Gerontology is the science of age-related changes and persons throughout their lives. It includes the research of people’s body, cognitive, and social developments as they age and societal changes caused by elderly society. This understanding is then applied to policies and interventions. Gerontologists increase people’s standard of living and well-being as they get older by doing research, teaching, practicing, and using multidisciplinary expertise on the process of aging and the geriatric population. As a result, there are existing policies concerning the aging population implemented at the local, state or national levels. However, as the world changes, the people also develop new needs or face new issues on which the policies are guaranteed to operate. As a result, there is a necessity for policy analysis for further evaluation and validation. The procedure of gerontological policy analysis can be described in five words that constitute it: research, assessment, implications, ranking, and recommendations.
The first component of gerontological policy analysis that could be described in a word is research, which might be apparent since research is a starting point for multiple programs that involve decision-making. According to Bartels and Wittmayer (2020, p. 3), research “seeks to explicate ambitions, challenges, and practices involved with fostering policy changes and sustainability transitions.” The research comprises a review of the literature, a study of the present corpus of studies on the policy topic that can inform about existing policy variants. This type of analysis may help determine what is known collectively about policy alternatives and any inadequacies in current studies. The research must include a strategic, methodical collection of knowledge regarding incidents, patterns in the elderly population, and what you could face during the policymaking process.
The next component of analysis includes assessment, which is aimed to determine whether the policy is effective, efficient, and feasible. In the assessment, one should consider the health effect, which is especially important for the elderly, the cost, and the practicality of each choice (Martin, 2016). One may illustrate these three elements by determining how would each policy choice influence the geriatric population. The other good question is the backdrop for potential alternative policies, such as historical events, the economy, and policy discussion. From a fiscal standpoint, it should be known what the expenses and advantages of each policy issue are. When evaluating viability, it is critical to identify obstacles that would prohibit a program from being produced, approved, or implemented. A policy may be more practical in one place or at a particular period, but not in another. What is deemed inexpensive or socially acceptable may alter as the situation changes.
Next, it is essential to identify the implications of each policy or the particular one under analysis. For example, there is substantial debate on the efficacy of coordinated healthcare for the elderly (Moon, 2022). As indications of program efficacy, studies have employed reductions in admittance to medical centers, satisfaction with program aims via questionnaires, and cost savings. However, the literature reveals conflicting findings on the efficiency of the incorporated elderly care company (Moon, 2022). In turn, resource allocation, fundamental rights and status modifications, and actual advantages are vital to consider for appropriate analysis, and could be all implications. Researchers verify the content of the strategy from the part of consumers of the comprehensive care service in the local area and anticipate the government budget for each product to run it by assessing the types of policies and the makeup of the budget. This has policy implications for corporate operations as well as ramifications for long-term cash decisions.
The other element of each analysis is the ranking of policies that could be done after a substantial background on the needs of the elderly has been discovered. Then, it is possible to order them according to the criteria of health consequences, fiscal and economic impact, and practicality. Stakeholders can advise on how to proceed. Considering the rankings are always somewhat biased, it is helpful to record the reasoning care. The evaluation may show a clear winning sideline in certain cases—a policy that is practicable, has a significant, beneficial effect on the health, and is financially sustainable (Bandola-Gill et al., 2021). In other circumstances, rating the alternatives may be more complex and require weighing trade-offs.
Finally, the analyst should make recommendations for the various aspects of policies for the elderly. A policy suggestion is advice that someone should take some action to encourage a habit, such as adopting, giving counsel, starting a public education campaign, purchasing a product, or enacting legislation (Shimizu & L. Clark, 2019). This element is essential for determining the specifics of what can be done in practice. It is necessary to underline whether it is preferable to change, update, abolish, or add a policy.
To conclude, the gerontological policy analysis method may be summarized in five words, which include research, assessment, implications, ranking, and recommendations. One should conduct research and identify potential policy choices using a literature search and best practices surveys. Next, it is necessary to discuss possible policy solutions, including their health implications, cost-benefit, and practicality. After that, one assesses each policy choice based on its consequences, monetary and social impact, and viability, and then selects the one they believe is right for the elderly, making final recommendations.
References
Bandola-Gill, J., Grek, S., & Ronzani, M. (2021). Beyond winners and losers: Ranking visualizations as alignment devices in global public policy. Worlds of Rankings, 27–52.
Bartels, K. P. R., & Wittmayer, J. M. (2020). Action research in policy analysis: Critical and relational approaches to sustainability transitions (1st ed.). Routledge.
Martin, B. R. (2016). R&D policy instruments – a critical review of what we do and don’t know. Industry and Innovation, 23(2), 157–176.
Moon, B. (2022). Classification of program types and cost prediction of integrated care for the elderly. Frontiers in Public Health, 10.
Shimizu, M., & L. Clark, A. (2019). Conclusions, public policy recommendations and pathway forward. Nexus of Resilience and Public Policy in a Modern Risk Society, 137–145. Web.