Policy analysis or public policy analysis is a technique used in the public administration sub-field of political science to enable civil servants, nonprofit organizations, and others to examine and evaluate the available options to implement the goals of laws and elected officials. People who regularly use policy analysis in their work, particularly those who use it as a major part of their job duties are generally known by the title policy analyst. The process is also used in the administration of large organizations with complex policies. It has been defined as the process of "determining which of various policies will achieve a given set of goals in light of the relations between the policies and the goals."Compare:

Policy analysis can be divided into two major fields:

Analysis existing policy, which is analytical and descriptive – it attempts to explain policies and their development Analysis new policy, which is prescriptive – it is involved with formulating policies and proposals (for example: to improve social welfare) One definition states that:

Another definition considers policy analysis as a method employed in the administration of the state to empower civil servants, activists, etc. for identifying, analyzing and scrutinizing the available alternatives to execute the agenda of laws and elected officials. This makes policy analysis both a process for public and the private sector.

The purpose and area of interest determine the type of analysis conducted. A combination of two kinds of policy analyses together with program evaluation is defined as policy studies. Policy analysis is frequently deployed in the public sector, but is equally applicable elsewhere, such as nonprofit organizations and non-governmental organizations. Policy analysis has its roots in systems analysis, an approach used by United States Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara in the 1960s.

Approaches Various approaches to policy analysis exist. The analysis for policy (and analysis of policy) is the central approach in social science and educational policy studies. It is linked to two different traditions of policy analysis and research frameworks. The approach of analysis for policy refers to research conducted for actual policy development, often commissioned by policymakers inside the bureaucracy (e.g. civil servants) within which the policy is developed. Analysis of policy is more of an academic exercise, conducted by academic researchers, professors and think tank researchers, who are often seeking to understand why a particular policy was developed at a particular time and assess the effects, intended or otherwise, of that policy when it was implemented.Khorsandi Taskoh, Ali. A Critical Policy Analysis of Internationalization in Postsecondary Education: An Ontario Case Study, The University of Western Ontario, October 24, 2014.

There are three approaches that can be distinguished: the analysis-centric, the policy process, and the meta-policy approach.

Analysis-centric The analysis-centric (or "analycentric") approach focuses on individual problems and their solutions. Its scope is the micro-scale and its problem interpretation or problem resolution usually involves a technical solution. The primary aim is to identify the most effective and efficient solution in technical and economic terms (e.g. the most efficient allocation of resources).

Policy process

The policy process approach puts its focal point onto political processes and involved stakeholders; its scope is the broader meso-scale and it interprets problems using a political lens (i.e., the interests and goals of elected officials). It aims at determining what processes, means and policy instruments (e.g., regulation, legislation, subsidy) are used. As well, it tries to explain the role and influence of stakeholders within the policy process. Stakeholders are broadly defined to include citizens, community groups, non-governmental organizations, businesses and even opposing political parties. By changing the relative power and influence of certain groups (e.g., enhancing public participation and consultation), solutions to problems may be identified that have more "buy in" from a wider group. One way of doing this follows a heuristic model called the policy cycle. In its simplest form, the policy cycle, which is often depicted visually as a loop or circle, starts with the identification of the problem, proceeds to an examination of the different policy tools that could be used to respond to that problem, then goes on to the implementation stage, in which one or more policies are put into practice (e.g., a new regulation or subsidy is set in place), and then finally, once the policy has been implemented and run for a certain period, the policy is evaluated. A number of different viewpoints can be used during evaluation, including looking at a policy's effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, value for money, outcomes or outputs.

Meta-policy The meta-policy approach is a systems and context approach; i.e., its scope is the macro-scale and its problem interpretation is usually of a structural nature. It aims at explaining the contextual factors of the policy process; i.e., what the political, economic and socio-cultural factors are that influence it. As problems may result because of structural factors (e.g., a certain economic system or political institution), solutions may entail changing the structure itself.

Methodology Policy analysis uses both qualitative methods and quantitative methods. Qualitative research includes case studies and interviews with community members. Quantitative research includes survey research, statistical analysis (also called data analysis) and model building. A common practice is to define the problem and evaluation criteria; identify and evaluate alternatives; and recommend a certain policy accordingly. Promotion of the best agendas are the product of careful "back-room" analysis of policies by assessment and ' evaluation.

Several methods used in policy analysis are: Cost–benefit analysis Management by objectives (MBO) Operations research Decision-making based on analytics Program evaluation and review technique (PERT) Critical path method (CPM).

Dimensions for analyzing policies There are six dimensions to policy analysis categorized as the effects and implementation of the policy across a period of time. Also collectively known as "Durability" of the policy, which means the capacity in content of the policy to produce visible

Effects Effectiveness What effects does the policy have on the targeted problem? Unintended effectsRychetnik et al., 2002 What are the unintended effects of this policy? EquityPotvin et al., 2008 What are the effects of this policy on different population groups?

Implementation Cost What is the financial cost of this policy? Feasibility Is the policy technically feasible? AcceptabilityPeters, 2002 Do the relevant policy stakeholders view the policy as acceptable?

The strategic effects dimensions can pose certain limitations due to data collection. However the analytical dimensions of effects directly influences acceptability. The degree of acceptability is based upon the plausible definitions of actors involved in feasibility. If the feasibility dimension is compromised, it will put the implementation at risk, which will entail additional costs. Finally, implementation dimensions collectively influence a policy's ability to produce results or impacts.

Five-E approach One model of policy analysis is the "five-E approach", which consists of examining a policy in terms of: Effectiveness How well does it work (or how well will it be predicted to work)? Efficiency How much work does or will it entail? Are there significant costs associated with this solution, and are they worth it? Ethical considerations Is it ethically and morally sound? Are there unintended consequences? Evaluations of alternatives How good is it compared to other approaches? Have all the relevant other approaches been considered? Establishment of recommendations for positive change What can actually be implemented? Is it better to amend, replace, remove, or add a policy?

Framework Policies are often viewed as frameworks intended to optimize general well-being and are commonly analyzed by legislative bodies and lobbyists. Every policy analysis is intended to bring an evaluative outcome. A systemic policy analysis is meant for in depth study for addressing a social problem. Following are steps in a policy analysis: Defining the problem assessed by the policy. Assessing policy objectives and its target populations. Studying effects of the policy. Policy implications: distribution of resources, changes in services rights and statuses, tangible benefits. Alternative policies: surveying existing and possible policy models that could have addressed the problem better or parts of it which could make it effective.

Evidence-based models Many models exist to analyze the development and implementation of public policy. Analysts use these models to identify important aspects of policy, as well as explain and predict policy and its consequences. Each of these models are based upon the types of policies.

Types Government (e.g. federal, provincial, municipal) Policies adopted within public institutions (e.g. hospitals, child care centers, schools) Workplace (e.g. policies that govern employees and employee-manager relations)Kim Bergeron, Florence Morestin et al.

Governments

Public policy is determined by a range of political institutions, which give policy legitimacy to policy measures. In general, the government applies policy to all citizens and monopolizes the use of force in applying or implementing policy (through government control of law enforcement, court systems, imprisonment and armed forces). The legislature, executive and judicial branches of government are examples of institutions that give policy legitimacy. Many countries also have independent, quasi-independent or arm's length bodies which, while funded by government, are independent from elected officials and political leaders. These organizations may include government commissions, tribunals, regulatory agencies and electoral commissions.

Process model

Policy creation is a process that typically follows a sequence of steps or stages: Identification of a problem (also called "problem definition") and demand for government action. Different stakeholders may define the same issue as different problems. For example, if homeless people are using illegal drugs such as heroin in a city park, some stakeholders may define this as a law enforcement issue (which, in their view, could be best solved if police presence in the park is stepped up and if the individuals using illegal drugs are arrested and punished); on the other hand, other stakeholders may view this as a poverty and public health issue (which, in their view, could be best solved if public health nurses and government medical doctors and substance abuse counsellors were sent to the park to do outreach with the drug-using individuals, and encourage them to voluntarily enter "detoxification" or rehabilitation programs). Agenda setting Formulation of policy proposals by various parties (e.g., citizen groups, congressional committees, think tanks, interest groups, lobby groups, non-governmental organizations). Policy selection/adoption and legal enactment of a selected policy by elected officials and/or houses of representatives. At this stage, policy legitimation is conferred upon the selected policy solution(s). Policy implementation, which involves civil servants putting the selected policy option into practice. Depending on the choice made by the executive or legislative branch, this could involve creating new regulation (or removing existing regulations), creating new laws, creating a new government program or service, creating a new subsidy or grant, etc.