Do executive orders lead to better policy outputs than the traditional policy process? the case of Botswana

Abstract

This study investigates the effectiveness of Presidential Directives in comparison to the traditional policy process in Botswana. More precisely, the study determines whether the use of Presidential Directives is a more efficient and effective means of achieving policy outputs, as compared to the traditional policy process. To achieve this, the study conducted a comprehensive analysis of policies and Presidential Directives in Botswana, examining the processes through which they were formulated, implemented, and evaluated. The methodological approach adopted includes an intrepretivist research paradigm as well as a qualitative research approach for both data collection and analysis. Results reveals that Presidential directives achieve outputs faster and more effectively than the traditional policy process, Presidential Directives may have some advantages in terms of speed and flexibility, but they are not necessarily more effective than the traditional policy process in achieving their planned outcomes, policy process, which involves stakeholder consultation, evidence-based decision-making and comprehensive analysis of the policy context, is a more reliable and effective means of policy-making in the long term. However, the study also found that there are some areas where Presidential Directives may be more appropriate, such as in emergency situations or when quick decisions are required. Overall, this research provides valuable insights into the effectiveness of different approaches to policy-making in Botswana, and its findings have important implications for policymakers, practitioners, and researchers in the field of public policy. The study recommends transparency and accountability; stakeholder engagement; evidence-based policy-making and comprehensive policy evaluation.