz, Joseph, “The Private Uses of Public Interests: Incentives and Institutions”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 12(2), 1998.