In Virginia, major differences between revenue forecasts and actual revenue collections raised questions from legislators about the adequacy of the state's econometric forecasting models and the forecasting process itself. Consequently, Virginia's process and models were examined by the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC), a legislative watchdog agency. The review found most of the differences could be attributed to declining economic factors and not poor forecasting. However, a surprisingly large component of the forecast was based on undocumented judgmental inputs that required greater oversight. Other states in similar circumstances may wish to evaluate their own forecasting process and econometric models using the JLARC approach.
In the face of a national movement for environmental justice, the Virgnia General Assembly directed its legislative oversight agency in 1993 to study practices related to the siting, monitoring, and cleanup of solid waste facilities, specifically focusing on the impact of these activities on minority communities. The key issue raised by the assembly's mandate was whether a pattern of racial discrimination had developed in the process for siting and monitoring solid waste management facilities that disproportionately exposes minorities to certain health risks. Although the study found no evidence of an intent to discriminate against minoricies, the analysis revealed that in some cases, siting and monitoring practices have had a disproportionate impact on minority communities.The report resulting from this legislative mandate includes a number of significant findings related to the impact of solid waste management facilities on minority communities. Here we focus less on presenting these issues than on describing the structured use of multiple and disparate analytical techniques to develop a cogent and clarifying representation of these issues to a legislative body concerned with making appropriate choices in the future. We view the formal and focused use of quantitative and qualitative techniques from various disciplines as convergent policy analysis. This approach to analysis emphasizes the importance of designing policy studies and program evaluations in a fashion that allows for using results from disparate techniques such that they converge on similar policy solutions. This approach allows for the generation of preponderant evidence in support of a particular social outcome or policy recommendation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.