Introduction
In Deborah Stone’s The Art of Political Decision-Making, the concept of policies as solutions highlights five primary factors, which are incentives, rules, persuasion, rights, and powers. Essentially, all of these components illustrate how varied approaches formulate or give shape to policies that address ongoing issues (Stone, 2012). Incentives encompass policies that dictate either rewards or punishment for certain behaviors or actions. Incentives are likely the most commonly used tactics within the sphere of policy as they are seen within the taxation system, which punishes tax avoidance but allows a tax credit for activities that are prioritized by the government. The incentive-based policy aims to establish community needs and encourage practices to be in accordance with the goals of the majority.
Discussion
Rules are referred to as guidelines that promote social goals. Most commonly observed as laws on a national scale, rules are negotiated, recorded, made available to the public, and enforced. Even social norms, which can be seen as unofficial rules, have been cited to either be the foundation or even the reason for some form of enforcement. Regulations similarly fall under the type of policy that is dictated by rules. While rules may seem to be similar to incentives, and they are often implemented simultaneously, rules are commands that come into force over time. The representation of facts or persuasion with the use of information is another form of policy that aims to reduce social issues. The use of persuasion within the policy is usually regarded as the implementation of rational reasoning and decision-making in informing legal regulations. However, due to the more ambiguous and less exact nature of persuasion, there is also the potential for rationality to be misrepresented. While the rational idea is supposed to be founded on empirical data and unbiased interpretations, in practice, the presentation of information has often been subject to manipulation.
Much of the political issues, especially in the U.S., can be discussed through the lens of rights. While universal human rights have been established, their integration into practice or even policy is often inadequate. Similarly, many rights even within the U.S. can be seen as being directly opposite. This is often seen in policy regarding welfare, with individuals or organizations on opposing sides of the ideology of rights arguing whether the right to resources is a substantial reason to provide welfare. As such, while many rights are recognized widely and are integrated into policy, many are not. Essentially, unlike rules and incentives, rights are also more politically vague, much like persuasion.
Power is a term Stone uses to reflect on the way authority is established within legal structures that provide decision-making processes for policies. Power is a requirement for governmental bodies to enforce certain policies, and as such, can indicate the reach of organizations in terms of decision-making. As such, the reform or introduction of policy is often due to defining which individuals or parties have more decision-making power. Successful utilization of powers within policy decision-making can be seen in outcomes that reflect public interests and welfare.
Pitfalls of Policy Analysis and Evaluation
Much like policies themselves, policy analysis and evaluation can be subjected to issues, pitfalls, or inadequacies. The primary cause is often the nature of political analysis in general, which has become more reliant on reason and rationale but continues to be subject to irrational, complex, and bound to biases. As such, these issues are often reflected in policy analysis that can occur through a manipulated perspective. Similarly, the removal of human elements and reliance on purely rational judgments also has the potential to skew policy away from the public interest. As such, there have been attempts to improve policy analysis pitfalls through compromise and middle ground.
Pitfalls can occur even within settings that attempt to reduce interference and irrelevant variables. However, a number of issues can occur during such evaluation. First, programs or policies may not meet the standards to be evaluable (Newcomer et al., 2015). Second, data collection may occur at a poorly selected time frame of the policy’s lifespan. Third, due to the size of a policy, it may be impossible to secure all relevant data. Fourth, the managers of programs or policies may not understand the implications of an evaluation. Fifth, devices, and equipment used in the evaluation may not be adequately tested to ensure high-quality data collection. Sixth, the study may not be able to find the relevant indicators of the effects of a policy. Seventh, data collectors may not be sufficiently prepared.
Conclusion
Policy evaluation and analysis pose challenges that can be foreseen prior to the implementation of the policy or its investigation. First, the process of evaluation requires quality control and can be prone to inaccuracies. Second, evaluators play a major role in the process, and both their selection and training may be inadequate. Third, the maintenance of ethics and practice standards is necessary in order to ensure that the analysis is useful. Fourth, the findings of the evaluation must be implemented in the improvement of the policy, and as such, they must be accurate. It is vital to implement regulations in order to address these challenges.
References
Newcomer, K.E., Hatry, H.P. & Wholey, J.S. (2015). Handbook of practical program evaluation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Stone. D. (2012). Policy paradox: The art of political decision making (3rd ed.). Norton & Company.