Introduction to policy analysis

1
Introduction to policy analysis

• What to think about when you want to examine the
  content and impact of a policy

2
Thinking about creating a new policy

• Definition of the Problem
• Cause of the problem identifying the causal
  chain
• Target Population
• Consequences of the Problem
• Ideology and its relationship to policy solutions
• Criteria for setting policy goals (generally
  derived from ideology/values).
• Gainers Losers (Political, Social, Monetary
  Gains)

3
Role of ideology

• Ideology is a set of assumptions about how the
  world works.
• Most of the time ideologies are not tested
  empirically. If they are tested and verified, we
  would call them theories.
• Ideologies are often associated with political
  parties.
• For example, policy decisions could be based on
  the following principles
• 1) Individual Responsibility
• 2) Social Responsibility, especially for
  people in need.
• A politician that adopts the Individual
  Responsibility approach might argue against new
  taxes and for reducing social programs.
• A politician that adopts the Social
  Responsibility approach might argue that new
  taxes are necessary to support programs for the
  poor.
• The Individual Responsibility approach is often
  used to argue against government intervention.
  Social Responsibility approach is often used to
  argue for more government programs.

4
Causal Chain
Limits on Involuntary Commitment Reductions in
mental health funding
People with mental illness
Fewer mental health institutions and outpatient
facilities
Increases in homeless-ness
More mentally ill people on the streets
5
MOST SOCIAL POLICY IS BASED ON THE RATIONAL OR
PROBLEM-SOLVING MODEL

• Problem identification
• Assessment
• Goal Setting
• Implementation
• Evaluation

6
Social Policy Analysts use a variety of methods
to choose among alternative goals or intervention
plans

• Review of the available theoretical and research
  literature to identify appropriate interventions
  that have been assessed as effective.
• Best practices disseminated by other agencies and
  planning groups.
• Decision trees
• Conceptual, visual, or mathematical models.
• Principle of Transitivity If A gt B and Bgt C,
  then A gt C.
• Cost benefit or cost effectiveness analysis.
• Analysis of the distributional impact of the plan
  (what groups will benefit or lose).

7
Gainers Losers

• Costs for Social Programs are seldom shared among
  different groups in society.
• Social Policies should have some benefits for the
  public at large, but may favor some groups over
  others.
• Policy analysts and social planners use the
  principle of pareto optimality in the
  decision-making process.
• The principle states that in all social programs,
  the gains should outweigh the costs of programs.
  In addition, the principle suggests that people
  who benefit disproportionally from a program
  should compensate the losers.
• However, some policy analysts believe that it is
  sufficient that policies and programs simply meet
  the standard of potential pareto optimality
  i.e. that rather than actually give compensation
  to the losers, a program or policy should be
  adopted if the people who benefit can potentially
  compensate the losers because their benefits are
  so large.

8
This principle is put into operation by
government agencies and businesses by conducting
cost-benefit or cost-effectiveness Analysis

• In cost-benefit analysis, the benefits of social
  policies should outweigh the costs. Policy
  analysts look at a number of different program
  outcomes and evaluate them in terms of costs and
  benefits.
• In cost-effectiveness analysis, policy analysts
  examine the costs of various policy options and
  their potential impacts. The lowest cost program
  that has the highest impact is the one chosen for
  implementation.
• Problems issues with these approaches costs are
  expressed in dollars. Some social costs and
  benefits can not be converted into dollars. For
  example, quality of life, mental health, or the
  beauty of a national park cannot be assigned
  dollar values.
• Also, the method may not take into account
  unexpected costs or side-effects of the program
  (externalities) and it may be difficult to
  estimate costs and benefits overtime.
• In addition, the method does not really help to
  identify how benefits should be distributed
  across different demographic or income groups.
  Distributional decisions are usually made
  (non-rationally) in the political process.

9
Distributional Effects in Cost-benefit Analysis
(adopted from Stokey Zeckhauser, 1978)
Benefits Costs Net Benefits
Project 1
Landlords 100,000 50,000 50,000
Tenants 30,000 40,000 -10,000
Whole Society 130,000 90,000 40,000
Project 2
Landlords 40,000 80,000 -40,000
Tenants 40,000 10,000 30,000
Whole Society 80,000 90,000 -10,000
10
In analyzing policies or proposing new ones, we
take into account judicial decisions.

• Three branches executive, legislative, judicial.
• Legislative branch passes laws executive
  (president, governor) may sign or veto laws and
  implements policy. Judiciary interprets laws and
  regulations.
• Standards used to interpret laws are inherent in
  the Bill of Rights and the Constitution.
• Does the law uphold individual and state rights
  identified in the Bill of Rights and the
  Constitution.
• Two layers of courts Federal and State.
• Federal judges are appointed (District and
  Supreme Court judges). U.S. Senate must confirm.
• State courts have a mix of appointed (by the
  governor) and elected judges.

11
Controversies about the judicial branch

• Judges are supposed to make impartial decisions.
• Might be difficult in cases in which judges are
  elected (they accept campaign donations)
• Since judges are appointed by politicians, the
  President or Governor may make appointments based
  on political ideology.
• Since judges are called upon to assess government
  policy, the person who appoints them might have a
  vested interest in appointing judges that will
  make decisions that support existing policies or
  government decisions. The legislative branch may
  refused to confirm judges that they feel are
  partisan or that have made previous decisions
  that run counter to a particular political
  partys ideology or vested interests.
• Judges do make decisions based on ideology. One
  philosophical approach is strict
  constructionism the belief that laws must be
  interpreted in a manner that is consistent with
  the intent of the founding fathers. Other judges
  believe that changes in social values and
  technology can be used to make new interpretation
  of rights granted in the constitution.

12
In deciding whether a law is Constitutional
Judges take into account

• Judicial precedent how have similar cases been
  decided by the court?
• Procedural rights due process do people have
  equal access to benefits, jobs, services, voting,
  and legal protections? For example, do people
  have the right to appeal government decisions?
• Have people been previously granted substantive
  rights by a piece of legislation that cant
  legally be withdrawn by government?
• Does the law violate any of the rights identified
  by the Bill of Rights. Difficulty in
  interpretation by the courts relates to
  implementation or procedures used to put the
  policy into operation. Another difficulty in
  interpretation involves understanding of what
  those rights actually mean. Courts have held that
  certain rules can be used to regulate the
  exercise of those rights. In some cases, the
  rights of some individuals can conflict with the
  rights of others. In addition, our understanding
  of rights can change over times due to
  differences in social values or changes in
  technology.

13
FRAMEWORK FOR UNDERSTANDING JUDICIAL DECISIONS
(FROM CANNON AS CITED IN CHAMBERS WEDEL,2005,
P. 38)

• Whether and in what way new judicial decisions
  negate earlier legislation.
• The degree to which earlier judicial precedents
  are altered.
• Determining what specific policy consequences
  follow from a judicial decisions.
• How new judicial decisions affect administrative
  discretion (it might alter how the policy is
  implemented courts can facilitate consent
  degrees when someone sues the government both
  parties must agree to abide by the decision).

14
When analyzing judicial impacts it should be
noted

• That since there are courts in each state and
  federal courts serve different regions of the
  country, different courts can make different
  decisions on similar issues.
• Most court decisions can be appealed except for
  matters that go to the U.S. Supreme Court.
• Even the Supreme Court may re-examine cases
  considered settled.
• Especially for laws affecting individual rights,
  new court cases can affect how the laws are
  interpreted and enforced. Consequently, some laws
  are constantly changing. This is called case
  law. Therefore, government agencies, private
  businesses, and nonprofit agencies need to keep
  updating their knowledge of these changes in
  order to be in legal compliance. This is
  particularly true about laws affecting the
  hiring, firing, and retention of staff.

15
More on policy analysis

• Analysts look at the current or potential impact
  of laws and policy.
• Analysts choose the criteria to be used for
  examining laws and policies.
• Often these criteria are based on value
  assumptions about how laws should work. The value
  assumptions are closely linked to ideology and
  political philosophy.
• Policy analysts use values such as equity,
  equality, adequacy, efficiency, and
  constitutional rights (freedom of speech, freedom
  of the press, etc). Effectiveness or the ability
  of a policy to produce the intended outcome is
  also a criteria. Policy analysts must also
  consider whether a policy outcome is feasible
  (economically, politically, or likely to receive
  public support).
• Policy analysts also try to determine
  externalities who or what is likely to be
  affected by unintended side effects of the
  policy.

16
Using the problem-solving (rational) model,
policy analysts choose among a number of
different options with different effects
17
ASPECTS OF POLICIES TO BE CONSIDERED WHEN
CHOOSING THE MOST APPROPRIATE POLICY (AS
DESCRIBED IN JANSSON)

• Mission or purpose
• Level of Government or Specific Agency that is
  responsible for policy implementation/oversight
• What type of organization should actually deliver
  the program (government, nonprofit, for-profit)?
• How should funding be delivered (for example,
  direct federal, or federal to state to agency)?
• How much money should be provided?
• What type of services should be delivered?
  Theoretical framework for service delivery?
• What type of staffing should be required?
• Should beneficiaries pay some of the costs of
  services.
• Should access to services to restricted or
  rationed?
• Should organizations serving similar clientele or
  offering the same programs be required to
  collaborate with one another.
• Should some administration practices be a
  condition for funding?
• Who should be responsible for monitoring the
  implementation of the program/policy?

18
Policy analysts may

• Consider options for a number of types of
  programs or
• Consider options for each of the policy/program
  components involved in implementation.
• Value criteria are used to choose among the
  options.
• The policy analyst can use mathematical models
  such as cost-benefit analysis, can establish a
  formula for ranking each item, or use research
  data, information on best practices, or previous
  program evaluations to choose among the various
  options.
• Questions to be addressed are whether the
  policies uphold the value criteria. Does the
  policy meet some of the criteria and not others.
  Which option meets most of the criteria?