ASPECTS OF INCREMENTALISM : DEVELOPMENT AND RELEVENCE IN URBAN PLANNING THEORY in Nepal

Introduction

Incrementalism is a policy of making changes, especially social changes, by degrees; gradualism. （htt1）Development process is always carried out on the basis of avaibility of resources and its implication complexity. As the resources are always limited, the incremental process is adopted to reach a goal. This step by step incremental process is incrementalism. “Incrementalism was first developed in the 1950s by the American political scientist Charles E. Lindblom in response to the then-prevalent conception of policy making as a process of rational analysis culminating in a value-maximizing decision.” （Hayes）

This essay tries to emphasis on the idea of Incrementalism and the basic theory behind it. Basic scientific knowledge behind means and ends of the planning process will be discussed. The intermediate of the development of planning process is carried out with the science of muddling through. The term muddling through will be discussed in the essay with its relevance in the development process. The procedural use of the theory to the real implication in the planning process will be carried out with the examples of organizational planning process. The contextual analysis will be done in reference to Nepal. Basic approach of the essay will be elaborating the incrementalism on the policy planning related at the periphery of urban planning.

Origin of Incrementalism:

Orgin of the incrementalism is the outcome of the industrial revolution and activities during the time. During the upper end of industrial revolution era The Political Scientist, Charles E. Lindblom, developed Incrementalism in the mid 1950’s. “The Science of Muddling Through” (1959), was an essay Lindblom wrote to help policymakers understand why they needed to consider a different approach when making policy changes. The goal for the new perspective of Incrementalism was for policy makers to avoid making changes before they really engaged and rationally thought through the issue. （Wikipedia）

Incrementalism emphasizes the plurality of actors involved in the policy-making process and predicts that policy makers will build on past policies, focusing on incremental rather than wholesale changes. Incrementalism has been fruitfully applied to explain domestic policy making, foreign policy making, and public budgeting. （Hayes）

The incrementalism is expressed as the rational comprehensive concept as the root.  The classification of values or objectives distinct from and usually prerequisite to empirical analysis of alternative policies in the rational comprehensive root. Policy-formulation is therefore approached through means-end analysis: First the ends are isolated, then the means to achieve them are sought. The test of a “good” policy is that it can be shown to be the most appropriate means to a desired end. In root the analysis is comprehensive where every important relevant factor is taken into account. Hence the theory of Incrementalism is basically relied upon the roots of the planning process in the decision making.

The branch of the Incrementalism is taken as the successive limited comparisons. In which the selection of value goals and empirical analysis of the needed action are not distinct from one another but are closely intertwined. Since means and ends are not distinct, means-ends analysis is often inappropriate or limited. So the test of a “good” policy is typically that various analysts find themselves directly agreeing on a policy (without their agreeing that it is the most appropriate means to an agreed objective).

In the analysis of the branch of the incremental theory the limitations are also found as a drastic major of its description. The important possible outcomes are always neglected in the process of incremental development process and the alternative potential of the policy is neglected. The very slow process of Incremental process leads into a different situations in the future which may not be dealt with the roots taken into consideration in the past. In this theoretical approach the important values are neglected and certain choice is carried out on the basis of rationality of the present dominant stakeholders or the rational processed planner. Hence a succession of comparison greatly reduces or eliminates reliance on theory.

Process in Incrementalism

Incrementalism process is very used in the public organizations. The process is often termed as the bargaining process, which is characterized by compromise. Basically sacrificing of one stage of development leads into the next step of more advanced set of systems and tools. The consensus seeking is the process to carry out the process. Hence,  Instrumentalism chooses better from previous on the basis of incremental differentiation with at least slight change. The process is slow and steady. Continuous and discreet steps may be applied to achieve certain goals which are identified by the objectives. So this is the method of achieving goals by means of a series of small gradual increments or small steps.

The science of mudding through seeks a different approach where the exactness of the future objectives are muddled. The muddling may be carried out by the agencies which work for the community on the behalf of governmental organizations, different non-governmental organizations and the donor agencies as well.

The guidelines in Incremental theory later came to be distilled into the misleading aphorism, “take small steps,” an issue to which the essay is described on. Since a great many management schools, as well as policy analysts trained in economics and the physical sciences, still virtually ignore these simple truths about the limits of analysis and the strengths of interactive problem solving, it remains important to periodically reassert and update basic points. But most political scientists now take some form of disjointed incrementalism and partisan mutual adjustment as a given, “Muddling Through” has been reprinted in dozens of anthologies, and there have been several thousand citations to the seminal works. The insights would seem to have been about as well incorporated into the discipline as could be hoped for any set of ideas.

Suppose an administrator must choose among a small group of policies that differ only incrementally from each other and from present policy. He might aspire to “under-stand” each of the alternatives-for example, to know all the consequences of each aspect of each policy. If so, he would indeed require theory. In fact, however, he would usually de-cide that, for policy-making purposes, he need know, as explained above, only the conse-quences of each of those aspects of the policies in which they differed from one another. For this much more modest aspiration, he requires no theory (although it might be helpful, if available), for he can proceed to isolate prob-able differences by examing the differences in consequences associated with past differences in policies, a feasible program because he can take his observations from a long sequence of incremental changes. （Lindblom，1959）

In incremental decision making various measures are to be adopted carefully. Constitutional checks and balances, separation of powers, and federalism. Interest groups and sub-governments promote incremental change. They control the micro-agenda, limit the scope of alternatives, shut out unsympathetic voices, and skew the decision making in favor of vested interests and past practice. In such an environment, the built-in political process of negotiation, bargaining, and compromise among many legitimate participants in the policy arena is virtually the only way to get things done. （htt161）

Further, the very character of large-scale, complex organizations fosters incrementalism: fragmentation, inertia, bureaucracy, conflicting goals, and financial constraints.  Government-induced change typically carries a price tag, but budgets are scarce and complex. Budgetary constraints prevent the initiation of new policies or the expansion of existing programs. The budget-making process is notoriously cumbersome and resistant to reform, as we shall see when we turn our attention to budgeting. （htt161）

Planning and Urban Design projects that are focused on the public realm and are not immediately linked to building projects quite often face a long time frame until implementation actually starts. The absence of private property development and related stake-holders make these projects “purely public” and therefore dependent on public financing. The lengthy processes to secure financing are usually accompanied by political change. Therefore, strategies have to be developed to secure support for these projects over a long time-frame. Public awareness is high when projects begin with public meetings, participation processes, ect. But when the process lasts too long with no signs of pending implementation, dwindling public interest is the consequence. Once formerly active community members have retreated from the process, it is difficult to rekindle their enthusiasm. Therefore, it is advisable to design smaller projects into the overall plan that can be implemented quickly and without problems. The planners have to actively search for these situations on the site in order to successfully organize their separate implementation.

Strengths and Limitations of Incrementalism

Incrementalism is a planning methodology normally found where a large strategic plan is either unnecessary or has failed to develop and for that reason it is often just called “muddling through”. Incrementalism is the antithesis of intrusive central planning, which can create rigid work systems unable to deal with the actual problems faced at the grassroots level.

Features of the incrementalism are described as: Simplicity: This type of budgeting is very simple to understand. Gradual change: With this type of budgeting, you will have a very stable budget from one period to the next. Flexibility: This type of budgeting is very flexible. Avoid conflict: With this method of budgeting, it is easier to keep everyone on the same page and avoid conflicts between departments.

Few disadvantages of the incremental process can be characterized as it does not account for change on the idea that expenses will run pretty much as they did before. No incentives provided for any kind of creativeness.  Use it or lose it concept is predominant for many employees as a “use it or lose it” system. （Wikipedia）

In sum, the main criticisms of incrementalism have been wide of the mark. But simply refuting the critics is not enough, for something pretty clearly is amiss. If political scientists are to orient part of our work around strategic coping with the human predicament of small brain/big problems, we need to feel comfortable with the task; and the misperceptions reviewed above clearly indicate that something about the original formulation of disjointed incrementalism confused and disturbed a lot of scholars. Similarly indicative of problems is the field’s general unwillingness or inability to pick up the task Lindblom tried to lay out. The story Lindblom told apparently was good enough to appear seamless and complete, not inviting elaboration and testing, yet also difficult to use, or even to fully believe.

Nicholas Negroponte once said, “Incrementalism is Innovation’s worst enemy.” To his point, we cannot sustainably continue incrementally improving existing technology. （htt2）

As the advantages of incrementalism over other planning decision making theories is that no time is wasted planning for outcomes which may not occur.

    Simplicity: This type of budgeting is very simple to understand. Compared to some of the other budgeting methods used in business, it is one of the easiest to put in practice. Therefore, you do not have to be an accountant or have much experience in business to use this form of budgeting.

    Gradual change: With this type of budgeting, you will have a very stable budget from one period to the next. This allows for gradual change within the company. Many managers are intimidated by large budget increases from one period to the next. With this type of budget, you will not run into this problem because it is based on the previous period’s budget.

    Flexibility: This type of budgeting is very flexible. You can easily do it from one month to the next. This allows you to see change very quickly when you implement a new policy or budget.

    Avoid conflict: Companies with many different departments often run into conflict between departments because of their different budgets. With this method of budgeting, it is easier to keep everyone on the same page and avoid conflicts between departments. （Wikipedia）

As the weakness of the incremental planning are that time may be wasted dealing with the immediate problems and no overall strategy is developed. Incrementalism in the study of rationality can be seen as a stealthy way to bring about radical changes that were not initially intended: a slippery slope.

    Does not account for change: This method is based on the idea that expenses will run pretty much as they did before. However, in business, this is rarely the case. There are always variables.

    No incentives: Such a simple method of budgeting really does not provide your employees with much reason to be creative. They have no incentive to innovate and come up with new ideas or policies because everything is limited.

    Use it or lose it: Many employees view this as a “use it or lose it” system. They know that next year’s budget is going to be incrementally based on this year’s. Therefore, if they do not spend everything that is allocated to them, they may not have enough money to work with next year. This creates an environment where waste is encouraged. （Wikipedia）

 Though Incrementalism has widespread acceptance within political science, it has not spawned a lively research tradition leading to cumulative refinement and amplification of the core concepts. Nor has it provided much guidance for policy making, in part because scholars never attempted to clarify how decision makers could become better incrementalists. This is due in part, we suggest, to the fact that understanding of the concept of “incrementalism” has become extremely muddied, conceivably to the point where the term may have outlived its usefulness; but the problems which motivated the early scholarship remain at the heart of political theory and practice.

Much of social science bears on the problem of coping with uncertainty, or potentially can be brought to bear on that huge area of inquiry. But very little research to date has aimed directly at understanding what tends to go awry in trial-and-error learning.

Incrementalism and context of Nepal

For example the incremental practice has taken in the political decision in Nepal, After the declaration of Nepal as Federal Democratic Republic Country in the constitution, we have formally stepped in an inclusiveness in all institutions nationally. No matter the institution is governmental or non-governmental, religious or the social organizations, the inclusive whelm has just taken place is a good symbol for collective growth with participatory approach of all people theoretically. But in the practicality we still cannot be pretty sure about the inclusiveness and equitable development in the lives of people. The question that prevails after the declaration of theoretical inclusiveness through constitution is, what ensures the Inclusiveness? How can we achieve the values gained by the long debate into the livelihoods of people?

There has been always a debate in the process of including the marginalized groups into the mainstream of the governance, globally.  In this or that way governments has always tried to keep the people in its main stream simply because to have a control over them. The ideas of controlling the people was completely rational during the primitive governance systems. But, as the society come into the global communications, the control from the hands of rulers has always slept as nightmare of the rulers. In the present context, we have tried to participate people into all decision making process either by direct participation or by the representatives of the people. Which surely ensures the concern of the people as main stakeholders of the development process.

The participation of the underdeveloped communities as the sub set of the developing communities has been a challenge. Allocation of the quota system into the institutional and political system is ensured as the process of inclusion of excluded group representatives being marginalized ones. Which is simply not a solution to achieve the equitable society. The deprived people are to be made competent enough in a whole matrix of complex systems of developed behavior. The grassroots of the society where the unequal distribution of resources is being created either by geography or by the pre-existed ruling ideologies is to be the first target to be identified and eliminated.

The real inclusion can only happen if and only if there are the human rights practically be cared by the government and its all stakeholders. The rights of the people are not to be taken as burden by the government and responsibility of a citizen is duly practiced by the people. As a matter of fate, we have reached a political system where the government is not ideologically in favor of taking people rights as burden after promulgation of new constitution. But creating a responsible individual with fulfilling his duties is a complex issue. This complex can only be solved by adopting the strategic and intervention action plans of making people to choose their own fate with their own individual rationality. Strategic interventions with practical education with problem solving attitude, social cooperatives with the behavioral unity and involvement in development, legalizing compulsion in bearing the corporate responsibilities, discouragement of hatred in between any communities in the name of gender, cast, religion, socio-cultural status, economic differentiations etc. need to be completely eliminated. As the individual becomes conscious of its rights and duties, the society starts radiating the quality needs. As the quality needs are predominant, the natural selection of the best among better is achieved from the same society that we ever expected of the necessity of the reservation to participate in the primary social institutions. Thus the inclusion of the every marginalized group can be achieved by creating competitive human resource by building up the capacity in them rather than simply selecting workable ones from less capable bunch of jobseekers.

In the underdeveloped and developing countries like Nepal, the issue of participation is always raised as the advocacy theory by the political leaders of the exclusive societies. Where the very first intention becomes the public consumption, which leads to the popularism. During course of which they simply seek the shortcut solutions to the problem with weak identification of roots of the problems. Short term solutions are created in the course very rapidly and the long term objectives lie under the shadow of the other short term successive solutions. The ultimate goal of making capable citizen to free competitions gets lost and the illusion of reservation as a solution continues for unidentified duration in future. Hence the never ending process to the real solutions is created with virtual solutions through quota system or the reservation system where the public institutions get weaker and weaker. The strong governing system is to be maintained with incremental development and implication process to the continuous momentum of highly qualified bureaucrats.

Hence, the unending cycle of making marginalized groups into the mainstream of the government system is to be eliminated with the tools of consistent government and other all social institutions in continuous and consistent behavior of problem solving techniques.

Bibliography

[Online]http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/incrementalism．

[Online]http://medtechviews.eu/article/%E2%80%9Cincrementalism-innovation%E2%80%99s-worst-enemy%E2%80%9D ．

HayesMichaelT.http://www.britannica.com/topic/incrementalism．[Online]http://www.britannica.com/topic/incrementalism．

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/incrementalism[Online]

http://profwork.org/pp/formulate/inc.html．[Online]http://profwork.org/pp/formulate/inc.html．

LindblomCharlesE.1959．

WikipediaWikipedia．[Online]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incrementalism．