The paradox of policy analysis: If it is not used, why do we produce so much of it? (original) (raw)

Howlett, Michael, Seck L. Tan, Andrea Migone, Adam Wellstead, and Bryan Evans. “The Distribution of Analytical Techniques in Policy Advisory Systems: Policy Formulation and the Tools of Policy Appraisal.” Public Policy and Administration, March 24, 2014, 952076714524810.

The literature on policy analysis and policy advice has not generally explored differences in the analytical tasks and techniques practiced within government or between government-based and non-government-based analysts. A more complete picture of the roles played by policy analysts in policy appraisal is needed if the nature of contemporary into the provision of policy advice and policy work at the national and subnational levels in Canada, it explores the use of analytical techniques across departments and functional units of government and compares and assesses these uses with the techniques practiced by analysts in the private sector as well as among professional policy analysts located in non-governmental organizations. The data show that the nature and frequency of use of the analytical techniques used in policy formulation differs between these different sets of actors and also varies within venues of government by department and agency type. Nevertheless, some general patterns in the use of policy appraisal tools can be discerned, with all groups employing process-related tools more frequently than "substantive" content-related technical tools, reinforcing the procedural orientation of much contemporary policy work identified in earlier studies.

The distribution of analytical techniques in policy advisory systems: Policy formulation and the tools of policy appraisal

Public Policy and Administration, 2014

The literature on policy analysis and policy advice has not generally explored differences in the analytical tasks and techniques practiced within government or between government-based and non-government-based analysts. A more complete picture of the roles played by policy analysts in policy appraisal is needed if the nature of contemporary policy work and formulation activities is to be better understood. This article addresses both these gaps in the literature. Using data from a set of original surveys conducted in 2006–2013 into the provision of policy advice and policy work at the national and sub-national levels in Canada, it explores the use of analytical techniques across departments and functional units of government and compares and assesses these uses with the techniques practiced by analysts in the private sector as well as among professional policy analysts located in non-governmental organizations. The data show that the nature and frequency of use of the analytical te...

Policy formulation, policy advice and policy appraisal: the distribution of analytical tools

The Tools of Policy Formulation, 2015

At its heart, policy analysis is what Gill and Saunders (1992, pp. 6-7) have characterized as 'a method for structuring information and providing opportunities for the development of alternative choices for the policymaker'. An important part of the process of policy formulation, policy analysis involves policy appraisal: providing information or advice to policymakers concerning the relative advantages and disadvantages of alternative policy choices (Mushkin 1977; Wildavsky 1979; Sidney 2007; Howlett et al. 2009). Such advice comes from a variety of different actors operating in a wide range of venues both internal and external to government. And policy workers operating in these venues employ many different types of analytical techniques or 'policy formulation tools' in this effort (Mayer et al. 2004; Colebatch et al. 2011). These tools generally are designed to help evaluate current or past practices and aid decision making by clarifying or eliminating some of the many possible alternative courses of action mooted in the course of policy formulation. They play a significant role in structuring policy-making activity and in determining the content of policy outputs and thus policy outcomes (Sidney 2007) and are a worthy subject of investigation in their own right. Unfortunately, although many works have made recommendations and suggestions for how formulation should be conducted (Vining and Weimer 2010; Dunn 2004), very few works have studied how it is actually practiced, on the ground (Colebatch 2005 and 2006; Colebatch and Radin 2006; Noordegraaf 2011). This lack of knowledge is generally true of many of the tasks and activities involved in policy formulation (DeLeon 1992;

The Use of "Policy Analysis" to Improve the Quality of Policy-Making in Government and Non-Governmental Organizations

Quality of policy-making in this paper refers to the element of "rationality" which is in turn associated with the criteria of effectiveness and efficiency. The originality and value of this paper is related to the fact that this kind of rationality is missing in most public organizations in the Arab and Third World countries. This is evident in the scarcity of policy research and the paucity of training and education in policy analysis in these countries. Therefore, the paper aspires to show how the toolbox of policy analysis can be used to provide relevant information and design alternative policies to provide rational solutions normally addressed by governments, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) as well as private sector organizations. To that end, the paper attempts to show how the tools of the flourishing field of policy analysis can help policy makers design rational policies and programs and to evaluate their outcomes at different levels of government-local, national, and international levels. The major finding of the paper is that government, non-governmental organizations in Arab countries need to establish a professional job in their ranks to be intellectually grounded on policy sciences in order to provide advice to policy makers at different government levels on specialized policy issue areas-e.g. education, healthcare, energy, environment, privatization and monopoly.

Thomas E. James and Paul D. Jorgensen, "Policy Knowledge, Policy Formulation, and Change: Revisiting a Foundational Question." Policy Studies Journal 37:1 (2009), 141-162.

Policy Studies Journal, 2009

Understanding the influence of policy knowledge (analysis, evaluation) on policy change represents a long-standing quest in the policy sciences. Despite attempts of Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) scholars, the first to embark systematically on this quest, utilization and policy process literatures still run parallel. Through a critique of ACF and utilization studies, we argue that the inability of policy theory to include how and which information decision makers use is the foundational issue hindering efforts to link process and substance in policy theory. Situating utilization studies in the policy design approach offers an improvement in conceptualizing relationships between policy knowledge, process, and change.

Policy analysis and policy work in federal systems: Policy advice and its contribution to evidence-based policy-making in multi-level governance systems

Policy and Society, 2010

In most cases, policy scholars interested in the role of policy analysts in promoting and practicing evidence-based policy-making rely on very partial survey results, or on anecdotal case studies and interview research. Despite the existence of a large body of literature on policy analysis, large-scale empirical studies of the work of policy analysts are rare, and in the case of analysts working at the sub-national level, virtually non-existent. There has been very little research on this level of policy workers despite the significant powers they exercise in prominent federal systems such as the USA, Germany, Australia, Mexico, Russia, Brazil, Malaysia and Canada. This paper reports on the first comprehensive survey of the work of policy analysts at the provincial and territorial levels conducted in Canada in 2008-2009. It examines the background and training of provincial and territorial policy analysts, the types of techniques they employ in their jobs, and what they do in their work on a day-by-day basis. The resulting profile of sub-national policy analysts presented here reveals several substantial differences between analysts working for national governments and their sub-national counterparts, with important implications for policy training and practice, and for the ability of nations to improve their policy advice systems in order to better accomplish their long-term policy goals through the practice of evidence-based policy-making.