Public Policy Design: How to Learn From Failures

Coletti, Paola

doi:10.1515/wps-2015-0008

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The success of public sector innovation encourages various organizations to replicate these successes in order to resolve public issues in a different region (Coletti 2015). The findings in this research are in line with prior findings which state that dissemination is the most effective mechanism for replicating public sector innovations.…”

Section: Strategy For Replicating Public Sector Innovation In Indonesiasupporting

confidence: 87%

Untitled

2019

VPA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research attempts to analyse the determining factors of successful innovations and formulate a strategy for replicating public service innovation. It also aims to fill the gap in research regarding the public sector innovation that is required to create sustainable, innovative services, and to develop a better understanding of how innovation develops in the public sector. In this study, the desk review method was used with data of the public services available in Indonesia to analyse the determinants of service innovations in the public sector. Additionally, interviews and Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) were

show abstract

Section: Strategy For Replicating Public Sector Innovation In Indonesiasupporting

confidence: 87%

Untitled

2019

VPA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This tool was called (and is still called today) the standard cost model (SCM). The Dutch had started using metrics in a different direction: by setting departmental targets for the reduction of administrative burdens via the SCM (Coletti, 2013).…”

Section: Regulatory Indicators In the Eumentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The fact that intellectually the SCM reached an impasse (Helm, 2006) did not stand in the way of substantial political endorsement by several Ministers. Additionally the language of red tape was perceived as an efficient way to communicate with the business community (Coletti, 2013).…”

Section: Regulatory Indicators In the Eumentioning

confidence: 99%

Regulatory indicators in the European Union and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development: Performance assessment, organizational processes, and learning

Radaelli

2018

Public Policy and Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has produced four waves of regulatory management indicators. By contrast, the European Union has never adopted a common system of indicators, although it is much more integrated and less heterogeneous than the OECD. This cannot be explained by the different propensity for performance measurement: the European Union has agreed on policy metrics in economic and social policy areas, and regulation is a fundamental tool for this organization. Although structural variables matter, to answer questions about adoption (Yes/No), timing (when) and content of indicators (what type of indicators) we need the additional aid of policy learning and empirical observations on organizational processes. We find that the OECD process was one of self-directed learning fuelled by high socialization, internal validation of knowledge, favorable attitudes and posture of the secretariat, and mutually constitutive roles of delegates and staff. For the European Union we find the reverse. These findings contribute to the literature on policy learning, regulation, and global performance measurement.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, some argued that scientific evidence alone is not enough to improve public policy (Hammersley, 2013;Nelson, 2011). Some researchers have recognized the limitations of evidence; they have argued that a wider definition of evidence should be considered (Cariney, 2016;Colletti, 2013;Head, 2008).…”

Section: Wider Expertisementioning

confidence: 99%

Can Evidence-based Policy Contribute to Correcting Overreaction?—Considering Democracy and Rationalized Policy Making

Sugitani¹

2018

IRD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper focuses on evidence-based policy-making and democracy, along with political overreaction. In many countries, evidence-based policy-making is a prominent aspect of administration and aims to rationalize the policy-making process. Moreover, democracy is subject to many critiques nowadays because it cannot guarantee good public policy-making. Under such circumstances, some researchers have suggested that democracy should be limited, especially in public policy-making processes. There are many critiques of such arguments because they ignore the participation that is necessary for democracy. There is some hope that evidence-based policy-making can teach laypersons using evidence. However, evidence is too difficult to understand for many laypersons. In this paper, the author suggests limited participatory analysis to support evidence-based policy. In this system, only knowledge holders would be allowed to participate. If evidence-based policy meant that the formulation of policy relied only on narrower experts, it would not make a positive contribution. However, if evidence-based policy were to adopt a participatory policy-creation process, it would offer greater potential. PrefacesEvidence-based policy making is strong stream in many developed democratic states. It aims to rationalize policy processes and improve policy programs. According to the theories of evidence-based policy, political processes are not preferable because they distort the policy programs. Thus, promoting evidence-based policymaking means that it strengthens the experts and scientific knowledge in politics.Evidence-based policy concentrates on rationalizing policy process and public policy making. Therefore, it is said that evidence-based policy can contribute to correcting political overreaction because rationalization can deal with overreaction and irrationality. However, some researchers argue that evidence-based policy disregards the value of democracy and it harms participation by citizens. Indeed, theorists of evidence-based policy argue that politicians or administrations neglect the importance of evidence. According to such a perspective, participation is not preferable for good policy making. On the contrary, some researchers argue that in public policy making, we need to consider democracy and social value. These conflicts have a long history in public policy studies and analysis.However, these discussions are often carried out without "accountability". The concept of accountability is complex, but it is clear that accountability has a strong relation with citizens who are not bureaucrats. This concept suggests that public policy must maintain clarity regarding why a policy is upheld or ended. Despite this, practices and theories of evidence-based policy emphasize "what works", which relates to specific policy programs. They concentrate on improving policy programs. Thus, accountability to citizens has not been afforded due importance. Some researchers supporting evidence-based policy argue that evidence can correct the irrati...

show abstract

Public Policy Design: How to Learn From Failures

Cited by 3 publications

References 16 publications

Untitled

Untitled

Regulatory indicators in the European Union and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development: Performance assessment, organizational processes, and learning

Can Evidence-based Policy Contribute to Correcting Overreaction?—Considering Democracy and Rationalized Policy Making

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About