Thechallenge that most local governments have grappled with over theyears regards getting enough funds to carry out economic developmentin their areas of jurisdiction. In most countries, the resourcesprovided by the national government are never sufficient to meet allthe needs of the local administration. Given the above problem, thelocal governments constantly device various public policies aimed atgenerating revenues to facilitate the development at the grassrootslevels. These policies are intended to utilize the locally availableresources in a manner that is productive, which not only generatesrevenue to the local government but also create employmentopportunities to the locals.

Onesuch policy is the Tourism Promotion Policy, which is aimed atmarketing the local tourism destinations at the local and regionallevel. The tourism industry is one potential area that the localgovernment can promote as a means of achieving both social andeconomic development goals. The utilization of policies aimed at thepromotion of tourism sector is increasingly becoming salient,especially at the local levels where the industry has played afundamental role in supplementing the declining profitability inlocal economies.

Therefore,promotion of the tourism sector and its development as a whole is amechanism for boosting regional development. The regular players inthis arrangement are the local governments themselves who have theresponsibility for developing the sector, promoting it, and puttingup infrastructure that supports their operations. Other players inthe success of this are the locals who must co-operate with thegovernment to ensure that the tourist sites are protected, and thevisitors are safe. These policies will positively impact on the localcommunities through job creation that will improve their livingstandards. Besides, the local government will also generate enoughrevenues to finance other development projects such as infrastructureprojects and social amenities like recreational facilities.(Shaftritz, Karen &amp Borick, 2005).

Anecdotalevidence is proof based on anecdotes. This evidence is based onpersonal accounts as opposed to research or facts. They constitutestories told and are not necessarily reliable. Anecdotal evidence iswidely applied in policy making despite the lack of scientific dataor facts to back it. The policies are usually meant to affect thepublic. Therefore, the assumption taken when using anecdotal evidenceis that it forms a reflection of the public opinion. In most cases,the opinion makers in a country are exceptional individuals who arehaving diverse experience in particular areas where their input isrequired. Therefore, this means that these people can apply theirexperience in formulating policies (Birkland, 2015).

Despitehaving weak or no scientific backing, the anecdotal evidence isapplied in public policy debate since it is frequently presented byreal people based on real events. Therefore, to this extent, it isvery reliable. Given that public policies are subjects to change andcontinuous adjustments, it makes it expensive to conduct scientificresearch in their formulations. Anecdotal evidence is suitable inthis case since, in the event that the policy fails, quick changescan be done without further research to correct the errors.Narratives are central to policymaking just as they are to one`slife. Individuals live in a society where people tell stories, sharetheir experiences, problems, and also craft possible solutions to thevery problems affecting the community. From these narratives, policymakers can receive important ideas applicable in policy formulationthat directly answers the questions raised should they be implemented(Stone, 2011).

Elitetheory is a public policy principle that asserts that the greatestpower in public affairs is held by a few minorities made up of theeconomic elites as well as policy planning networks. This minorityholds this power irrespective of the outcomes of the elections. Thetheory further argues that this elite group possesses a large amountof knowledge, intelligence, and skills necessary for running publicaffairs either in general flair or “behind the doors.” The elitegroup runs the society while the rest of the people remainincapacitated or incompetent to govern themselves effectively. Elitetheorists believe that important decisions on public affairs cannotbe left in the hands of the public but rather a few groups of elites.For instance the policy of privatization adopted by most governmentsto reduce the financial and administration burdens in running publiccompanies is an elite policy.

Onthe contrary, Pluralism holds on to the view that real power lieswith the bigger majority from various organizations. This isirrespective of whether these groups originate from the governmentalinstitutions or not. The theory affirms that since democracy is abattle of ideas and ideals, in a space that is crowded no individualpolitical group is capable of dominating and overpowering the otherplayers. Given this fact of non-dominance, all the players are thusforced to compromise their positions to reach a consensus and pass asound public policy for the benefit of the whole community. Anexample of a pluralist public policy is the National Social WelfarePolicy which is aimed at empowering the citizens to face the socialchallenges and develop the human potential.

Ina summary, the theory of elites states that a single elite minorityand not significant competing groups, makes decisions on the keyissues of the nation as whole leaving the other minor issues to themiddle class with the ordinary people having almost no say. On theother hand, the pluralists contend that the inclusion of competinginterests is necessary for making public decisions. However, in bothcases, the common citizenry alone is incompetent and not capable ofexerting their influence on the structures of the government withoutthe assistance of the well-funded elites (Bottomore, 1993).


Bottomore,T. (1993). Elitesand society(2nd Edition). London: Routledge.

Birkland,T. (2015). AnIntroduction to the policy process: Theories, concepts, and models ofpublic policy making, 4th Edition. U.S.A:M.E.SharpeShaftritz,J., Karen, L., &amp Borick, C. (2005). Classicsof public policy.New York: Pearson Longman.

Stone,D. (2011). Policyparadox: The art of political decision making.New York: W.W. Norton.