Introduction

The concept of public policy, according to Casey (2004), refers to a process whereby state agencies come up with a plan of action which is pursued with an intention to solve public problems. Public policy may also be conceptualized as a system of laws, regulatory measures, causes of action and funding priorities concerning a given topic promulgated by a government entity or its representatives (Zahariadis 2006). The public policy serves several advantages to a country such as assisting the government to eliminate all forms of ambiguities in the decision-making process. Avoidance of making uncoordinated decisions which may jeopardize government’s decisions, avoidance of future pitfalls, disasters and unplanned emergencies, stabilization of national government programmes as well as acting as negotiation tools, just to mention but a few.

This chapter seeks to establish the influence of globalization on public policy. To make it specific, illustrations would be drawn from Kenya. The central question of this chapter is to what extent does globalization impact Kenya’s public policy processes? To answer this question, this chapter sets out the following specific objectives, examine the nature of the public policy making process in Kenya, and identify and explain the external factors that influence public policy making in Kenya.

Theoretical Framework: World Systems Theory

This chapter will be anchored on the world systems theory. Immanuel Wallenstein, who was a neo-Marxist, advanced this theory. He refers to the world system as a world economy. This world economy, according to him, has integrated markets and a disjointed political centre. The world has been divided into two, the core and the periphery. They rely on each other for the basic needs such as food, protection and fuel, among others. The states both at the core and at the periphery are in constant competition with each other (Goldfrank 2000).

Immanuel Wallenstein (1974) defines world system as a territory that is multi-cultured and characterized by divisions of labour as well as specialization of labour in the process of production. By division of labour, Immanuel Wallenstein refers to the production forces and class relations of the two segments of the world apart from being different in terms of geography and culture. He notes that the core region uses capital-intensive methods to produce while the periphery adopts the labour-intensive methods to produce (Goldfrank 2000). This means that the relationship between the core and the periphery is characterized by structuralism. States that are at the middle of peripheral and the core states (semi-peripheral states) in Skocpol’s view (2017) act as a buffer between the two groups of states. This structural nature of the international system has also extended to the policy areas. Whereby the state at the core usually sets the agenda, states at the periphery adopt the agenda as advanced by the states at the core. For instance, the Millennium Development goals emanated from the states at the core as a strategy of enhancing development to the states at the periphery.

Chase-Dunn and Grimes (1995) observe that the structure of the world economy between the two states is hierarchical. The core states are in constant domination of the weaker states. The core states are usually aided by technology that helps to position countries whether at the core or at the periphery. Technology also helps to indicate whether the state is advanced or not. The production levels of the core are usually higher than those at the periphery, hence economic domination.

Skocpol (2017) explains that the existence of the core and the periphery is good for survival and reproduction of the international system. This is because the states in each of the segments are interdependent on each other. Immanuel Wallenstein refers to this type of relationship as unequal exchange, whereby periphery states constantly supply countries at the core with the raw materials and in turn countries at the core sell finished products to those at the peripheral states. In addition to that, core states supply peripheral states with modern technology and industrial machines. In turn capital accumulation internationally increases and states in the peripheral are developed.

Politically, Wallenstein (1979) observes that states are just mere variables or elements of the international system. It is the existing classes that use the states as avenues of pursuing their interests. He argues that what holds or makes the international systems to survive are the division of labour as well as specialization of labour. This means that the interests of the core states and the class of the rich are always united in safeguarding their interests. This means that the efficacious arrangement works best for the international system.

Wallenstein (2004) also emphasizes that products in the core states are usually done by monopolies while products that emanate from the peripheral states are usually produced through a competitive environment. This means that products from the core states that are produced by the monopolies are highly priced and highly demanded in the globalized market unlike those products from the peripheral states that are produced in a competitive manner. This therefore makes the core states to grow richer while peripheral states become poorer.

Wallenstein (2004) further argues that in the modern international system, the concept of racism as well as sexism is so rampant and people are discriminated against based on their race, colour and religion. This is the divide between Universalism and the Particularism. This means that people belonging to races and religions that are dominant in the core states are usually favoured in terms of power, work and allocation of privileges to the disadvantage of states in the periphery.

Wallenstein explains that the modern sovereign state is a product of the international system. Before the consolidation of the international system, states were pursuing contradictory self-interests. This rendered the international system to be anarchic. To restore order in the international system, states had to recognize each other as well as respect other states. This happens through the concept of reciprocity in the diplomatic and international relations. However, states at the core have continued to disregard the states from the periphery. As a result, instead of the relationship between states being horizontal, it is now vertical. States at the periphery are forced to open their markets and subject to economic policies from the centre, which do not help them to get out of underdevelopment.

Wallenstein further describes the states at the periphery as neo-colonies of states of the core. This is because they are controlled formally and informally by the states at the core. The peripheral states (neo-colonies) are managed like the “mother country” in a discreet manner. The relations between the core and the peripheral states are exploitative; the states at the core are not the best of friends to each other either. But they are united because of common interests, but deep down they are bitter rivals. This bitter rivalry that usually push them in different directions is mediated by their common interests, hence the survival of the international system sustained by these global hegemons.

Stages of Public Policy Making Process

The global arena as prescribed by Diane is expanding and diversifying. This is because the state is not necessarily retreating or declining; however, it is reconfiguring with the dynamics of globalization and remains an important or central agent in the international system. Yet, the components of the agora or the international system, its values, discourses, symbols, norms, institutions and practices, as argued by Arthurs (2001), are also created by other non-state actors that have acquired or appropriated public authority when responding unilaterally or in partnership to global policy problems. Global policy processes have emerged with governments, international organizations and non-state actors responding to three types of policy problems (Soros 1991), namely “trans boundary problems” of cross-border movement such as money laundering, pollution, drug trafficking; “common property problems” regarding oceans, Antarctica, the atmosphere; “Simultaneous problems” of nations experiencing similar problems in areas of education, health, welfare, urbanization and population growth.

These three problems, according to these authors, have led to new forms of “soft” authority or “soft law” that complements the traditional “hard” or formal authority of states and international organizations. “Soft” authority is seen in the emergence of private regimes, and global standard setting and transnational policy communities. The exercise of public and private authority through policy networks and law-like arrangements creates global policy processes.

Adapting traditional concepts from policy studies highlights some of the difficulties in analytically capturing the idea of global public policy. Nonetheless, one advantage of public policy at the global level is that it brings into relief the role of private actors and processes of self-regulation. The policy process is often divided into four stages:

  1. 1.

    Problem definition and agenda setting.

  2. 2.

    Formal decision making.

  3. 3.

    Policy implementation and

  4. 4.

    Monitoring and evaluation.

These traditional elements of the national policy processes are also extended to the global arena where states pursue their interests at the global arena. However, the global contents show more clearly the volatility of policy processes. The ever-changing character of the global policy process shows the lack of formal, authoritative and sovereign power to give guidance. In fact, the studies have concluded that transnational public administration has also been less transparent than at the domestic level.

Globalization and the Emergence of the Global Policy Process

Globalization, according to Richard (2012), is a phenomenon that has emerged as one of the unchallenged issues in the contemporary world. Globalization as a process is not a recent phenomenon but has been there for a while without critical recognition; previously it took different forms from what it is today. However, the essence of globalization is closeness and interaction; countries and societies have closer working relations. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) perceived globalization as the increasing interdependence on a worldwide state where cross-border trade intensifies free flow of capital and widespread expansion of technology.

Naisbit (1982) further conceptualized globalization as a situation where one can invest anywhere, locate industries anywhere, produce any product anywhere, source labour from anywhere, mobilize resources anywhere and sell products anywhere so long as investible capital benefits from it. Public policies will thus be made with these profitable returns in mind. David Held (2010) defined globalization as the widening, deepening and speeding of global interconnections, in a multidimensional way, whereby states and societies get deeply involved in a wider and quicker way. Anthony Mcgrew (2007) provided a comprehensive conceptualization of globalization where he defined it as a forging of multiplicity of interconnections socially, economically, politically and other faces of interactions where societies and states come together so that events and activities in one place come to have significant impacts in other distant societies. Kenichi Ohmae defined globalization as the end of geography; that is, the borders that define states are not only absent but irrelevant because investible capital will march irrespective of territoriality so long as there are profitable returns (Richard 2012).

Due to globalization, developing country’s public policy making process, according to Adar, has continued to be externally influenced through several strategies and avenues. First, technological advancements today are so sophisticated that information moves quite faster irrespective of distance. For instance, people can share information within a very short time and individuals can make decisions quite faster because the information is readily available. As a result of the existence of the Internet and social media platforms, problems facing Africans and countries in the south are highlighted and broadcasted all over the world and therefore elicit immediate reactions from all concerned persons and entities across the world. All these entities and concerned persons become part and parcel of public policy making in addressing issues. External influence on public policy processes of states in the south are quite strong.

Secondly, public policy making of states in the south are being influenced by the industrial revolution that took place in Europe in the early part of nineteenth century. The western conception of modernity has led to linear precedence where a roadmap to country’s development in the south was predetermined. According to the Rostovian model, the countries in Africa must go through several stages in their development trajectory, including the traditional phase, the preconditions for take-off, take-off stage, drive to maturity and high mass consumption, to come out of the quandary of over-production and under-consumption. The quest for industrial success logically involves vicious external search for market outlets. Meanwhile, industrialized countries have remained very active in foreign markets through which they compensate for loss of market at home. They dominate the global market so that no competition can emerge to forestall profitable returns to their powerful and widespread multi-national corporations. Examples of powerful MNCs that operate in Kenya includes Barclays Bank of Kenya, Coca-Cola, BAT Kenya, Unilever, Demonte Group, Samea Africa, just to mention but a few. The spread of the MNCs in different countries has also intensified globalization because resource movement, raw material movement and other factors of production have transcended the state borders. MNCs influence national public policies as they pursue their interest within the countries.

The other strategy in which globalization has influenced public policy processes of African states is through the easy flow of capital (Money), the internationalization of capital. For instance, the issue of portfolio investments has been developed and most MNCs are entering into sub-contracting ventures with the local companies. They are also entering into a partnership with other regional-based companies where they conduct joint investments or split their operations. In all these arrangements they remain the dominant players. Again, the easy movement of money across state borders has also come along with the challenges of illicit financial flows as well as money laundering. Huge resources can easily be wired for any investments, wherever it is and equally currency convertibility is well developed, so that it is no longer an impediment. Relative under capacity of the state in Africa means that a state like Kenya must rely on the safety policies that have been adopted at the global level to contain any economic crimes such as money laundering.

The emergence of global coverage mass media has also contributed to influencing Kenya’s public policy. Examples of global mass media which have continued to play a big role in influencing Kenya’s public policy include Aljazeera, the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), the Voice of America, the New York Times, Cable News Network (CNN), among others. The mass media has had a powerful influence on the global stage where events in different parts of the world are quickly disseminated to a large audience creating a single village. Equally, the media exposes debates within Kenya and outside Kenya on topical issues where people from all over the world can call in and interact around issues. For instance, the subject of international terrorism has been widely discussed by the international media to an extent that they have managed to shape the perceptions of Kenyans along certain lines. These perceptions at times have advanced the interests of the states at the core at the expense of the states of the south.

The advancement in global transportation systems has also succeeded in ensuring globalization perfectly influences public policy processes of the counties in the south. For instance, the mushrooming of the many airlines across the world has made it easier for individuals across the world to jet in and out of Kenya easily. In cities where airlines have massive connections, there have been seen large movements from one point to the other in pursuit of diverse interests. The advent of naval ships and sea transport has increased emergence and development of the global businesses across the world and the expansion of the international trade. The construction of modern ports and harbours and the standard gauge railway has enabled investors from all over the world to come and make huge investments in Kenya. This has had as serious effects on Kenya’s public policy because most of these players are clamouring to have a say on these processes of public making process to protect their diverse interests.

The rise and spread of formal education and widening of employment opportunities, expansion of tourism interests and health management has made many people to travel across the world and within the African continent in search of opportunities to better their lives. African governments have formulated public policies in response to these needs that have been shaped by globalization. Local and the foreign tourism organizations have also sought to influence the relevant African governments in line with their interests. Many African governments have responded quickly to these interests as they seek revenue; sometimes, they have become more accountable to external interests than their own citizens. Thus, there is greater external influence on public policy making processes of Africa’s developing states.

The emergence of regional integration schemes across the world has also influenced the formulation and the conduct of the public policy in many of the states in the south. For instance, the East African Community and the European Union (EAC-EU), Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA), Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), United Nations (UN) and African Union (AU), among others, have seen states surrender some of their decision-making powers on certain issues to the larger union. The regional organizations have increasingly taken responsibilities on behalf of the individual states and of regional community in certain matters. Therefore, such states interact, make decisions and act as a block. This therefore makes public policy in almost every African state is no regional but global activity, eroding national policy making capacities.

The rise of international institutions of governance such as the UN, Federation of International Football Associations (FIFA), World Bank, IMF, among others, has continued to influence developing countries public policy processes. According to Kenichi Ohmae, there is a large array of international institutions like the World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Trade Organisation (WTO), the UN which have over the years developed common policies to guide the behaviour of states, so that collectively, they have created an international regime which countries have to comply with. Therefore, the UN through its agencies such as the UNDP, FAO, WHO, WTO, just to mention a few, have continued to form a basis upon which public policies in Kenya are formulated and implemented, epitomizing the external influence on Kenya’s public policy making.

The idea of environmental change and conservation has also brought countries together. For instance, due to global warming and the problem of the environmental degradation, Kenya has been at the forefront in pushing for the environmental conservation and protection of its natural resources. For instance, during the signing of the Kyoto protocol, all the signatory and non-signatory states including Kenya were bound by the decisions that were taken in that protocol. Also, a few Kenyans have been internationally acclaimed all over the world in the environmental conservation. Wangari Maathai is a perfect example. In addition to these, in a bid to protect its wildlife, to deal with the poaching menace, among others, Kenya entered into international agreements with other states. Now, the global policies against poaching and environmental protection are also part of Kenya’s public policies.

The urge to ensure the maintenance of international peace and security has also seen the idea of globalization impacting on the security policies of states. For instance, Kenya’s security policies on issues such as the war on terror, money laundering, drug trafficking and international terrorism have largely been informed by the guidelines issued by the United Nations Security Council and the African Union Continental Early Warning Systems. In addition to these, Kenya has been partnering with its regional neighbours to ensure its own security.

Finally, the impact of globalization on Kenya’s public policy is marked by the implementation of various structural adjustment programmes such as liberalization, privatization, reduction of government expenditure, retrenchment, currency stabilization through the devaluation of currencies, among others. These came from the Washington consensus underscored by a neoliberal theocracy propagated by the World Bank and the IMF. Today, globalization is faithful to the idea of open markets whereby all countries must liberalize their markets, be exposed to competition with free capital mobility.

The idea of liberalization has largely been pushed by industrialized economies to enable them access market opportunities in the global south. Concerning matters of privatization of public enterprises, globalization required that public enterprises which were notorious for poor performance needed to be sold off to the private sector which will now overhaul these entities into profitable outfits. The argument being those inefficient states in developing countries have crowded out private capital, yet it is private sector that should be the engine growth. The private sector had sufficient resource capacity to productively move these countries. Privatization was considered necessary to address the fiscal crisis of the state, reduce government expenditure, reduce waste in non-essential services and release more funds to critical needs like social welfare in education and health, among others.

Retrenchment of government work force was considered necessary to cut the size of the public service that was bloated, so that the few who remain will be better paid for efficient performance. However, many of this work force became highly demoralized, due to low pay as wages stagnated. Labour market flexibility required that labour unions were prevented from embarking on strikes and other disruptions that would affect production; that is, harsh mechanisms be made to regulate labour unions, so that there is stability and continuity in production. Currency stabilization measures were abandoned, and currency devaluation and floating of the currency in the foreign exchange market was considered necessary in an “interdependent” global economy. The government of Kenya accepted all these conditionalities and prescriptions made by the Bretton Woods institutions.

Globalization and the Policy Process in Kenya

Among the global influences of Kenya’s domestic public policy process are the many international charters, treaties and agreements which the Republic of Kenya has signed. These have been in various areas including the key sectoral policies: education policies, health sector polices and agricultural policies.

The education sector is one of the foci of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). The Kenyan government identified achieving the SDG goals in relation to education as one of its priorities. Education is considered an important tool of development since it is through education that the citizens are informed, formed and transformed both in their thinking capacity and in their behavioural expectations. Besides, education is also a source of ensuring that poverty is eradicated, and acts of insecurity are reduced. Education has also been lauded by many stakeholders as a means through which inequalities are narrowed and national integration and cohesion is fostered. As a result of these, the government of Kenya in partnership with its 47 county governments has embarked on various programmes informed by the SDGs. For instance, there is the provision of universal free primary education, which made education compulsory for all children of school-going age. There has also been a policy of universal free secondary education. Technical, tertiary and vocational educational training institutions (TVETS) at the local levels have been expanded. Besides these, there has been expansion of the higher education loan funds that now include both the university students and the TVET students. These initiatives have gone a long way in ensuring that there is the localization of education, and every child acquires the necessary education that he or she needs to develop him/herself. They are meant to ensure that the Kenya’s vision 2030 and the SDGs goals and targets are met within the stipulated timelines.

The government of Kenya and all the 47 counties carried out several initiatives in the health sectors. The Kenyan health sector has historically suffered from serious challenges including poor health infrastructure, inadequate medical equipment and personnel across the country, scarcity of drugs in the health centres, among others. The government of Kenya and the county governments have invested in infrastructures in the 47 counties’ health facilities. These include the construction and expansion of referral hospitals, the construction of new level 4 and level 5 hospitals in every sub-county, and the introduction of the mobile clinics in remote areas by the county governments. The national government extended the coverage of the National Health Insurance Fund (NHIF) scheme to cater for all Kenyans with the involvement of public and private hospitals. The NHIF scheme covers both the inpatient and the outpatient services. The scheme is known to cover various forms of treatment such as major and minor surgeries, cardiac conditions and various chronic illnesses. In a bid to address the shortage of the medical personnel, the government of Kenya has gone to an extent of hiring medical doctors with different specializations from the Republics of Tanzania and Cuba in a bid to ensure that Kenyan citizens receive proper and adequate treatment from its health facilities. These doctors have been distributed to all parts of the country, especially in the far-flung areas. This is a good initiative in ensuring that there is full localization and domestication of the SDGs.

In agriculture and food security, the government of Kenya in partnership with the 47 county governments implemented various agricultural programmes. For instance, mega dams have been constructed in far-flung locations in the arid and semi-arid areas. More than 1000 acres of land have been put under irrigation to ensure that there is food available across the country. The government of Kenya has transferred responsibilities for agriculture to the county governments where most citizens are. Finally, farmers in different sectors have been supplied with fertilizers and credit facilities enabling them to expand their production. These programmes and policies have been influenced by the global policies with regard to food security and agricultural development which Kenya has acceded to.

Globalization has had both negative and positive influences on Kenya. Some of the benefits that Kenya has recived from the globalization of public policy, according to Adar are numerous. First, there has been a steady increase in the economic production process in Kenya. This is because there has been a heavy capital inflow by the MNCs and increase in foreign direct investments. These have resulted in the emergence of many industries which produces at a large-scale level. Large-scale production allows the enjoyment of economies of scale which is good for Kenya’s economy. The heavy presence of the MNCs in Kenya has ensured that there is transfer of sophisticated technology from developed countries to Kenya. Small- and medium-scale enterprises in Kenya can be mentored and nurtured by these MNCs. Also, these MNCs have influenced the various government policies on taxation and regulation of the conduct of the MNCs.

Second, because of this external influence, there has been a significant increase in government revenues. There has been a constant push by the World Bank and the IMF on the government to fight corruption, promote financial austerity measures, ensure there is good governance and accountability, and ensure the digitization of the government’s taxation system.

Third, external influence on Kenya’s public policy has ensured the free flow of the factors of production across the country. Globalization allows movement of labour and capital. The production of goods and services has continued to register optimum results arising from the massive mobility of labour and capital.

Fourth, globalization has enabled Kenya’s government to focus public policy on competitiveness. This has enhanced competitive production and exchange which has improved market quality and increased income elasticity of most products sold in the market.

Fifth, the forces of globalization, especially the revolution in information and communication technology, have made it easier for Kenyans to access information on various opportunities. The flow of information, fast and easy access to information on several issues, has facilitated the pace of decision making by government officials and relevant stakeholders, thereby improving efficiency.

Finally, globalization has also expanded democratic space and promoted the ideals of liberalism. As a result of this influence, Kenya succeeded in promulgating a new constitution in 2010. This constitution has entrenched progressive ideas such as devolution, expansion of human rights, good governance, accountability and public participation in the governance process. The views of the people now matter in decision making.

On the other hand, the negative impact of globalization on Kenya’s public policy making, according to Kegley and Wittkopff (1997), includes the following.

First, globalization has categorized countries into two, the developed industrialized countries and the underdeveloped poor countries. In this classification, the benefits of globalization are mainly found within the industrialized economies which can maximize their investible capital, whereas many developing countries have also opened their economies, not much has been seen in terms of benefits to these countries. Rather, globalization of public policies has accelerated the exploitative tendencies of the states at the core.

Second, although globalization has orientated Kenya’s public policy on competitiveness, the country does not have sufficient productive capacity to take advantage of global markets. Therefore, Kenya loses in international trade to the advantage of the developed countries.

Third, under globalization multi-national capital has eroded the sovereign authority of Kenya as a state. This is so because these MNCs have constantly put undue pressure on Kenya’s government policy on various issues. Regulatory capture in some instances has led to decisions that are quite unfair to the citizens of Kenya. This implies that the government of Kenya cannot effectively enforce some of their economic policies due to the fear of antagonizing global capital.

Fourth, global interdependence has come with risks. Any crisis in one economy may have adverse effects in other economies due to integration. The contagion effect occurs as import—export trade suffers, especially seen in the conversion of currencies. For instance, during the global financial crisis in the United States, Kenya suffered heavily because its economy has been integrated into the global economy.

Fifth, globalization has led to massive erosion of cultural values and social practices in Kenya. This is because Kenyans have gradually abandoned their own culture and traditions in favour of the western culture. This is seen in the mode of dressing, music, food and social life habits more generally. Therefore, the Kenyan public policy on culture and national heritage has been affected by globalization in a manner that can be described as cultural imperialism.

Finally, the problems of insecurity have worsened for Kenya. For instance, there has been an increase in terrorist attacks on Kenyan soil, widespread cases of money laundering, increased drug trafficking and the spread of infectious diseases in the last two decades. These pose challenges for Kenya’s public policy on security, health and investments.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the sharp divide which existed between states at the core and the states at the periphery has been drastically bridged by globalization even though inequalities have increased in terms of interstate relations and on matters of trade, security, decision making, cultural values, and so on. The world systems theory remains relevant in an era of globalization where the countries of the world are brought closer to each other with greater collaboration between states and non-state actors. Globalization has influenced public policy processes of most states in the African continent. This influence has had both positive and negative effects, as shown in Kenya’s public policy making. Interactions among countries will continue to intensify as cross-border activities intensify. The issue of who benefits will be of much relevance; hence, Kenya and by extension states in the global south must re-strategize to take advantage of the opportunities that come with globalization and reduce the disadvantages that globalization presents.