The Science of Public Policy, Research Paper Example

Introduction

In part II of the policy process, the following stages are involved Evaluation, analysis and revision stage, each of the stage is essential in ensuring the success of the policy formed depending with area of application (Hays 2001). For the case of health sector, The significance of any form of health research deployment in the topic- policy making process and knowing the principle behind the process is on increasing demand. In the recent past there has been an increasing number calls for resources to promote health standards in third world countries, the universal procedure for accountability, develop  a great sense of  interest  to a topic based research as an aspect of policy making process(Daniels & Martin2003). Major elemental topics have been discussed in the past, but the yielding pressure on health research structures generate more topics hence the policy process should come up with policies that would ultimately result in the expected outcome plus other associated gains in health. The entire topic-policy formation process is a structural procedure with various stages which should be adequately put in consideration in order to generate policies that are realistic and workable in a variety of working environment leave alone health by so doing it aids in the formation of comprehensive account of the assorted sense of research. The levels of policy formation from a mere topic can be grouped mainly into; Evaluation stage, analysis stage, revision stage of which of these stages have methodological approach used in a coming up with the specified public policy

Evaluation stage

In the context of health politics and policy, the public centre of interest lies in health improvement of which any policy strives to accomplish. During evaluation much of sacrifice in terms of skills and interest ought to be directed towards the topic at hand in regard to the impact of public health action   to be taken. Nowadays, due to complexity of the society emergency complicated disease, the entire task of evaluation is becoming a more and more complicated task as well. Due this a frame work for program evaluation has been developed to accommodate the complicated transition being witnessed in public health, of which it ensures that the evaluation process is accountable and committed in obtaining a quantifiable health outcomes. Through incorporation of a framework of evaluation in the policy formation process, it is possible to stimulate topics that are directed towards improvements and at the same time be in a better position to formulate policies.  (Hays 2001).   More resourceful and appropriate topics necessitate formation of good policies and translating them into practices. Directed by the steps undertaken and stipulated standards in the evaluation frame work, the essential approach to policy formation will be evolved. Results from evaluations of the topic at hand in relation to policy formation will result in policies that are clearer and logical. In case this step is done in partnership ,then there is need of a comprehensive evaluation of the subject to achieve a common goal, use of incorporated data models or systems are likely  to support  more systematic measurement of which will ensure positive changes in the public health strategies

The evaluation stage in policy process provides a feedback structure to policy makers and other participants in the policy process and implementation of the same. In most cases when the evaluation of the real policy it is of significance to make relevant changes and modify several parts of the policy that might not assist in achieving the goal for which its purpose is for.  For example, modifications may be necessary to give chance to additional protection to the benefits in operation, since some individual will have a negative attitude towards the new policy and hence they will demand some modifications to be made on it. Monitoring is an aspect of evaluation hence the objectives set earlier will be shortchanged or moved in relation to the positivity or negativity of its effect (Daniels & Martin2003).

Analysis stage

Analysis comes after evaluation and it involves determination of which of the several topics (alternatives) is likely to a achieve set of objectives in very short time between the policy and the initial topic. However, the analysis stage of any policy making process can be classified into two major groups. It can either be analytical and descriptive which tries to explain policies and how they developed from the topics or it can be prescriptive in nature whereby it formulates policies and proposal. In analysis, interest and the goal of analysis influences the kind of analysis to be done. Combining policy analysis and topic evaluation develops the policy process (Miyakawa, 2000). In most cases analysis of policy is carried out in the public sector but it relatively the same in other types of organization leave alone the health institution

In deed there are various ways of policy analysis, but the three commonly used approaches include:

• Anal centric
• The policy process
• Meta-approach

In the case of analycentric method, the analyzer base on the problems facing individuals and there respective solution, though the approach covers a small scale, the challenge existing is usually interpreted is technological in nature. The main objective of using this approach is to recognize the most helpful   and resourceful solution in technical and economic terms

The policy process approach relies on the procedural political process and concerned stakeholders; it ranges in the meso-level and has a political nature form of problem interpretation, it chief aim is to determine which procedure and the way to be used in the process by so doing it explains the essence and power of stakeholders in the entire policy process (Miyakawa, 2000). Hence through inter-changing of comparative power and the manipulation of particular groups, resolution to problems can be also be made.

The meta-policy approach goes hand in hand with the context approach, it lies within the macro-scale and it has a structural nature  form of problem  interpretation .Through this approach the background aspects of the policy process such as socio-cultural, economic and political elements can be well explained and a solution on to the same be made, Just like other stages of the policy process, policy analysis is usually carried out in a methodological approach this can be done using qualitative and other quantitative methods which are broad in nature and in most cases they include case studies , researches carried out in surveys and other statistical analysis practices not forgetting  development of a model . The method chosen should be able to identify each and every alternative, carry out evaluation and give the appropriate recommendations to the findings. The models involved in this process include; institutional model, process model, rationale model

Revision stage

After policy analysis stage and various short coming have been realized it is essential to revise all parts of the evaluation process, the part to be revised can be easily noticed from the structured feedback in the process (Daniels & Martin2003). The main aim of the revision stage is minimize mistakes that had earlier occurred in the policy process. Well carried out revising stage ensures that the main goal of the policy is achievable.

The purpose and methodologies process for evaluating and revising

The methodological evaluation structured in part II of the policy process, delivers a well structured procedural system of a case in management. Through application of theory-model based systems, it is possible to prepare checklists to explain the element of a good-quality management system. Also by integrating multiple values frames, products placed within the checklist will define the logic expected for a reliable management system as agreed by the other stakeholders within the group (Miyakawa , 2000). A policy is not any individual issue, it affects the mass. In the policy process the approach take in the evaluation and analyzing determines the success of the policy.

In conclusion, policy formation process is a gradual process which has a specific structure despite which policy is being formed, generally the second policy process is a continuation of the first policy formation stage and each stages should be effective carried out so that the conclusions made are relevant and appropriate in formation of good policies(Daniels & Martin2003). In medicine this policies should improve the health standards and the health services delivered to the patients of affected patients. The policies should try to be specific to the nature of topic it wants to handle since general policies might not hold that weight during implementation.

Reference

Allen Hays (2001): Who speaks for the poor: national interest groups and social policy? Publisher Taylor & Francis

Tadao Miyakawa (2000): The Science of Public Policy: Policy process, part II, Publisher Routledge

Stephen Daniels, Joanne Martin (2003): Civil juries and the politics of reform, Publisher Northwestern University Press,