BOOK ANALYSIS

The End of Power: From Boardrooms to Battlefields and Churches to States, Why Being  Charge Isn’t What It Used to Be. Moisés Naím.

This book analysis will focus on Moises Naim’s thoughts on power as reflected in his book the End of Power. Dr Moisés Naím is an internationally-syndicated columnist and best-selling author of influential books. He served as Venezuela’s Trade Minister, Editor-in-Chief of Foreign Policy, turning the magazine into a modern award-winning publication on global politics and economics. He has also served as an Executive Director of the World Bank, and currently at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. His prize-winning work is highly influential in the world of international politics, economics and business. Given his background, he is well placed to discuss the rise and fall of giants in the world’s political and economic scene.

He writes that 21^st century power is easier to get, harder to use and easier to lose. Naim introduces the game of chess and how it has evolved over the last fifty years. Chess was once a game of the privileged both intellectually and financially. Nations used to invest a lot in their players in order to make the champions, Grandmasters. In 1988 there were only 22 Grandmasters in the world and in 2013 there were more than 1200 Grandmasters. The question is, what changed? Technological advancements have made it easier to learn the game and simulate the toughest opponent, hence the power that lay in a few is now accessible to many. To prove this Naim introduces his main thesis, the More, Mobility and Mentality revolutions.

“More” people have been at the centre of India and China’s growth. Coupled with sound economic policies the two countries have been able to harness their demographic dividend to spur economic growth. The possibility of China over taking the US to become the super power is no longer incomprehensible.

Naim does an excellent job of introducing the power dynamics at play in the world today.  He writes that the people have become more enlightened about the choices they have and the impact of their decisions. From one party political systems to democracies, monopolies to free trade and major advancements in the art of war and how the micropowers continue to threaten the existence of the megaplayers. He does point out that globalization has broken many barriers to information, changing the way people think and growing an insatiable need to be liberated from the yokes of ignorance and bondage.

In Chapter five (5) Moises Naim looks at the Decay of power in national politics. He refers to Beppe Grillo a comedian in Italy and the Grillo movement. The movement managed to poll about 20 percent of the national vote and win several mayoral seats. There are similar cases of anti political characters becoming popular among the voters and being elected officials. This can be seen in the 2016 US elections, people opting for the least qualified candidate, Donald Trump, to be President compared to Hillary Clinton who has thirty (30) years experience in government.

The role of the internet in changing the narrative can not be downplayed.  Naim also writes about how the use of the internet has also caused radical changes in the world of politics, with increased citizen participation in governance and democratic processes. One of the many events that stand out is the Arab Spring that began in 2011. Social media played a great role as a tool for inspiring activists. Some may argue that in this case, social media caused the revolts in the rest of the regions. The Arab Spring in 2011 as well as the 2008 and 2012 Obama campaigns have fueled interest in how social media might affect citizens’ participation in civic and political life.

The second edition of the Arab Social Media Report reveals that nearly 9 out of 10 Egyptians and Tunisians used Facebook to organize and publicize protests and all protests except for one took place. Furthermore, the report found that Facebook usage increased or doubled between January and April of 2011. The overall number of users had increased by 30 percent to 27.7 m compared to the 18% increase in 2010. Usage in Bahrain escalated by 15 percent only in the first 3 months, Egypt 29% and Tunisia 17 %. Libya’s usage however, declined by 76% probably due to the extreme violence in the region. During the period of protests in Egypt and Tunisia, 88% of Egyptians and 94% of Tunisians said they had been getting their information from social media sites (Arab Social Media Report, 2011).

The power to create change now lies in the people being governed more than ever. From only about fifty (50) democracies in 1950 to over 100 in 2010 it is evident that the world has no room for despots. Techno giants such as Google, IBM and Microsoft are always wary of new players coming into the market and taking up their market. The size of a nations military does not guarantee safety anymore. Power that lay in a few is now accessible to many. With various technological advancements, small militaries and terrorist groups have capitalised, making it easier for them to carry out their activities.

Naim concludes that contrary to what Max Weber and other sociologists and economist of his time, size has little to do with success. Being a Large corporation is no longer a guarantee for success anymore. New players are now making the headlines, as the advantages of the large scale diminish opportunities for micropowers increase. A number of small start-ups like Vox media have grown to overtake giants like The New York Times in subscribers and viewership.

Basically, Naim is saying due to increased interconnectivity, technology and the rise in the world’s population the shift of power has become inevitable. The question is no longer how it can be stopped but how the world can adapt to the ever-changing shifts in power. He tries to move away from the notion that the world elite are still running the show to the fact that the seemingly silent and useless nations now have a say in what happens in the world. However, with the top spot, the super power position, being more contested now than ever it is important to still form allies and nations like India, China and Russia will stop at nothing to clinch that position.

True to his observations, the mobility revolution has also changed the political landscape of many countries. The migrant crisis that has seen refugees flocking to Europe and has also put a strain on their economies and their capacity to absorb all the migrants into their system. Naim points out that the Hispanic vote in America has become so crucial that in a few years’ time it will easily become the deciding vote in the election. Naim’s argument that the influence of super powers like the US and institutions like the UN is slowly dissipating is true, however, their power still exists.

One of the major determinants of a Presidents’ success is the bureaucrat. Bureaucrats put government policy into practice, and therefore having a large impact in policymaking. In order to get their policies passed, the Presidents in most democratic systems of governance must work with the bureaucracy. Controlling the bureaucracy can be difficult. This is also one of the major point that Naim does not address. A large chunk of what the President achieves also depends on the team he/she is working with. Comparing Barack Obama and Ronald Reagan’s presidency is not a fair measure of the amount of power held by either president. The prevailing geopolitical environments were different and the priorities in the domestic and foreign policies may have also been different.

Naim speaks of the rise to supremacy of the US and European nations but does not address the source of their wealth and the suppression of most of the developing world in the hands of the developed nations. The role of the slave trade and colonialism in Africa and South America in the underdevelopment of the two continents. It will forever remain a mystery if the absence of the slave trade and colonisation would have made a difference in the development of Africa but the psychological effects of it are still evident today. The US economy was built on the back of slaves and that of Britain and France would not be where it is today without the resources that came from former colonies.

It is now clear that policy on Iraq and Lybia was made based on flawed intelligence and assessments. Still they were not challenged, and they should have been. The question is, who is the UK and America accountable to?

The claim made by the UK and US Governments that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction proved to be entirely false. The findings in the UK House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee (HCFAC) Report concerning the war of aggression against Iraq revealed that the judgements about the severity of the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction – WMD – were presented with a certainty that was not justified. The Joint Intelligence Committee should have made clear to Mr Blair that the assessed intelligence had not established “beyond doubt” either that Iraq had continued to produce chemical and biological weapons or that efforts to develop nuclear weapons continued…

With regards to the conflict in Lybia that led to the ouster an death of Muammar Gadhafi, the UK House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee (HCFAC) Report states that, on 2 April 2011, Sidney Blumenthal, adviser and unofficial intelligence analyst to the then United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, reported his conversation with French intelligence officers to the Secretary of State”.

Blumenthal reported that these French intelligence officers said that President Sarkozy’s suggestions immediately to conduct a military campaign against Libya “were driven by the following issues:

• a desire to gain a greater share of Libya oil production,
• increase French influence in North Africa,
• improve his internal political situation in France,
• provide the French military with an opportunity to reassert its position in the world, (and),
• address the concern of his advisors over Qaddafi’s long term plans to supplant France as the dominant power in Francophone Africa.”

The UK House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee (HCFAC) report says: “The sum of four of the five factors identified by Sidney Blumenthal equated to the French national interest. The fifth factor was President Sarkozy’s political self-interest.”

None of the French objectives explained by French intelligence officers, and known to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and therefore President Obama and the US Government, had anything to do with protecting Libyan civilians. They were focused on promoting French imperial interests in Africa, consistent with the historic neo-colonial French policy of Francafrique!

Naim writes about how much the war in Iraq has cost the US and UK but does not acknowledge the fact that neither the UN through it organs, the ICC, nor the EU has charged the two with crimes against humanity. This is clear evidence that power has not shifted at all. It still lies in countries with wealth and military power. To make matters worse the US is not even a signatory to the ICC.

Although Naim speaks to UN security council being made up of the big five and how they are not as free to dictate their will on the world body as before, he does not point out the need for the world body to reform its security council. If the UN is ever going to be viewed as an inclusive and non- partisan institution its security council must include developing nations from Asia, Africa and South America to be permanent representatives.

In the last few months from, September to November 2016, a few countries including South Africa and Burundi have indicated their intention to leave the International Criminal Court. Africans have lost their enthusiasm for the court’s style of international criminal justice, accusing it of bias. Fueling this suspicion is the fact that nine of the ten situations the court is currently investigating are in African countries.

An issue that has always been raised by African leaders is that if George Bush had been an African leader he would have been tried by the ICC for crime against humanity during the war in Afghanistan and the invasion of Iraq. Uganda’s president Yoweri Museveni, despite once asking the court to help prosecute rebel fighters, praised South Africa’s decision, calling the ICC “useless.” Earlier this month, Burundi’s parliament voted to leave the court, submitting its withdrawal to the UN. Gambia followed suit, calling the court an “‘International Caucasian Court’ for the persecution and humiliation of people of color, especially Africans.” Kenyan lawmakers have already tabled a bill to withdraw from the court, and Namibia is also reconsidering its membership, saying the country no longer needs the court, now that its own institutions have strengthened.

Perhaps most significantly, the African Union earlier this year said it would consider a mass withdrawal from the court, a proposal initiated by Kenyan president Uhuru Kenyatta, who had previously appeared at The Hague on allegations of crimes against humanity. This shows that power has not necessarily decayed. It is still in the hands of the super powers. If it had decayed equality amongst nations would have been reached a long time ago.

Naim ignores the fact that most democracies in Africa are just democracies on paper but the leaders are dictators. A very good example is that of Zimbabwe. President Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe has been in power since 1980. Elections marred with violence and intimidation have been held regularly since his ascent to power but Naim still regards it as a democracy. There are many other countries in similar situations like Uganda, Burundi and Gambia.  The systems of governance of most African countries have had a huge bearing on the level of development that has taken place on the continent and its ability to influence decisions at a global scale.

The table below shows how most developing nations still heavily rely on aid to sustain their populations. The flows of aid clearly show that there is still an imbalance of power.  The OECD countries remain the largest contributors to the UN and other humanitarian relief agencies.

On global issues such as climate change Naim bewails how “more and more ‘small’ countries veto, foot-drag, demand special consideration, or generally undermine the efforts of the ‘big’ nations in one area after another” but does not talk about how much the ‘big’ nations block viable solutions being pushed by the ‘small’ nations. The developed countries remain the largest emitters of carbon emissions. He does not put into perspective the risks associated with climate change and how forces of nature can strip any super power of its power.

Governments, corporations, and other established powers have a long history of selfishness, exploitation, and destruction generating widespread suffering and disaster. In the last few years China has gone on a spending spree in Africa. Acting like a saviour from the east, China has taken advantage of aid dependant continent, weak investment and labour regulations in Africa from the extractive, manufacturing and banking industries. It has used the African market as a dumping ground for its cheap exports and labour.

Naim speaks highly of the increasing number of philanthropic organisations in America and world wide but he does not critically analyse the fact that despite huge investments in aid and humanitarian assistance in Africa, how come little has been achieved in ending poverty in the world. The same argument can be used when he talks about how developing nations are forming their own economic blocks, if these economic blocks are so successful how come no country has pulled out of the United Nations. The fact that the Commonwealth and the Organisation internationale de la Francophonie remain with members up to this day clearly shows that Britain and France may have lost their empires but they still hold the power.

For small businesses, the road to Wall street is not always easy with “mega players” always lurking like sharks to devour them. Facebook is the first to line up and buy new small media technological innovations that pose a threat to its domination. Facebook has bought WhatsApp and Instagram who were accumulating a large following. So contrary to what Naim says, size still matters in the world of business.

The Internet does introduce easier ways of communication and hence potentially makes dissemination of information and participation easier. However, it does not solve the problem of motivation. People may continue to abstain from participating if they do not believe that their participation will make a difference. Therefore, policies that are directed towards the utilisation of technology for democratic purposes need to consider the reasons behind citizens’ lack of interest before suggesting the Internet as a solution. As Dutton (1999) suggests, “Digital government can erode or enhance democratic processes…but the outcome will be determined by the interaction of policy choices, management strategies and cultural responses – not by advanced technology alone”

Naim also does not take into consideration that there are countries like China were internet activity is highly monitored and certain internet sites are censored. Hence, it might no be as effective in starting an “Arab Spring” protest.

Internet literacy is also a barrier to internet access. The skills and language used have to be appropriate if the message is going to reach the intended recipients. As technology continues to evolve so have the gadgets requires. In developing countries, more than 60% of the populations reside in rural areas where there is limited connectivity to the internet. The smarter the phones have gotten the less user friendly they have also become. Hence it is important not to abandon traditional sources of information and communication like the radio and television which are accessible to most people. Traditional media remains a relevant and crucial source of information for the masses in rural areas.

Naim does not gives a balanced argument on each of the four main arguments of the decay of power that in the end his position is not clear on whether power is really decaying. In chapter nine Naim writes that power resides in everything and everyone. If that is the case, then there is no decay of power. This contradicts his definition of power – is the capacity to get others to do or stop doing something- because if power is accessible everyone then no one can neither stop nor allow anyone to do anything. Naim does not address the need for countries to work together for a common goal. For him it is about who has the upper hand. There is no first among equals only a super power.

His power worldview is confined to the capacity to control, manage or dominate. It ignores other forms of power that become visible when we define power simply as “the ability to create effects”. These other forms of power include Charisma or personal power, Knowledge or expertise. From a gender perspective, his book makes it look like its still man’s world. He only makes one reference to a woman in a position of power in his whole book.

Naim writes that the world is over due for another radical and innovative event to change the course of the future. He is of the thinking that the world needs brand new institutions that will reassert the military and political supremacy of another country, dominance of another corporation and this will somehow end the decay of power. In my opinion, its more about refining the already existing institutions. Like mentioned earlier the United Nations needs to be reformed if its going to exist in the next 50 years. Smaller nations continue to feel disenfranchised by such inequalities.

In chapter 11 he also makes the assertion that only when trust is restored in the political systems at home endowing leaders with the capacity to contain the decay of power and enable them to make hard decisions and avoid gridlock will they be able to tackle the most pressing global challenges. Hence the need for stronger and more democratic political parties and political systems. He seems to ignore the fact that there are still some absolute monarchies that rule by decree and not the electoral system. There is no hope of building democratic institutions and in such places power is not decaying at all.

The biggest shortcoming of Naim’s otherwise excellent book, in my opinion, is how broad he looks at power. He touches on too many elements that he ends up confusing the reader and repeating himself in many instances. Chapters one to four are basically an introduction to the rest of the remaining book. He gets into the specifics of the book much later than the reader would want to.

Instead of calling it “the end of power” or the “decay of power”, it is more like the balance of power. Protests that are happening are because people want to have governance institutions that abide by the rule of law. The current world order is still far from changing, neither US, Russia nor China are willing to give up the power that they have. The collective power that comes from having allies who are willing to stand by them is just as important in claiming world dominance.

References

1. Global Outlook on Aid Results of the 2014 DAC Survey on Donors’ Forward Spending Plans and Prospects for Improving Aid Predictability. (2014) http://www.oecd.org/dac/aid-architecture/GlobalOutlookAid-web.pdf
2. Arab Social Media Report Vol. 1 2nd Edition. (2011) arabsocialmediareport.com.
3. Durant, R. and Resh, W. (2011-01-02). “Presidentializing” the Bureaucracy.Oxford Handbooks Online. Retrieved 21 Oct. 2016, from http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199238958.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199238958-e-23.
4. Mbeki, T. The Libyan Tragedy: Power in the Contemporary Geo-Political Setting. (2016) http://www.mbeki.org/2016/11/19/the-libyan-tragedy-power-in-the-contemporary-geo-political-setting

What would a Trump victory mean for Africa?

I think every country should be able to vote in the American elections. It sounds absurd but true. When America sneezes, the whole world catches a cold, this time it might be more than a cold.

With Americans going to the polls in less than a week there is so much uncertainty surrounding who is going to win. At one point in time we all thought it was quite clear on who the winner is, but now we all just watch and pray.

During the Presidential debates the world had the opportunity to hear and judge for themselves the candidate with the best or rather better foreign policy. Although Africa did not feature much in either candidates’ foreign policy during the debate the little that was said has risen questions in the minds of many African people whose countries still heavily rely on foreign aid, American aid.

I am not going to focus much on Hillary Clinton because her candidacy has never raised questions in my mind and I have never doubted her ability to lead. In fact as a young woman hoping to make it in the world of global policy making she is a role model to me and many other women seeking to be leaders in a male dominated political space. I question the candidacy of her opponent.

Donald Trump wants to build a wall, not just between US and Mexico but world. As an African coming from a country were US foreign aid covers more than 50% of the health burden and  in 2014, approximately 76% of the world received some form of economic assistance from the U.S. of which the majority was located within Africa. With this reality in mind one can not help but to ask “What if Trump wins, is this going to change?”

Just listening to his speeches from the sidelines, one gets the impression that Mr Trump wants to isolate the US from the rest of the world. He feels like America has given so much and gotten so little in return. If only he knew the many silent thank yous that people who are now able to get life saving HIV treatment through President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), the young women who have been given a chance to go school and communities that have been transformed because of initiatives sponsored by USAID in Africa.

It’s not because he is a Republican, many outside the US would not care which party he belongs to. It’s the anger and the hate speech that he shows and says that cripples us as we anticipate and fear the unknown future that is going to become reality and fact in the next few days. It’s the future of hundreds of thousand of people that rely on American support that hangs in the balance.

All eyes are on America and I still maintain that we all should be allowed to vote in US elections because the outcome affects us all. However, since we all can’t and it is the right and privilege of every American national to do so, Africa calls on them to vote wisely.

Analysis of Articles by

1. Dutton in Oxford Handbook of Governance,
2. Durant and Resh in Oxford Handbook of American Bureaucracy and
3. Grube, “Responsibility to be Enthusiastic: Public Servants and the Public Face of “Promiscuous Partisanship” Governance.

Overview

This paper will explore and discuss, based on the readings of the week, the shift in power that occurs within organisations inorder to maintain control and deliver on policy goals and expectations. Similar strategies are used both in government, private and public organisations to ensure that plans on paper are translated into actions and tangible outcomes. These strategies, that will be discussed at length in this paper, include persuasion, personnel shifts (have proved to be the most of effective), reorganization, and budgetary control amongst others. The bureaucratic systems in place in most organisations seem to pose a threat to incumbent managers hence the need to exercise the legitimate power that comes with the position of Presidency or managerial post.  Most often than not, within government, the civil service finds itself in the middle of the storm, that is, caught between making a political decision and a professional one. The 21^st century has witnessed a boom in the use of internet in governance. The role of the internet in influencing continues to be explored to measure its impact on communicating policy and influencing decisions at an international, national and community level. The internet has worked to bring people into positions of power and to overthrow leaders from power, for example the Arab Spring. This paper will also discuss how the use of the internet has continued to evolve.

Bureaucrats put government policy into practice, and therefore having a large impact in policymaking. In order to get their policies passed, the Presidents in most democratic systems of governance must work with the bureaucracy. Controlling the bureaucracy can be difficult for the following reasons as stated by Johnson and Libecap (1994):

• Size: monitoring everyone or even every group within the bureaucracy is impossible, so much of what bureaucrats do goes unmonitored.
• Expertise of bureaucrats: The people who administer policy often know much more about those issues than the president or any manager (unless they have been part of the system before). This expertise gives the bureaucrats power. Weber alluded to this as one of the tenets of the bureaucracy.
• Civil service laws:Firing bureaucrats, even for incompetence, is very difficult because of the long procedures that one has to go through before one can be dismissed.
• Clientele groups: Many government agencies provide services to thousands of people, and those people sometimes rally to defend the agency.
• Policy implementation: When a new program is created, it does not establish all the details on how the policy will be implemented. Instead, an enabling legislation is passed, which grants power to an agency to work out the specifics

Faced with these challenges the heads of organisations have to make management decisions on how best to control and have the upper hand in order to achieve intended targets. The article by Durant and Resh refers to what Richard Nathan (1983) dubbed “administrative presidency”. This entails using strategies within the confines of the law to guarantee the desired outcomes.

Administrative presidency conditions levels of trust between appointees and careerists, which subsequently conditions the level of explicit and tacit knowledge sharing within organizations. It is used by Presidents and managers who come into power and want to work with people who share the same vision as them and will act as their eyes, ears and foot soldiers on the ground within the bureaucracy. This has been the norm in the US when a President selects their Cabinet, in the UN when the Secretary General appoints or rather handpicks advisers and even in grassroots organisation when managers hire individuals they know from previous work experience. It is based on trust and knowing that unilaterism within institutions does not work.

Various tools are used in the administrative presidency, these include what Robert Durant (1998) called “contextual tools”, these include, the art of persuasion, personnel shifts and reorganisation among others. Elena Kagan (2001) also refed to what she called the” unilateral tools” which include, presidential proclamations, executive orders and executive agreements. This paper will briefly look into how each of the tools work.

Presidential scholar Richard Neustadt has argued that the president’s primary power is that of persuasion. The president must lobby or persuade bureaucrats, get their buy- in. But trying to convince members of the bureaucracy that their goals fit with the president’s goals is a time-consuming and an often frustrating process. Workplaces are filled with diverse personalities and require various interaction methods and approaches to drive better collaboration and action. Persuasion has always been an important management skill, but one that becomes more important with the rise of collaborative management styles. To persuade someone effectively, the research shows that people need to be well-prepared, and have enough knowledge, and data/evidence to convince others to accept your proposal (Clarke and Crossland 2016).

The centralization of administrative decision making and regulatory review is another way in which the bureaucracy is controlled. This means minimum autonomy and maximum restrictions on operations of subunits of the organization. If any decentralization is to happen it will come with the imposition of staff from the head of the organisation in order to maintain direct or indirect control.

Under the tenure of United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, the number of the highest-ranking U.N. officials increased by an average of 35 percent (a 47 percent increase in New York and a 27 percent increase elsewhere). The Secretary-General is the chief administrative officer of the United Nations. Article 101 of the U.N. Charter grants him authority to appoint U.N. staff “under regulations established by the General Assembly (Schaefer 2009). A fundamental tenet of the administrative presidency has been that careerists cannot be trusted to be responsive to leader’s policy agendas (Moffit, 2001; Sanera, 1984). And while it is typically claimed that applying the tools of the administrative presidency is motivated by appointees’ distrust of careerists to faithfully carry out those agendas (Ban & Ingraham, 1990). The implementation of the politicization strategy is ostensibly meant to align the expert and institutional knowledge of the career bureaucracy with the leader ‘s agenda in a given policy area (Rudalevige, 2009).

Politicization of the civil service means the substitution of merit-based criteria for political criteria in the selection, retention, promotion, rewards, and disciplining of members of the public service (Peters and Pierre 2004). The civil service usually finds itself between a rock and a hard place, that is, having to always be neutral in carrying out their job descriptions and having to carry out politically motivated tasks just because they are part of the Presidents’ agenda. The challenge with politics creeping into public service is that public servants have to compromise on what is best for the people for what the president wants in order to meet their goals.

Contractualism provides politicians with the means to politicize civil servant positions, since they are allowed greater freedom to choose the director generals of their liking. One basic idea of the NPM model is that the public sector should become more like the private sector. Traditional bureaucratic virtues like equity, universalism, personal responsibility, professionalism, safety and resilience should be replaced by the principles of competition, specialisation, efficiency and flexibility (Lægreid 2001). For instance, the employments and careers of civil servants should not be too secure in order that the political control is strengthened and the civil service is made more productive and responsive

One of the undisputed characteristics of New public management (NPM) is the separation of politics and administration, which can be traced back to the Progressives and classical public administration, to the influence of policy analysis for politics, and even to certain branches of public management. However, decisions about administrative structures are political questions and are closely related to political philosophy (Gruening 2001). Hence leading to partisan-political staff as a new force in public administration.

Another external factor that might affect the level of autonomy of an agency is the public attention attracted by that agency. An agency that faces a great deal of external criticism in parliament, by other public agencies or NGOs, or in the media, might also draw the critical eye of the government. Being the institution that is held democratically accountable for the achievements of the public agencies, the government is likely to allow less autonomy to an agency that appears to have problems handling its commission satisfactorily (Lægreid et al. 2006). On the other hand, if the public attention is mainly positive, the government might be willing to allow the agency even greater degrees of autonomy than normal (Niklasson and Pierre 2012). Either way, the government has an interest in making sure that an agency that spends a lot of time in the limelight is led by a director general that they trust, e.g. somebody with a political background.

Agency task is another factor that is often related to the autonomy of public agencies. For example, agencies with regulating tasks are often said to enjoy greater autonomy than those mainly dealing with general public services or defence (Epstein and O’Halloran 1999). The government has a greater interest in ensuring that regulatory agencies appear to act independently of the political leadership, so that they may harmonise with a policy field that is largely dominated by private and international corporations. It is also a matter of convincing free market actors of the long-term stability and objectivity of the economic policies implemented. Governments can therefore be expected to be less prone to try to politicise these agencies, even though these agencies are also likely to enjoy a high degree of autonomy.

Other kinds of tasks may on the other hand decrease the autonomy of an agency. According to the study by Verhoest et al. (2010), agencies dealing with social welfare policies (housing, health, recreation, culture, religion, education and social security) display lower autonomy. This might be because this policy field has a large impact on people’s everyday lives and thus tends to be strongly correlated with the popular support for the government. Consequently, the government is less willing to give up control over these agencies. Swedish agencies dealing with social welfare issues have also been pointed out to be particularly politicized (Rothstein 2005).

When support is low within the bureaucracy, leaders tend to look outside for support in order to influence decisions to go their way. Network governance is one reliable way to rally support. Having interest groups supporting decisions inline with the leader’s policy goals is crucial for the bureaucracy to buy-into the ideas.  Network governance requires leadership that advances the shared interests of the network. Recent transformations of state and society have increased the importance of governance networks in formulating, determining and implementing public policy.

There is a need to give more recognition to the legitimacy of a wide range of stakeholders. Politicians and officials have a particular legitimacy given that government is elected, but there are other valid claims to legitimacy from among others, including business partners, neighborhood leaders, those with knowledge about services as professionals or users, and those in a position of oversight as auditors or regulators. These diverse bases of legitimacy cannot be trumped simply by the playing of the political card (Goss, 2001). The public value management paradigm relies on a stakeholder conception of legitimacy in its governance arrangements. The fundamental idea is that for a decision to be legitimate or for a judgment to be made, it is necessary to have all the stakeholders involved (Stoker, 2004).

Consent beyond the ballot box can be obtained through various methods of public consultation and deliberation, such as citizen juries. New information and communication technologies offer a range of further opportunities to get people’s participation in ways that are flexible, attractive to them, and not too time-consuming. During 2014, according to Keen (2015), the world’s Internet users, all three billion of them, sent 204 million emails, uploaded 72 million hours of YouTube video, undertook 4 million Google searches, shared 2.46 million pieces of Facebook content, published 277,000 tweets, posted 216,000 new photos on Instagram and spent $83,000 on Amazon every minute, every day. These networks are doing many things. The image of the power of flow might be more complex than is sometimes depicted. The growing use of the Internet and related digital technologies is creating a space for networking individuals to provide a new source of accountability in government, politics and many other sectors of networked societies.

Policymaking in the twenty-first century takes place in a changed environment. A significant proportion of social, economic and political activity across the world takes place on the internet. The Internet is intertwined with financial markets, with government and public services, with social life and social problems, and with the criminal world. Increasingly the major challenges that face public policy, from climate change to crime to public health, are tackled with technological innovations that involve the internet (Margetts, 2009). The Internet is embedded in interactions between citizens, firms, governments and NGOs, bringing with it new practices, norms and structures. These developments require and facilitate a policy response. In the world of policy making social networking technologies (SNTs) enable stakeholders to take part in the conception, implementation and evaluation of policies as consumers and producers of policy. Individuals and organisations have taken to SNTs to demystify policy making and the elitist attitude that is attached to it.

The use of the internet has also caused radical changes in the world of politics, with increased citizen participation in governance and democratic processes. One of the many events that stand out is the Arab Spring that began in 2011. Social media played a great role as a tool for inspiring activists. Some may argue that in this case, social media caused the revolts in the rest of the regions. The Arab Spring in 2011 as well as the 2008 and 2012 Obama campaigns have fueled interest in how social media might affect citizens’ participation in civic and political life.

The second edition of the Arab Social Media Report reveals that nearly 9 out of 10 Egyptians and Tunisians used Facebook to organize and publicize protests and all protests except for one took place. Furthermore, the report found that Facebook usage increased or doubled between January and April of 2011. The overall number of users had increased by 30 percent to 27.7 m compared to the 18% increase in 2010. Usage in Bahrain escalated by 15 percent only in the first 3 months, Egypt 29% and Tunisia 17 %. Libya’s usage however, declined by 76% probably due to the extreme violence in the region. During the period of protests in Egypt and Tunisia, 88% of Egyptians and 94% of Tunisians said they had been getting their information from social media sites (Arab Social Media Report, 2011).

Some countries have resorted to blocking social media during elections and civil unrest. The Ugandan Government blocked social media (WhatsApp, Twitter, Facebook) for three days in a highly contested Presidential election. This move restricted access to social media as voters went voters went to the polls on the 18th of February 2016 to elect presidential and parliamentary candidates.

The Internet introduces easier ways of communication and hence potentially makes dissemination of information and participation easier. However, it does not solve the problem of motivation. People may still continue to abstain from participating if they do not believe that their participation will make a difference. Therefore, policies that are directed towards the utilisation of technology for democratic purposes need to consider the reasons behind citizens’ lack of interest before suggesting the Internet as a solution. As Dutton (1999) suggests, “Digital government can erode or enhance democratic processes…but the outcome will be determined by the interaction of policy choices, management strategies and cultural responses – not by advanced technology alone” (pp. 193).

Political problems are related to government strategies in using the technology. Although governments are willing to exploit these technologies they rely on market forces for its delivery. Infrastructure is highly biased in favour of developed areas since the technology companies are reluctant to invest in deprived areas due to insufficient returns. Under these circumstances governments need to develop a strategy that will provide access to those who cannot afford it. These could be achieved by public access points in libraries, schools and community centres. However, statistics show that among the users only 7% access the Internet through these points (National Statistics, 2001). This also limits the reliability of the consultation and participation efforts carried through the Internet because the participants are inevitably self selected and unrepresentative.

The value that the Internet might bring to public policy is openness, characterised by the freedom from control by any central agent in the design of the internet; open access to information; and new possibilities for citizens to participate in policymaking. Openness is a value which contrasts strongly with the traditional perspective of governments and firms. The Internet has the potential to bring increased transparency (Hood and Heald, 2006), for example through open software which has even been hypothesised to lead to more effective democratic government (Camp, 2006), through reduced complexity of ‘joined-up’ government, greater accessibility of public information, moves towards freedom of information and ‘open-book’ government and more ‘rule-like’ government processes (Margetts, 2006).

In January 2014, US Congressman Paul Cook of Apple Valley hosted a Twitter Town Hall to engage and connect with constituents in California’s 8th congressional district. Citizens were encouraged to ask questions and share opinions using the hashtag “#AskCook.” Uses of social media like this allow public officials to engage with new constituencies and provide an instant channel between local residents and the government. Regardless of political party, officials in public office now utilize these technologies to convey their messages to the general public. Whether it is a brief commentary tweeted about an opponent on a Twitter feed or a quick photo shared through Instagram, public officials are trying to mobilize people to their cause. Ever so enticing, campaigns are quickly discovering that many Americans are willing to make financial contributions through a candidate’s Facebook page or official website.

There are two major arguments against the idea that social media will make a difference influencing policy. The first is that the tools are themselves ineffective, and the second is that they produce as much harm to democratization as good, because repressive governments are becoming better at using these tools to suppress dissent. The critique of ineffectiveness, most recently offered by Malcolm Gladwell in The New Yorker concentrates on examples of what has been termed “slacktivism,” whereby casual participants seek social change through low-cost activities, such as joining Facebook’s “Save Darfur” group that are long on bumper-sticker sentiment and short on any useful action (Shirky, 2011).

Most of the success of social media campaigns depend heavily on who is using it. For lesser known people it would take a lot to convince to participate in government protests or to vote for a political party that is lesser known. The use of the internet is only as powerful as the person using it. At times it all boils down to affordability and accessibility of gadgets that enable internet connectivity.

English is the unofficial language of the Internet. A 2002 report by the World Economic Forum found that three-quarters of all websites are in English. An obvious result of this language disparity is that the Internet is more accessible to English-speaking people.  One study conducted by Emlyn Hagen examined fifty-four African countries over a span of twelve years and found a positive and significant correlation between the prevalence of the English language and Internet development.

Another study found that the strongest positive influence on dial-up Internet subscription across nations is the presence of English as an official language in a country. In contrast, the lack of online content in languages other than English has limited Internet development in nations where English is not the primary language. Hagen’s study of African nations revealed that the predominance of French and Arabic has a negative influence on the Internet development of a country. Another study found that the lack of content in native languages discourages use of the Internet in South Asia (Hagen, 2007).

Civil society organizations have a key role to play in the digital divide because these organizations understand the needs and interests of the underdeveloped community, they can play a role in narrowing the digital divide by filtering content relevant to members of the community. They can also help to ensure that information that is relevant to disadvantaged communities is published online. This can expand awareness of and trust in ICTs among the underdeveloped population.

Internet literacy is also a barrier to internet access. The skills and language used have to be appropriate if the message is going to reach the intended recipients. As technology continues to evolve so have the gadgets requires. In developing countries more than 60% of the populations reside in rural areas where there is limited connectivity to the internet. The smarter the phones have gotten the less user friendly they have also become. Hence it is important not to abandon traditional sources of information and communication like the radio and television which are accessible to most people. Traditional media still remains a relevant and crucial source of information for the masses in rural areas.

This paper addresses critical issues that affect the success or failure in implementing policies administratively. It shows how the complexity of the bureaucracy consumes radicalism and how elected official utilise legitimate strategies to enforce policy change. These strategies include the centralization of administrative decision making, agency reorganization, the politicization of the bureaucracy through appointment powers, and wielding unilateral tools through the issuance of executive orders, executive memoranda, and presidential signing statements (Durant & Resh, 2010).  Both public and private organisations including Non governmental agencies are use these strategies. The challenge comes when public officials became partisan in carrying out their duties and engaging with the public.

The core values of public management include neutrality and bureaucratic neutrality encompasses both political and policy neutrality. Another tool that can be used to foster neutrality in engaging with the public is internet. This paper also discussed how the internet has revolutionised public engage with public officials and how it carries serious democratizing potential. However as effective as the internet maybe in challenging policy makers and communicating with the masses more still needs o be done to improve accessibility and internet literacy among people from different communities.  Being connected will not just be about having phone and perhaps Internet service. It will mean broadband delivery of increasingly converging services such as interactive voice, data and full motion video.

References

Arab Social Media Report Vol. 1 2nd Edition. (2011) www.arabsocialmediareport.com.

Ban Carolyn, Ingraham Patricia W. Short-Timers Political Appointee Mobility and its Impact on Political-Career Relations in the Reagan Administration. Sage Publications Inc. 1990.

Brett D. Schaefer.  The Limits of the United Nations and the Search for Alternatives. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2009.

Christensen, T. and Lægreid, P.  `A Transformative Perspective on Administrative Reforms‘, pp. 13—42. Aldershot : Ashgate. 2001

Clarke, G., Crossland, M., Shine, R. Can we control the invasive cane toad using chemicals that have evolved under intraspecific competition? Ecological Applications, 26(2), 463- 474. (2016).

Clay Shirky. The Political Power of Social Media: Technology, the Public Sphere, and Political Change. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 90, No. 1 (JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2011), pp. 28-41. Council on Foreign Relations Stable. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25800379

Durant, R. and Resh, W. (2011-01-02). “Presidentializing” the Bureaucracy.Oxford Handbooks Online. Retrieved 21 Oct. 2016, from http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199238958.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199238958-e-23.

Epstein D, O’halloran S.  Delegating powers: A transaction cost politics approach to policy making under separate powers. Cambridge University Pres. 1999.

Gruening, G. Origin and theoretical basis of New Public Management International Public Management Journal 4 (2001) 1–25. https://www.pravo.unizg.hr/_download/repository/4_1_Origin_and_Theoretical_Basis%5B1%5D.pdf

Hood, Christopher and Heald, David, eds. (2006) Transparency: the key to better governance? Proceedings of the British Academy 2009 (135). Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. ISBN 9780197263839

Kagan, E. Presidential Administration. Harvard Law Review, 114/8: 2245–385. 2001

Keen, Steve. Global Debt Deflation & Manipulated Asset Markets. IDEAeconomics Research Paper 2015/01– Economic Outlook 2015.

Margetts, Helen. “The Internet and Public Policy.”. Policy & Internet (1)1: 1‐21.

Moffitt, Robert. A. B. Atkinson, The Economic Consequences of Rolling Back the Welfare State, Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 386-388, June, 2001.

1. Hagen. The Digital Divide in Africa: Cross-Sectional Time Series Analysis Of The African Digital Divide Factors 48 (2007).

Nathan, R. P. The Administrative Presidency. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 1983.

Peters, G. and Pierre, J. ‘Multi-level Governance and Democracy: A Faustian Bargain?’ In I. Bache & M. Flinders, (eds.) Multi-level Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 74-89. 2004.

Ronald N. Johnson and Gary D. Libecap. The Federal Civil Service System and The Problem of Bureaucracy. University of Chicago Press. http://www.nber.org/books/john94-1 Publication Date: January 1994. 0-226-40170-7

Rothstein, B. Social traps and the problem of trust .Cambridge University Press .2005.

 Sanera, Michael. Butler, Stuart M. and W. B. Weinrod . Mandate for Leadership II: Continuing the Conservative Revolution.  Heritage Foundation. December 1984.

Scott,Karen. Happiness on your doorstep: disputing the boundaries of wellbeing and localism, The Geographical Journal,2015, 181, 2, 129

World Economic Forum, Annum. Report Of The Global Digtal Divide Initiative 36 (2002), available at http://www.weforum.org/pdf/Initiatives/DigitalDivideReport_2001-2002.pdf

World Economic Forum. The Global Competitiveness Report 2002-2003. Oxford University Press, Mar 27, 2003. www.reports.weforum.org/global-competitiveness-index.

Welcome to UBC Blogs. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!