Final Exam Short Answers

Final Exam
Student’s Name
Institution
Final Exam
Problem Definition:
The U.S. Transportation Department has resorted to the regulation of peanuts in airplanes due to susceptibility to allergies (Bynum, 2010). There are many complaints of allergy gathered from individuals with allergies, medics and food companies bringing about this debate toward the ban of peanuts in airplanes. Apparently, these allergies break out when the people are flying hence; they are supposed to be banned on the planes. Most of the cases are not fatal; therefore, the debate on whether to ban these peanuts or not becomes constant.
Reasons for Government Interventions:
The case dictates that about 1.8M American people suffer from peanut allergies (Bynum, 2010). By banning the peanuts through government interventions, there would be fewer risks of these consumers complaining about peanut allergies. Intervention here also shows that the governments care about national unity by restricting these peanuts from the public. If at all the governments do not ban a ‘harmful’ commodity, they end up placing the lives of these consumers in danger.
Market Failures:
There is an evident market failure in this case since the quantity demanded by consumers is not in-line with the subsequent supply. Peanut farmers and food packagers have complained about the inability of these government interventions to lead to equilibrium. Embracing negative externality leads to more allergies as it shows that the producers do not care about their consumers’ well-being.

The market, therefore, inevitability fails when there is a focus on negative rather than positive externality.
Criteria and definitions of effectiveness, efficiency, and equity
Effectiveness refers to the extent to which an endeavor is fulfilled successfully or fruitfully. The U.S Transportation Department, in this case study, is useful in imposing the ban on peanuts in airplanes.
Efficiency refers to the ability to complete a task within a short period. Many airlines stopped giving peanuts to their passengers within a limited amount of time.
Equity refers to the state of upholding fairness. Despite banning peanuts in planes, the proposals offered provisions for individuals that are not allergic to the foods.
Policy Gridlock
From this case; there is a policy gridlock because the people are not happy about the regulation of peanuts in airplanes. In fact, peanut farmers and the food packagers are more vocal about the dissatisfaction with these laws. There is a significant backlash from the peanut industry that believes that the regulation(s) is unfair causing an inevitable policy gridlock. The argument, therefore, is that all foods on planes should be banned to avoid the ‘discrimination’ directed toward the peanut industry.
Models of Policymaking (elite and group theory)
In the case, there is a depiction that the peanut industry is a representation of the few members that are categorized under the elite theory. The small group in the society – peanut farmer and peanut packagers – are supposed to deal with the whole complex situations. Policies, according to this case study, are also made under the group theory which shows that peanuts should be banned because they affect a large group of consumers. The majority needs and wants to interfere with any idea(s) or propositions brought forth by the minorities.
Formal and Informal Policy Actors
The problem in this case study warrants existence of both formal and informal policy actors. Formally, there is the presence of the U.S. Transportation Department that strives to restrict production of peanuts for health purposes (Bynum, 2010). Unfortunately, the informal policy actors such as the peanut industry are not pleased with the verdict. Each one of them, however, plays a particular role in making the relevant policies as per this case. The institutional actors cannot be eliminated due to their role in intervention.
Steps in the Policymaking Process
Problem identification- Peanuts in airplanes are causing allergic reactions to the consumers.
Agenda setting- Some of the issues to be addressed included 1) the peanut allergies on planes 2) the debate on whether the allergic reactions only appear while flying 3) whether or not all foods should be banned in planes.
Policy formulation – Restricting production and supply of peanuts in airplanes.
Policy adoption- The proposals included 1) permanently banning peanuts on airplanes 2) offering peanut-free zones to passengers on request and 3) prohibiting peanuts to an allergic passenger.
Budgeting- The U.S. Transport Department set aside a budget for the creation and implementation of peanut-free zones.
Policy implementation- Many airlines such as the US Airways and Continental have stopped offering peanuts to their passengers.
Policy evaluation- It is working because, as mentioned, airlines have stopped serving peanuts in the airplanes. American Airlines, for instance, resort to only serving snacks with peanut ingredients.
Agenda-Setting, and Factors that Influence it
Despite the implementation of the policy, there is still backlash from the peanut industry with individuals believing that the verdict of restriction is unfair. Either the agenda will focus on the issue(s) of peanut allergies in the plane, an extrapolation on whether flying causes these allergies and the debate on whether all foods should be banned in airplanes. The peanut industry suggests that all foods should be banned from planes to avoid ‘discrimination.’
Lowi’s Policy Types
There are Lowi’s policy types including distributive, redistributive, regulatory and constituent. Unfortunately, the distributive policy cannot suffice in this case as it is one that involves winning and losing from involved parties. The U.S. Transportation Department, in facts, ends up emerging victorious. The redistributive policy type works in favor of the less powerful group [peanut industry] because they are not appeased by the change in policy apropos of production of peanuts. Regulatory policy type here depicts the conflict(s) between the U.S. Transportation Department and the peanut industry (Bynum, 2010). The latter visibly wins the altercation particularly after numerous airlines resort to banning peanuts in the airplanes. Lastly, the constituent policy depends on the U.S. Transportation Department to work as an agent for policy implementation [or lack thereof].
Types of Policy Analysis (risk assessment, ethical analysis, and cost-benefit analysis)
Risk assessment in this case study posits that peanut production is harmful to its consumers. The unexpected allergic reactions that are experienced in the planes are enough proof to ‘encourage’ the ban on these foods. Additionally, ethical analysis delves into the process of making the right moral decision at a given point in time. In this case, for instance, the peanut industry should place the rights and well-being of their consumers first before thinking about their economic endeavors. It is only moral to sell products that do not harm one’s consumers.
Limitations of Cost-benefit Analysis
However, there are limitations of the cost-benefit analysis. There may be inaccuracies while looking into the relationship between costs and benefits. One may omit or include figures that are not inclusive in the analysis. Again, the cost-benefit analysis may lead to misleading conclusions due to inaccurate calculations. The case study does not have an accurate depiction of its budget thus there are possibilities of auguring inaccuracies.
Public Policy Tools (regulation)
The case study focuses on regulatory policies to consider the ban on peanuts in airplanes. Complaints from allergy sufferers, medics, and the food industry show that regulation is a necessary public policy tool (Bynum, 2010). Regulation means that peanuts will only be produced in particular spaces that are not affiliated with airlines or airplanes.
Policy Contexts (governing)
Input from the U.S. Transportation Department shows that the government plays a significant role in regulating various policies. If at it was not involved in this regulation process, the airlines would still be supplying peanuts in airplanes. It would be to the disadvantage of both producers and consumers as the former would battle with market failure while the latter battles with allergic reactions.
Reference
Bynum, R. (2010). Regulators consider ban on peanuts in airplanes. The Associated Press.