ALTERNATIVE POLICY ANALYSIS MODELS

Digest on Patton and Sawicki’s Model

The increasing complexity in society confronts us with more and more

difficult policy problems that are not easily solved. According to Patton and
Sawicki, although these problems may be “attacked” or “addressed”, often
they have no clearly correct answers, a the problems are always not well
defined, seldom purely technical or political, question on the effectively o the
offered solution, and the latter is seldom the best and the cheapest nor is it
always for the public good and can objectively measured. To Patton and
Sawicki, these are the simple methods of policy analysis and planning:

For Patton and Sawicki the six methods of policy analysis were
redefined. The first step involves not only defining the problem but also does
the interpretation and use of relevant data to properly set-out the objectives
and eliminate any ambiguity, thereby minimizing conflicting goals, and focus
on the critical factors as to directly address the issue.

This set to systematic procedure can be used to attack contemporary

problems. Those who may question such method may say that different
problems may be geographic or political, therefore it cannot be made to
apply, yet these process is an evolution of other models.

An early assessment is made as to whether the critical factors

considered were important or unusual and thus determine whether it can

1
C. Patton,et al (2016), Basic Methods of Policy Analysis and Planning, New York, USA
solve the problem. Gearing towards a more vivid plan and analysis, they
sought those parties that needed to be involved, as well as their powers and
thereby make a contingency plan on what resources shall be needed. It is
often called as the rational model in which the problem definition leads to the
identification and evaluation of alternative followed by policy implementation.

To Verify, Define and Detail the Problem dictates that often people do
consult other people and as a result, are confronted with a number of factors
of the problem and that the more that we delve in the problem, the more
aspects we find that needs to be evaluated. To define a problem and look for
a solution is a backward problem solving.

Thoroughly the solutions presented are evaluated by different factors

such as administrative ease, costs and benefits, effectiveness, equity, legality
and political acceptability. While the same considerations are taken in
assessing alternative policies but such the alternatives are put in a form other
than words to show their apparent differences.

The implementation of the policy should be monitored since a policy

may still require further modification because of the changing circumstances
upon which the policy was based.

The authors have incorporated ideas from a number of overlapping

descriptions of policy analysis with our own experiences to create the six-step
previously shown. These are major steps in the process, but each step could
be broken into smaller components, cross-referencing upon each step, thus:
 In the process, one must also learn to focus quickly on the central
decision criterion (or criteria) of the problem, think about the types of policy
actions that can be taken, avoid the toolbox approach to analyzing policy,
learn to deal with uncertainty, say it with numbers, make the analysis simple
and transparent, check the facts, learn to advocate the positions of others,
give the client analysis, not decisions., push the boundaries of analysis
beyond the "policy envelope”, and be aware that there is no such thing as an
absolutely correct, rational, and complete analysis.