Policy Analysis,

Formulation and
Management
Presented
By
Prof. Ven Mvano, PhD
1
 Recommended Textbook

William N. Dunn, Public Policy Analysis,

Fifth Edition (2012), Pearson Prentice Hall

2
 Readings/papers
• J. Musso, B. Miller and B. Myrtle,
Tradecraft of writing for policy analysis and
management, School of Policy, Planning
and Development, University of South
California, 1999
• G. E. Reyes, The Policy Making Process
and Models for Public Policy Analysis,
Graduate School of Public an International
Affairs, University of Pittsburgh, 2002(?)
3
 Topics

• Policy making process

• Process of integrated policy analysis
• Policy analysis in the policy making
process
• Structuring policy problems
• Recommending preferred policies
• Monitoring observed policy outcomes
• Evaluating policy performance
• Policy argumentation and communication
4
 Phases of the policy making
process

• Agenda setting
• Policy formulation
• Policy adoption
• Policy implementation and monitoring
• Policy assessment
• Policy adaptation
• Policy succession
• Policy termination
5
The Policy making Policy
Agendas
proble
process ms

Agenda
setting Adaptation, Formulation
Succession
Termination

Outputs Impacts Proposals

Assessment
Implementation Adoption

Policies
 Agenda setting -
characteristics
Elected and appointed officials place
problems on the public agenda. Many
problems are not acted on at all, while
others are addressed only after long
delays.

7
 Policy formulation -
characteristics

Officials formulate alternative policy

options to deal with a social (public)
problem. Alternative policy actions assume
the form of executive orders, court
decisions, and legislative acts

8
 Policy adoption - characteristics

A policy alternative is adopted with the

support of a legislative majority,
consensus among cabinet members, or a
court decision

9
 Policy implementation
-characteristics

An adopted policy is carried out by public

service agencies or other administrative
units, which mobilize financial and human
resources to comply with the policy

10
 Policy assessment -
characteristics
Responsible auditing and accounting units
(evaluators) in government determine
whether public agencies, legislatures, and
courts are in compliance with statutory
requirements of a policy and whether they
are achieving desired policy objectives

11
 Policy adaptation -
characteristics
Non-performing policies are adjusted in
view of changing circumstances within the
socio-economic, technological and/or
physical environment. Policies may also
not be succeeding due to poorly written
regulations, insufficient resources,
inadequate staff training, etc; in which
case, improvements may be required in
these aspects.
12
 Policy succession -
characteristics
The problem to which the policy was
directed may have been resolved. Instead of
terminating the policy, it is maintained and
redirected toward a new problem situation. It
is assumed that the policy is suitable for the
conditions of the new problem situation. An
example would be an agricultural extension
service program which is applied to public
health awareness creation.

13
 Policy termination -
characteristics
A policy or an entire agency is terminated
because it is no longer needed. This could
be due to the fact that the problem to
which it was directed has been solved, or
because the policy has failed.

14
 Discussion Topic
• Think about the state of the nation’s forests.
You are required to discuss the following
issues:
1. Forestry related challenges facing the
country
2. Who are the key stakeholders in the forestry
sub-sector?
3. Identify 3 or 4 key policies and/or laws in the
management of national forestry resources

15
Discussion Topic – Key learning points

• Key policy issues

• Extent of forestry cover
• Forestry resources
• Causes of deforestation
• Effects of deforestation
• Forestry and state of the environment
• Economic benefits of forests
• Social benefits
16
• Key stakeholders
• Respective stakes of the different stakeholders
groups
• Conflicts existing between and among different
stakeholder interests
• Relative power of each stakeholder group
• Existing forestry utilization and preservation
measures/policies
• What additional measures need to be
implementated
17
 Policy analysis – a multi-displinary
framework
• Policy analysis is a process of
multidisciplinary inquiry designed to
create, critically assess, and communicate
information that is useful in understanding
and improving policies

18
 Methodology of policy analysis
• Multiple disciplines
• Partly descriptive, but also normative
• Seeks to create knowledge that improves
efficiency of policy choices
• Multiple perspectives, methods, measures,
data sources, and communication media

19
 Principle of ‘critical multiplism’

• A process of analysis which deliberately

employs multi-dimensional approach with
respect to, for example, number of
participants/stakeholders, perspectives,
methods, measures, data sources, and
communication media

20
Key questions in policy analysis
• What is the nature of the problem?
• Which of two or more actions should be
chosen to solve the problem?
• What are the outcomes of choosing a
particular action?
• What is the likelihood/probability that a
particular outcome will be realized?
• Does achieving the outcomes contribute to
solving the problem? i.e. What is the
impact on the problem situation?
21
 Types of policy relevant
information
• Policy problems
• Policy futures/expected policy outcomes
• Policy actions
• Observed policy policy outcomes
• Policy performance

22
 Methodology of policy analysis
• Multiple disciplines
• Partly descriptive, but also normative
• Seeks to create knowledge that improves
efficiency of policy choices
• Multiple perspectives, methods, measures,
data sources, and communication media

23
 Principle of ‘critical multiplism’

• A process of analysis which deliberately

employs multi-dimensional approach with
respect to, for example, number of
participants/stakeholders, perspectives,
methods, measures, data sources, and
communication media

24
Key questions in policy analysis
• What is the nature of the problem?
• Which of two or more actions should be
chosen to solve the problem?
• What are the outcomes of choosing a
particular action?
• What is the likelihood/probability that a
particular outcome will be realized?
• Does achieving the outcomes contribute to
solving the problem? i.e. What is the
impact on the problem situation?
25
 Four strategies of policy analysis

• Prospective and retrospective analysis

• Descriptive and normative analysis
• Problem finding and problem solving
• Segmented and integrated analysis
Prospective and retrospective analysis

• Prospective analysis involves production

and transformation of information before
action is taken. This strategy involving ex
ante analysis typifies operating style of
economists, systems analysts, operations
researchers and decision analysts
• Retrospective analysis strategy of ex post
analysis involves production and
transformation of information after policies
have been implemented. This
characterizes operating style of political
scientists, sociologists, problem oriented
analysts, and application-oriented analysts
 Descriptive and normative analysis

• Descriptive policy analysis parallels

descriptive decision theory, which refers
to a set of logically consistent propositions
that describe or explain action. These
decision theories originate in political
science, sociology and economics
• Normative policy analysis parallels
normative decision theory, which refers
to a set of logically consistent propositions
that evaluate or prescribe action.
• One of the most important features of
normative policy analysis is that its
propositions rest on disagreements about
values such as efficiency, equity,
responsiveness, liberty and security
 Problem finding and problem solving

• Problem finding strategy has to do with

discovery of elements that go into definition
of problems, and not their solutions; e.g.
 how ell do we understand the problem?
 Who are the most important stakeholders?
 Have appropriate objectives been
identified?
 What alternative are available to achieve
pbjectives?
• Problem solving methods are designed to
solve rather than find problems
• Problem solving strategy is more
technical; problem finding is more
conceptual
• Problem solving methods answer
questions about policy causation,
statistical estimation, and optimization
 Segmented and integrated analysis

• Framework of integrated policy analysis

helps examine assumptions, strengths,
and limitations of methods employed in
disciplines that tend to be overly
segmented and excessively specialized to
be useful in practical problem solving
 Policy analytic methods
• Structuring policy problems
• Forecasting expected policy outcomes
• Recommending policy actions
• Monitoring policy outcomes
• Evaluating policy performance

34
 Policy
Policy
Framework for
problems
proble
integrated ms
Policy analysis

Problem
structuring Practical Forecasting
inference

Observed Policy Expected

outcomes performance outcomes

Evaluation
Monitoring Prescription

Preferred
policies
 Types of policy relevant information

• Policy problems
• Policy futures/expected policy outcomes
• Policy actions
• Policy outcomes
• Policy performance

36
 Policy problems
• A policy problem exists when the actual
situation is ‘worse’ than what was
expected
• A policy problem is an unrealized value or
opportunity for improvement which may be
attained through public action

37
 Illustration of a policy problem (poverty)

• The number of people who are living

below the ‘poverty line’ (e.g. $1 per day) is
too high
• Most of these people have resources
which they are not using productively (for
income generation)

38
 Expected policy outcome
An expected policy outcome is a probable
consequence of a policy designed to solve
a problem

39
 Illustration of (expected) policy
outcomes
• An agricultural price support policy would
improve and stabilize farmers’ incomes
• Subsidizing agricultural inputs would
reduce cost of farming and (therefore)
improve profit margins of farmers

40
 Preferred policy (actions)
A preferred policy is a potential solution to
a problem. To select a preferred policy, it
is necessary to have info about expected
outcomes and their respective
probabilities. It also depends on judgments
about value of expected outcomes

41
 Observed policy outcomes
An observed policy outcome is a past or
present consequence of implementing a
preferred policy. Not always certain that
outcome is a result of a policy. It may be
anticipated or unanticipated.

42
Illustration of observed policy outcomes

• Average annual income of rural farming

households was (say) US $ 730 last year
• As a result of higher incomes several
households were able to send their children
to school
• An additional benefit of increased income
was
improvement in children’s nutritional status

43
 Policy performance
Policy performance is the degree to which
an observed policy outcome contributes to
the attainment of values, goals, or
objectives. For example, based on the
results of the farming policies discussed
above, one may conclude that the policies
performed well.

44
 Policy analytic methods
• Structuring policy problems
• Forecasting expected policy outcomes
• Recommending policy actions
• Monitoring policy outcomes
• Evaluating policy performance

45
 Problem structuring (definition)
• Determining the nature, scope, effects and causes
of a particular social and/or economic problem; for
example,
• more than 30% of the population live below the
poverty line, in more than 75% of the country
• As a result of poverty, there is high incidence of
sickness, malnutrition, and loss of self esteem
• The major causes of the widespread poverty can
be found in the very poor performance of the
economy, leading to high level of unemployment

46
 Forecasting expected policy
outcomes
• Determination of the (future) likely
consequences (and their probability of
occurrence) of any particular policy
intervention that is under consideration for
adoption (including taking no action)

47
 Recommending policy actions
• Suggesting what appears to be the most
preferred course of action to solve a
particular problem, based on agreed
criteria

48
 Monitoring (actual) policy
outcomes
• Collecting and reporting information about
the outcomes of policy actions that were
implemented, using appropriate indicators

49
 Examples of monitoring indicators for
agricultural price support program

• Volume of produce
• Income of farmers
• Variation in farm income
• Increase in number of farmers
• Area under agricultural production

50
 Evaluating policy performance
• Assessing the performance of past policies
based on the extent to which they achieved
desired objectives and outcomes
• E.g. if target increase in agricultural
production was 100 million tons, and actual
increase in production for the particular
period was 80 mill we can conclude that
policy performance was 80%

51
Role of policy analysis in the policy
making process
• Role of policy analysis is to improve policy
making by providing relevant info.
• Problem structuring information can be used
to challenge assumptions underlying the
definition of problems during agenda setting
phase.
• Forecasting provides information about
probable consequences of alternative policy
actions under consideration at the policy
formulation phase.

52
Role of policy analysis in policy making
process (continued)

• Methods of selecting (recommending)

policy alternatives yield info about benefits
and costs, and more generally the value or
utility, of expected policy outcomes, thus
aiding policy makers in policy adoption
phase

53
 Role of policy analysis in policy making
(continued)
• Monitoring provides information about the
consequences of adopting policies, thus
assisting in the policy implementation
phase
• Evaluating policy outcomes yields
information about discrepancies between
expected and actual policy performance,
thus assisting in policy assessment

54
 Problem structuring
• Policy problems are unrealized needs,
values, or opportunities for improvement
that may be pursued through public action
• Problem structuring produces info about
the nature, scope, effects and causes of a
particular social or economic problem

55
 Characteristics of policy
problems
• Interdependency of policy problems
• Subjectivity of policy problems
• Artificiality of policy problems
• Dynamics of policy problems

56
 Interdependency of policy
problems
Policy problems in one area frequently
affect policy problems in other areas.
E.g. problems of cholera, poor living
conditions, ignorance, cultural practice,
poverty are interlinked

57
Subjectivity of policy problems
External conditions that give rise to a problem
are selectively defined, classified, explained,
and evaluated. Although there is a sense in
which problems are objective, e.g. air
pollution, the same data about pollution are
typically interpreted in different ways by
different stakeholders.
E.g. different individuals will consider
themselves poor at different levels of income

58
Artificiality of policy problems
Policy problems are possible only when human
beings make judgments about the desirability of
altering some problem situation. Policy
problems are products of subjective human
judgment. Problems have no existence apart
from the individuals and groups who define
them.
E.g. number of student failing to get admission
to university because of very high cut-off grade
points
59
Dynamics of policy problems
There are as many different solutions for a
given problem as there are definitions of
that problem. Solutions to problems
become obsolete even if the problems to
which they are addressed do not.
E.g. malaria parasites becoming resistant
to previously effective anti-malaria drugs;
mutation of HIV virus; indiscipline in
schools
60
 Three classes of policy
problems
• Well structured problems
• Moderately structured problem
• Ill-structured problems

61
 Well-structured problems
Well-structured problems are those that
involve one or a few decision makers and
a small set of policy alternatives. Utilities
(values) reflect goal consensus and are
clearly ranked in order of decision makers’
preferences. Outcomes of each alternative
are either known with certainty, or with
known probability

62
Moderately structured problems
These are problems involving one or a few
decision makers and a relatively limited
number of alternatives. But, unlike well
structured problems, outcomes of
alternatives are not certain

63
 Ill-structured problems
• Problems which involve many different
decision makers whose values are either
unknown or impossible to rank in a
consistent fashion. Goals of decisions
makers usually conflict. Policy alternatives
and their outcomes may also be unknown.

64
 Differences in the structure of the
three classes of policy problems

Element Well structured Moderately Ill-structured

structured
Decision makers One or few One or few Many
Alternatives Limited Limited Many
Values Consensus Consensus Conflict
Outcomes Certainty or risk Uncertain Unknown
Probabilities Calculable Incalculable Incalculable

65
 Discussion Topic – Rural urban
(R-U) migration
Consider the issue of rural urban migration.
1. What is the nature of the problem. How would you
describe the problem situation?
2. Explain three causes and three effects of R-U migration
3. What is the substantive problem?
4. What should the government be doing to stem the flow
of people into cities/towns?

66
Phases of problem structuring
Meta-
problem
Problem
Problem search
definition

Problem Substantive
situation Problem

Problem Problem
sensing Formal
specification
problem
67
 Phases of problem structuring
• Problem sensing – recognition or felt existence of
a problem situation
• Problem search – Attempting to discover problem
representations of multiple policy stakeholders
Problem definition – Identifying cause and effect
relationships to arrive at a substantive problem
• Problem specification – Development of
a formal mathematical representation (model) of the
problem
68
 Methods of problem structuring
• Boundary analysis
• Classification analysis
• Hierarchy analysis
• Brainstorming
• Assumption analysis
• Multiple perspectives

69
 Boundary analysis
• Boundary analysis involves a three-step
process:
 Saturation (or snowball) sampling of
stakeholders
 Obtain from stakeholders info about
problem
 Boundary estimation

70
 Boundaries of a meta-problem
Accumulation
of new Boundaries of meta-problem
concepts

Policy stakeholders

71
 Classification analysis
• This is a technique for clarifying concepts
used to define and classify problem
situations. Classification analysis is based
on two main procedures:
 Logical division – we select a class and
break it down into its component parts
 Logical classification – combination of
situations, objects, or persons into larger
groups or classes
72
Illustration of logical division – a
sample of 6000 poor people

Employed Self- Unemployed Total

employed
3000 700 300 4000
Male

Female 400 900 700 2000

Total 3400 1600 1000 6000

73
Illustration logical classification
– a sample of 3000 people

Very happy Moderately Unhappy Total

happy
800 1000
Rich 130 70

Poor 700 770 530 2000

Total 1500 900 600 3000

74
 Hierarchy analysis
A method for identifying possible causes of
a problem situation in a hierarchical form.
Two techniques can be used:
a. Problem tree
b. ‘5 Whys’

75
 Hierarchy analysis – Problem
tree
Energy
shortage

Excess Insufficient
demand supply

Increased Low Limited

Inefficient Generation
Economic Water in
appliances capacity
activity dams

High cost Increased Extended High cost

Very old
Ignorance Of efficient Industry Drought of new
equipment
appliances production period equipment
76
 Problem tree

Low quality education

Quality of Condition of Relevance of

Quality of teachers
students facilities curriculum

Level of Incentive Large Applicability

Discipline High cost
training packages classes of knowledge

No. of Limited Poor Lack of

Educ. Absence of Too much
training C/room Inflation Econ g/lines&
budget punishment theory
colleges space perfmnce stds
77
 Discussion Topic – Environmental
pollution
REQUIRED:
a) Identify 10 causes
b) Identify 5 effects
c) Construct a problem tree of the causes
d) Design a logical division of polluted
areas you might choose to investigate
 Discussion Topic 3– Rural urban
(R-U) migration
Consider the issue of rural urban migration.

1. What is the nature of the problem. How would you

describe the problem situation?

2. Explain three major causes and three major effects of R-

U migration

3. What is the substantive problem?

4. What should the government be doing to stem the flow of

people into cities/towns?

79
 Brainstorming
A method for generating ideas, goals, and
strategies that help identify and conceptualize
problem situations. Step:
 Select persons who are knowledgeable
 Keep separate processes of idea generation
and idea evaluation
 Keep atmosphere of brainstorming open
 Exhaust idea generation before evaluation
 Prioritize ideas generated
80
 Assumption analysis (AA)
A technique that aims at the creative
synthesis of conflicting assumptions about
policy problems. Procedures of AA:
 Stakeholder identification
 Assumption surfacing
 Assumption challenging
 Assumption pooling
 Assumption synthesis
81
 Assumption analysis is designed to overcome
four major limitations of (traditional) policy
analysis:
• Assumption of a single decision maker
• Failure to consider strongly differing views
• Difficult to challenge prevailing formulations of
problems
• Failure to address basic assumptions
underlying conceptualization of problems
82
 Multiple perspectives
A method of obtaining greater insight into
problems and potential solutions by
systematically applying personal,
organizational, and technical perspectives
to problem situations.

83
 Personal perspective
This perspective views problems and
solutions in terms of individual
perceptions, needs, and values.

84
 Organizational perspective
Organizational perspective views
problems and solutions as part of an
orderly progression from one
organizational state to another. Standard
operating procedures, rules, and
institutional routines are major
characteristics of organizational
perspective

85
 Technical perspective
Technical perspective views problems and
solutions in terms of optimization models
and employs techniques based on
probability theory, benefit-cost analysis
and decision analysis, systems analysis,
among others

86
 Discussion Topic
Consider the problem of FAMINE

1. Identify the main causes famine

2. What are the most serious effects of
famine
3. What would you say is the ‘substantive’
policy problem?
4. Draw a problem tree of causes of the
problem

87
 Recommending policy actions
• The policy-analytic procedure of
recommendation enables analysts to
produce info about the likelihood that future
course of action will result in consequences
that are valuable
• It suggests what appears to be the most
preferred course(s) of action to solve a
particular problem, based on agreed criteria

88
Recommending policy actions –
Key issues

• Whose needs, values, opportunities?

• What goals and objectives should be
attained?
• What alternatives exist?
• How much will it cost?
• What constraints may impede attainment
of goals
89
90
91
92
 Key issues (continued)
 How will the value of costs/benefits
change over time
 Are there side effects?
 How certain are forecast outcomes?
 What should be done?

93
 Multiple advocacy
 An approach to the systematic comparison
and critical assessment of a number of
potential solutions, NOT a way of
defending single solutions at any cost
 Questions of action demand that analysts
choose among multiple claims about what
should be done

94
 Advocative claims are:
 Actionable – they focus on actions that
may be taken to resolve a policy problem
 Prospective, since they occur prior to the
time that actions are taken (ex ante).
 Value laden – they depend as much on
“facts” as they do on “values”.
 Value duality – a given value (e.g. health)
may be regarded both as intrinsic (an
end) and extrinsic (means to an end)

95
 Simple model of choice
• In its simple form, choice may be
represented as a process of reasoning
that involves three components:
 Definition of a problem requiring action
 Comparison of consequences of two or
more alternatives
 Recommendation of the alternatives that
will result in preferred outcomes

96
 Simple model of choice (continued)

 Conditions that must be present for the

model to be valid
 Single decision maker
 Certainty
 Immediacy of consequences

97
 Complex models of choice
• Most policy choice situations are complex
because the conditions for simple model of
choice may not hold, i.e.
There are many stakeholders
Outcomes of any choice are not certain
Outcomes of choice occur over long
periods of time

98
Illustration of 'complex' decision model

Probability
Option Likely Time before of Discount Present Expected

outcom monetary
e outcome occurrence factor value value

($000) (years)

A 75 6 0.8 0.5066 38.00 30.40

B 100 7 0.6 0.4523 45.23 27.14

C 90 4 0.9 0.6355 57.20 51.48

D 105 5 0.75 0.5674 59.58 44.68

Note: 12% has been assumed to the rate of interest for 99

discounting purpose
 Forms of rationality
• Technical rationality
• Economic rationality
• Legal rationality
• Social rationality
• Substantive rationality

100
 Technical rationality
Technical rationality is a characteristic of
reasoned choices that involve the
comparison of alternatives according to
their capacity to promote effective
solutions for public problems. Example:
choices between solar and nuclear energy
technologies

101
 Economic rationality
Economic rationality is a characteristic of
choices that involve the comparison of
alternatives according to their capacity to
promote efficient solutions for public
problems, in terms of their respective
costs and benefits.

102
 Legal rationality
Legal rationality is a characteristic of
choices that involve the comparison of
alternatives according to their legal
conformity to established rules and
precedents.

103
 Social rationality
Social rationality involves comparison of
alternatives according to their capacity to
maintain or improve valued social
institutions, that is promote
institutionalization.

104
 Substantive rationality
Substantive rationality is a characteristic of
choices that involve the comparison of
multiple form of rationality – technical,
economic, legal, social – in order to make
the most appropriate choice under given
circumstances.

105
 Criteria for policy
recommendation
Decision criteria are stated values that
underlie recommendation for action.
These include:
• Effectiveness – achievement of objectives
• Efficiency – maximizing benefit/cost ratio
• Adequacy – extent to which problem is
resolved

106
• Equity – distribution of costs and benefits
• Responsiveness – satisfaction of needs
• Appropriateness – value or worth of
desired outcomes

107
Approaches to recommendation
Two most important approaches are:

• Cost-benefit analysis

• Cost effectiveness analysis

108
 Cost-benefit (CB) analysis
• CB analysis seeks to measure all costs
and benefits to society
• CB analysis is based on economic
rationality
• Social cost benefit analysis is a broader
measure than market based CB analysis

109
 Cost-effectiveness (CE)
analysis
An approach to policy recommendation that
permits analysts to compare and advocate
policies by quantifying their total costs and
effects.
 CE is more easily applied that CB
 CE is based on technical rationality
 CE is less dependent on the logic of profit
maximization in private sector
 CE is well suited to analysis of externalities
and intangibles
110
 Tasks in cost benefit and cost-
effectiveness analyses
• Problem structuring
• Specification of objectives
• Specification of alternatives
• Information search, analysis, and
interpretation
• Identification of target groups and
beneficiaries
• Estimation of cost and benefits
111
 Tasks in CB and CEA
• Discounting of costs and benefits
• Estimation of risk and uncertainty
• Choice of decision criterion
• Recommendation

112
Conditions for successful policy
implementation
• Clear and consistent objectives
• Specification of target groups, their needs,
expectations and benefits
• Compliance from implementing agents
• Adequate financial resources

113
Conditions for successful policy
implementation (continued)
• Competent and committed leaders and top
managers
• Ongoing support from constituency groups
and key stakeholders
• Supportive stable socio-economic and
political conditions
• Well articulated organizational and
institutional infrastructure
114
Reasons why some policies fail
 Lack of involvement of local groups
 Respective roles and responsibilities not
well defined
 Lack of ‘ownership’/ commitment by key
stakeholders
 Absence of accountability
 Change of government, which may bring
new set of priorities
115
 Failure to effectively communicate
information about the policy/project
 Unrealistic targets
 Inaccurate information about the policy
 Corruption
 Legal hurdles
 Backward cultural practices
 Poor assessment of development needs
 Poor infrastructure
116
 Monitoring observed policy
outcomes
• Four functions of monitoring
 Compliance
 Auditing
 Accounting
 Explanation

117
 Compliance

Monitoring helps determine whether the

actions of program administrators, staff,
and other stakeholders are in compliance
with standards and procedures imposed
by legislators, regulatory agencies, and
professional bodies

118
 Auditing

Monitoring helps determine whether

resources and services intended for
certain target groups and beneficiaries
(individuals, families, municipalities,
regions, local governments) have actually
reached them.

119
 Accounting

Monitoring produces information that is

helpful in accounting for social and
economic changes that follow the
implementation of broad sets of public
policies and programs over time

120
 Explanation

Monitoring also yields information that

helps to explain why the outcomes of
public policies and programs may differ
from those expected.

121
General framework for monitoring
Policy Policy
Policy Policy
outputs impacts
inputs processes Access

Side effects
Preconditions Unforeseen and spillovers
events 122
 Types of policy outcomes
• Policy outputs – goods, services, or
resources received by target groups and
beneficiaries
• Policy impacts – actual changes in
conditions, behaviour or attitudes that
result from outputs

123
 Types of policy actions
• Regulatory actions – those designed to
ensure compliance with certain standards
or procedures
• Allocative actions – those which require
inputs of money, time, personnel and
equipment

124
 Policy processes
Policy processes – administrative,
organizational and political activities and
attitudes that shape transformation of
policy inputs into policy outputs and
impacts

125
 Inputs
• Resources (human, material, financial)
• Information (e.g. Implementation
guidelines, other policies that may have an
effect of policy being implemented)

126
 Monitoring indicators
• An indicator is a characteristic or attribute
that can be measured
• It can be defined in a ‘conceptual’ and
‘operational’ statement. The latter is more
useful.
• Operational definitions help specify
indicators of input, process, output, and
impact variables
• Rarely will one indicator be adequate to
measure performance. Several indicators
will usually be required
127
 Discussion Topic – High
Morbidity Rate
Discuss and evaluate (on the basis of
effectiveness, cost, responsiveness
criteria) the following three policy
actions aimed at reducing high morbidity
rates.
(a)Sensitize the public on healthy living
(proper diet and regular exercise)
(b)Strengthen preventive health services
(c) Provide more curative health services
Using an appropriate scoring scheme,
rank the three options
128
 Approaches to monitoring
• Social systems accounting
• Social experimentation
• Social auditing
• Research and practice synthesis

129
 Social systems accounting
• An approach that permits analysts to
monitor changes in objective and
subjective conditions over time
• Uses social indicators e.g in health, public
safety, education, employment, income,
housing, population, governance, social
values and attitudes, environment etc

130
 Social experimentation

Process of systematically manipulating policy

actions in a way that permits more or less
precise answers to questions about the sources
of change in policy outcomes. Two approaches
may be adopted, namely, comparing
(a) situation ‘before’ and situation ‘after’
implementation of the policy; and
(b) Situation ‘with’ and situation ‘without’ policy
implementation

131
 Social auditing
Explicitly monitors relationships among
inputs, processes, outputs and impacts in
an effort to trace policy inputs “from the
point at which they are disbursed to the
point at which they are experienced by the
by ultimate intended recipient of those
resources”

132
 Research and practice
synthesis
• Involves the systematic compilation,
comparison, and assessment of the
results of past efforts to implement public
policies.
• Two primary sources of information: case
studies; and research reports that address
relationships among policy actions and
outcomes.

133
 Group discussion task
Consider the National Public Health
Service Delivery System. Identify:
(a)5 key inputs/resources
(b)5 appropriate processes
(c)3 important outputs
(d)3 important impacts
(e)2 monitoring indicators for each of the
inputs, processes, outputs, and
impacts
134
Evaluating policy performance
Assessing the performance of past
policies based on the extent to which they
achieved desired objectives and outcomes

135
 Characteristics of evaluation
• Value focus – judgment about the worth or
value of policies and programs
• Fact-value interdependence – assesses
both the values and the facts
• Present and past orientation – rather than
future (i.e. it is retrospective)
• Value duality – both as ends and means,
e.g. health

136
 Functions of evaluation
• Provides info about policy performance
• Contributes to clarification and critique of
values that underlie selection of goals and
objectives
• May contribute to application of other
policy analytic methods, including problem
structuring and recommendation

137
 Criteria for policy evaluation
• Effectiveness – achievement of objectives
• Efficiency – level of effort/cost was
involved
• Adequacy – extent to which problem
resolved

138
 Criteria for policy evaluation
• Equity – distribution of costs and benefits
• Responsiveness – satisfaction of needs
• Appropriateness – Are desired outcomes
(objectives) valuable or worthy?

139
 Multi-attribute utility analysis
technique of evaluation
• Stakeholder identification
• Specification of policy outcomes
• Identification of attributes of outcomes
• Determination of value/utility attached to
each attribute by each stakeholder

140
 Multi-attribute analysis
technique of evaluation
(continued)
• Calculation of total value/utility for each
stakeholder
• Determination of combined utility/welfare
• Evaluation and presentation

141
 Developing policy arguments
• Structure of policy arguments – elements
 Information
 Claim
 Warrant
 Backing
 Rebuttal
 Qualifier

142
 Information
• Policy relevant information (I) is the starting
point of policy arguments. An example of
policy relevant information is the following
statement: “A leading expert concludes that
the main cause of inflation is excessive
government spending”

143
 Claim
• A policy claim, C, is the conclusion of a
policy argument. The movement from
policy information to claim implies
‘therefore”. Some policy claims are
normative (e.g. government should reduce
its spending); others are descriptive (e.g.
the use of internet will double in five years)

144
 Warrant
• The warrant (W) of a claim answers the
question Why? with a reason, assumption,
or argument. W attempts to justify the
movement from I to C.

145
 Backing
• The backing B of a warrant also answers
the Why? with a more general reason,
assumption, or argument that Backing
justifies the warrant when its plausibility is
in question.

146
 Rebuttal
• The rebuttal is a reason, assumption, or
argument put forth by another stakeholder
to challenge the information, warrant, or
backing of the original argument.

147
 Qualifier
• Qualifier Q expresses the force of the
argument by stating the circumstance in
which the claim C is true or plausible.

148
 Modes of policy argument
• Authoritative mode
• Argument based on methodology used to
arrive at a conclusion or policy claim
• Argument based on generalization e.g.
statistical inference
• Argument based on cause-and-effect
relationships
• Argument based on analogy
• Argument based on ethical considerations
149
Increasing citizens’ access to the
policy making process
• Appropriate institutional arrangements
 Decentralize most government functions
 Flow of information from grassroots
upwards

150
Increasing citizens’ access to the
policy making process
• Strategies
 Sensitization and training about respective
roles and responsibilities of ministers,
permanent secretaries, politicians etc
 Opportunity for all parties affected to make
inputs into policy making process

151
 Increasing citizens’ access to the
policy making process
• Strategies (continued)
 Publicity through e.g. radio, TV. Brochures
etc.
 Exposure to other countries’ experience
 Issuance of guidelines and performance
standards by Central Government
 Monitoring, guidance and advice
 Effective participation by citizens in the
political process
 Specific inclusion of particular groups
152
Organizational and institutional setup
for policy analysis and management

• Need for a clear definition of

organizational roles
• Need for central organizational and
institutional coordination for analysis,
monitoring and evaluating policies
• Coordinating policy management activities

153
 Organizational and institutional
setup for policy analysis and
management
• Coordination among line ministries
• Efficient channels of communication
• Matching authority with requisite power
• Establishment of a policy advisory body at
the level of the president or head of
government

154
 Organizational and institutional
setup for policy analysis and
management
• Establishment of policy analysis units,
planning and research units within
ministries
• Encouragement of policy research by non-
governmental “Think–Tanks”, research
institutions and universities

155
 Enhancing policy analysis
capacity
• Strengthen central policy analysis bodies
• Improve the climate for policy debate
• Improve skills for policy analysis
• Diversify source of independent advice

156
Enhancing policy analysis capacity
• External assistance should be welcome,
notwithstanding strings attached
• Systematic and structured involvement of
public opinion in policy making

157
 Enhancing policy analysis capacity

• High level seminars, workshops, seminars,

conferences for both political and
administrative leaders
• Incorporate formal training in policy
analysis in university training and in
management training institutions
• Encourage inter-disciplinary policy
research and its utilization

158