Enhancing ABM into an Inevitable Tool for Policy Analysis
bination of internal intentions , natural impulses , and / or external factors that make modeling behavior complex .
In the first step the policy analyst verifies , defines , and details the given problem by characterizing the social context in which the problem is embedded and identifying the independent variables that affect policy outcomes . The identification of the problem source and the independent variables is a major milestone in policy analysis because the objective of the problem owner is often either not clear or appears to be in conflict . In fact , most often , different actors view the problem in their own perspective . It is the role of the analysts to understand the positions and influence of various stakeholders and choose the definition that the problem owner / decision maker has control on ( Patton and Sawicki 1993 ). Clarification of the problem takes place with consultation , brainstorming , narratives , and scientific research . Often , the problem is redefined many times during the process of analysis . In the second phase , the policy analyst identifies the criteria that show when the problem is solved or a goal is accomplished . The analyst aims to select those criteria that are central to the problem and most relevant to the decision makers in the implementation process ( Patton and Sawicki 1993 ). This also facilitates the comparison between policy alternatives . During comparison , new criteria may also be identified .
Once the analyst knows the values , objectives , and goals of the stakeholders and the evaluation criteria for judging policies , he can generate alternative policies ( Patton and Sawicki 1993 ) . The list of possible alternatives is usually long since there are many variations and combinations for the policies . Benchmarking and past experience are common approaches for identifying policy alternatives ( Scharpf 1997 ; Patton and Sawicki 1993 ).
Among policy alternatives , the most appropriate options are selected using the already defined evaluation criteria . The alternatives are compared based on the potential effects and their chain of causation . Since not every policy can be tested with the same method , analysts have access to various methods ( e . g ., cost – benefit analysis , programming , institutional analysis , and quantitative analysis ) to evaluate different policies . It is important to identify economically , technically , and politically feasible alternatives . This is where many institutional analysis theories and frameworks ( i . e ., IAD ( Ostrom 2005 ), Actor Centred Institutionalism ( Scharpf 1997 )) are frequently applied . Furthermore , it is important to clarify the distinction between possible policies and to be able to display them to the problem owners . Consultation commonly takes place to increase the efficiency and transparency of policy implementation ( Althaus , Bridgman , and Davis 2007 ).
The final phase of policy analysis is the monitoring , maintenance , and evaluation of the implemented policy . In most instances , the analyst develops implementation guidelines and procedures rather than being involved directly in the implementation of the selected policy . It is important for the analyst to know whether a failed policy could not be implemented as designed or the policy did not produce the desired results because the underlying theory was incorrect ( Patton and Sawicki 1993 ). Therefore , policy analysts are highly involved in the postevaluation of implemented policies . In general , this phase is about monitoring the use of inputs and the achievement of outputs , and evaluating the direct effects and long-term impacts of the policy .
In the next section , we discuss what kind of requirements the different steps of the process put forward for policy analysis tools .
63