Policy Analysis and Implementation Evaluation (I)

1
Policy Analysis and Implementation Evaluation (I)
2
Introduction

• Public administration is an activist part of
  government, the means via which government
  intervenes in the social, economic, and financial
  lives of the government. And, this intervention
  is done via public policy.
• Public policy is a course of action taken by
  government entities to address a particular
  issue(s). Objectives, target population, and
  means are embedded in that policy statement.
• Public administrators are the primary actors
  involved in the implementation of public policy.
  And, if the results of any public policy are not
  successful, then where could be the problem.in
  policy, implementation or both? This is called
  Policy Analysis and Implementation Evaluation.
• Policy Analysis can be prospective or
  retrospective.
• The traditional managerial, political and legal
  perspectives can be helpful in evaluating public
  policy.

3
The Growing Concern with Policy Analysis

• In the whole public policy formulation process,
  implementation is considered as Achilles heel.
  Objective understanding of any public policy is
  not possible.
• As public administration provides more services
  to people, it also engages in more extensive
  regulatory activities.
• Public administrative intervention in the
  economy, society and polity makes policy analysis
  more salient. The modern techniques of social
  sciences have solved this problem.

4
The Growing Concern with Policy Analysis

• Retrospective policy can be strengthened by a
  number of related administrative developments,
  which can include allocating budget for policy
  analysis after implementation or by allowing
  public access to information, developing program
  budgeting or by placing sunset clause.
• The outgrowth of policy formulation is the policy
  output which are made by public administrators
  (violation of politics-administration dichotomy).
  Policy impacts by contrast are concerned with
  performance or the achievement of stated
  objectives and the answer to this concern is
  elusive.

5
Impact Analysis

• Before the impact of policy can be ascertained,
  it is essential to identify the contents of that
  policy in operational terms, which is not always
  easy or possible.
• In principle, impact of all such policies can be
  evaluated but in practice, it becomes difficult
  to separate the impact of the policy from other
  factors.
• Impact analysis can be defined as being
  concerned with examining the extent to which a
  policy cause change in the intended direction.

6
Limited Opportunities of Experimentation

• One way to try to asses the impact of policy is
  via applying to one segment but not to the other
  composed of similar individuals. It is known as
  experimental design.
• Introducing control group can be very useful to
  ascertain causality in experimental analysis but
  there are hindrances in carrying it out in public
  administration.
• Problem of causality can also arise in
  preprogram-postprogram analysis, it can be
  overcome by establishing rate of change.

7
Limited Opportunities of Experimentation

• True experimental designs are not possible in
  public administration so quasi- experimental
  design could be a good alternative.
• Interpretation of results should be very
  cautious. Strong policy analysis must also
  consider long run.
• Policy analysis is still useful even if it does
  not create an impact.

8
Process Analysis and Implementation Studies

• Policy analysis should not focus only on impacts
  it can also be used to assess the process through
  which a policy is being implemented.
• Policy analysis concerns the way in which a
  particular policy or a program is implemented
  because implementation really affects the entire
  policy.
• Methods of implementation studies include case
  studies, historical analysis, observation and
  extensive interviewing.

9
Process Analysis and Implementation Studies

• Factors affecting implementation identified via
  studies include decision points, financial
  crunch, ambiguous objectives, lack or no
  competent staff, resistance to status quo or too
  much political interference.
• Implementation studies suggest that process
  analysis should be a step before impact analysis
  but usually this does not happen.