UNIT

04 Identifying, Evaluation, Analyse and

Advise

Names of Sub-Units

Introduction, Frame the Problem, Policy Discourse Awareness

Overview
The unit begins by introducing the concept of identifying, evaluation, analyse and advise in public
policy. Further, it discusses about framing the problem. It also elaborates upon policy discourse
awareness.

Learning Objectives

In this unit, you will learn to:

 State the brief introduction regarding analysis, evaluation and advise to be made in public policy
 Explain how a problem has been framed and how the solution can be made
 Discuss policy discourse awareness

Learning Outcomes

At the end of this unit, you would:

 Elaborate the analysis, evaluation and advise to be made in public policy
 Analyse the problem framing
 Summarise policy discourse awareness
JGI JAIN
DEEMED-TO-BE UNIVERSIT Y
Leadership and Communication in Public Policy

Pre-Unit Preparatory Material

 https://www3.paho.org/english/ad/dpc/nc/cmn-po-bar-7-2-ana-pub-problems.pdf
 https://medium.com/design-sprint-academy/about-problem-framing-cb387025f58d

4.1 INTRODUCTION
Policy analysis refers to the entire process involved in identification of potential policy options that
could effectively solve the problem as well as compare them with the one that is the most feasible,
effective and efficient. It is useful for making sure that the chosen option is the best one for the situation.

Problem analysis is the first stage where problem definition/formulation takes place. Analyst’ policy
problem statement needs to be addressed in order to ascertain the reason for the problem’s concern
and its need to be rectified through the use of public policy as the potential reasons for the particular
problem. Solution analysis follows problem analysis as the criteria is elected and alternatives are
constructed and compared.

Possible policy options can be researched and identified by reviewing of research literature, surveying
best practices in order to know what the other communities are doing and conducting an environmental
scan. It is crucial to describe the possible policy options. It is also important to keep in mind the following
factors:
 who would be affected by each policy option, when and how much?
 the background for each of the policy options, such as environment, policy debate and political
history
 the benefits and costs that would imply in each of the policy option from the budgetary viewpoint

While trying to work out the feasibility of an option, it is worthwhile to identify any possible difficulties
that may prevent the development, enactment, or implementation of the policy. A policy may seem
more feasible at a given time and not at others. Situation might also change as well as the affordability
and public acceptability of something.

Results are then communicated based on the consideration of organisational constraints

(implementation analysis of whether the organisation would be able to put the programme or policy
in place successfully) and implementation and evaluation of the programme (expert analysis- use of
scientific and objective criteria; political and market accountability- citizen support/ opposition).

4.2 FRAME THE PROBLEM

Problem definition or framing is the first step for policy analysis. It provides the direction and structure
to the investigation process. The conceptualisation of the analysis may vary but framing the problem
is unanimously considered as the first research step across literature. The decisions adopted during
this step related to required information, interrelations, variables, criteria, models to be utilised for

2
UNIT 04: Identifying, Evaluation, Analyse and Advise JGI JAIN
DEEMED-TO-BE UNIVERSIT Y

evaluation and forecasting of solutions and values underlying the problem may decide the ultimate
alternatives choice and determine the final policy options.

It is possible to mistake this stage as uncomplicated and short and one that just requires a problem
statement. However, the reality is quite different, as policy analysts can testify. Beyond the gathering
and synthesis of data, a creative and innovative mind with high sophistication in skills is required for
problem framing. The major issue is in the creation of the problem rather than in its description.

The main responsibility of an analyst is the identification of the actual problem setting or situation. It
is not a simple process for a variety of reasons. First of all, a problem situation occurs as a result of a
difference between the possibilities and expectations, or between the wants and needs; there might even
be more than a single problem or cause for a problem in some problem situations. Second, rather than
formulating the problem in an analytic and coherent way which allows for a follow-up examination,
the clients often suggest troubling alternatives. Third, problem situation tend to be unsettling collection
of political interests, actors, attitudes and values, sites, resources, as well as bureaucratic unwritten
routines and laws, legal interpretations and regulations.

The very first step in issue-solving is to frame (or define) the problem you’re trying to solve.

The parts that follow will help you understand crucial problem-solving steps. These procedures encourage
the participation of interested parties, the use of accurate data, the comparison of expectations to reality
and a focus on the problem’s core causes. To begin, you should:
 Examine and record the current state of processes (i.e., who does what, with what information,
using what tools, communicating with what organisations and individuals, in what time frame,
using what format).
 Consider the impact of new technologies and amended policies on the creation of your “what should
be” model.

To assist you, limit yourself to answering only one question: the crucial question. A significant question
isn’t a stand-alone component. Instead, it’s part of an introduction flow, adding to a scenario and
complicating things. This initial flow is also part of an environment where you can designate the
important stakeholders for your challenge as well as the aspects that are out of scope. As a result, it’s
critical that you know exactly which question you need to answer and what the context is.

One method to achieve this—and ensure that you’re on the right track—is to create an issue identification
card that summarises the aspects you know about your situation.

Of course, deciding whether you want to understand the underlying cause(s) of a scenario (i.e., solve
a why problem) or uncover potential solutions is an important part of describing your problem. As a
general guideline, only ask how if you already know why.

The problem-definition process can be aided by a variety of technologies. To begin with, you must employ
a great deal of logic. This is true at all stages of the solution process, but particularly at the start. You’ll
also need to go below the surface, comprehending the consequences—the “so what?”—of your situation
and its surroundings. You’ll also want to put this method through its paces, enlisting as many people as
possible to help you out.

3
JGI JAIN
DEEMED-TO-BE UNIVERSIT Y
Leadership and Communication in Public Policy

Remember that the most neglected stage in problem solving is a thorough problem definition. Ironically,
because it is a leadership move rather than a management one, it has the highest return on investment.
Just as you can’t win a race if you don’t start running in the right direction, the success of your entire
problem-solving approach hinges on your ability to identify the right problem. So don’t skip this step and
execute it correctly. Avoid biases, double-check your assumptions, reframe your problem if necessary,
and don’t plunge into issue tree development too soon. Rather, put in the time now; it will pay off later.

Albert Einstein once said “I would spend 55 minutes thinking about the problem and 5 minutes thinking
about the solution if I had an hour to solve a problem.”

Are we certain we’re addressing the correct issue? Are we really getting it? Do we have all of the necessary
context to completely comprehend it?

You will seek and find what you set out to find. This is one of the reasons why the frame is so durable.
It is time well spent to investigate the possible difficulty and completely comprehend its core and
ramifications.

It is critical for successful change to spend time consciously defining a problem. There is no clarity about
the appropriate focus on the right subject without a suitable framing. The kind of options considered
to address the problem, stakeholders’ perceptions of its relevance and the realisation of the intended
solution are all influenced by how a problem is framed or represented.

As a result, answering the right question in the right way is 95% dependent on how it is framed. These
top 10 tips can assure successful decision-making when dealing with problem-solving:
 Many times, precision in framing will lead to the best option. This rule, which follows four fundamental
principles, can be used to solve any problem that is difficult to define quickly. Describe your problem
in 40 words or less. Reduce it to 20, then to 10 and finally to a five-word problem statement. If you
can’t keep things simple, you haven’t gotten to the bottom of the problem.
 We can’t properly address something we don’t understand and we can’t understand an issue unless
we know its background, ramifications and potential consequences. Attempting to solve an issue
without all the relevant background data is akin to learning to write without knowing the alphabet.
Take the time to learn about the nature of the problem, its importance and urgency, its proclivity or
frequency of occurrence and all of the players involved.
 “Are you sure we’re dealing with the appropriate issue?” How do we know we’re dealing with the
right problem?
Take some time to reframe the problem if necessary. If the problem does not alter following this
exercise, you have confirmed the problem’s nature. However, 50% of the time, you’ll end up reframing
the problem in a far more strategic way, which will considerably boost your solution’s success.
To begin with, rephrase. Then concentrate. Assume your problem has a timeline and imagine
yourself in the period before it occurred. Focusing on the future from this angle will assist you in
determining the long-term consequences.
 Framing is the paradigm through which we experience reality in behavioural economics and it
surrounds our mental picture of the world. This indicates that “our frame” incorporates all of our
unconscious assumptions during decision-making, even if we aren’t aware of them. When posing an

4
UNIT 04: Identifying, Evaluation, Analyse and Advise JGI JAIN
DEEMED-TO-BE UNIVERSIT Y

issue, we must consider what we know to be true as well as what and how much we have assumed
to be true.
 Expand your perspective on the issue. By analysing the most important reasons for doing something,
we may realise that the roots of an issue are much deeper than the level we were digging in. Narrow
your focus even more to ensure that your broad problem isn’t responding to a very small and specific
cause.
 Examine the problem as though you were completely removed from it. Consider how a problem
has been framed, which entails looking at it from several angles and imagining potential solutions.
Others can help you with your problems. Consider it from the standpoints of all stakeholders. Before
you start looking for a solution, make sure you have some fresh thoughts.
 Questions allow new streams of ideas to enter the framework. The oversimplified negative
presumption that things are not going well is reduced by statements.
 Positive words are known to activate the fear centre of the brain, which is responsible for large-
picture thinking, respect, active listening, empathy and problem-solving. Positive language can
alter the expression of genes that govern emotional and physical stress, making it easier to find the
proper response and setting the stage for good decision-making.
 You’re still stumped? Turn it around and attempt to think of ways to create the problem instead.
Taking an alternative approach or viewpoint to a problem is always a source of creativity.
 Substitute, combine, adapt, modify (magnify or minify), rearrange and replace (reverse). This
comprehensive checklist will assist you in approaching any problem-solving situation with a
creative mindset.

4.3 POLICY DISCOURSE AWARENESS

According to a policy-as-discourse perspective, policy is a “strategic and political process.” However, it
sees the struggles as taking place not just at the level of wanting or rejecting a specific policy initiative
but also at the level of forming the shape of the problems to be examined.

Seeing knowledge and power as connected when approaching policy as discourse, for example, Foucault
claims that the act of ruling has become interdependent with particular types of institutionalised
analyses, reflections and knowledge (Foucault 1991). Discourse covers policy-relevant concepts and
ideas, as well as the interactive communication and policy-making processes that help to develop and
distribute these ideas (Schmidt and Radaelli 2004). These discursive frameworks (concepts, metaphors,
language codes, logic rules, etc.) contain cognitive and normative aspects that govern what policymakers
can better grasp and communicate and hence which policy proposals they are more likely to approve
(Campbell 2002).

This viewpoint provides a very rich method of understanding the relationship between knowledge
and policy in development and it has the ability to include features of both institutional- and actor-
focused approaches to knowledge. Discourse is important in establishing new institutional structures
as a collection of ideas about new norms, values and practises, as well as a resource utilised by
players in policy formation and communication processes and policy network theories and discursive
institutionalism explain how these shapes discourse (Schmidt and Radaelli 2004).

5
JGI JAIN
DEEMED-TO-BE UNIVERSIT Y
Leadership and Communication in Public Policy

Cognitive paradigms, normative frameworks, frames, categories, policy narratives, programmatic

models, concepts and so on all play key roles in policy making. There is a large body of literature that
(explicitly or implicitly) investigates many concepts and their discursive roles. Nonetheless, we shall use
selected subjects as illustrations:
 Cognitive paradigms, commonly accepted descriptions and theoretical analyses that explain cause
and effect, restrict the range of possibilities that policymakers are likely to consider beneficial.
Hall was the first to establish the notion of a policy paradigm (1993). Rao and Woolcock (2007)
offer another viewpoint, arguing that the World Bank’s ‘disciplinary’ of economists controls much
development work and limits what is examined.
 Policy narratives are three-part stories about change, each having a beginning, middle and finish
that provide a different perspective on physical or social phenomena. They outline an issue, explain
how it arises and demonstrate what has to be done to fix it. They unavoidably simplify complicated
topics in the process, yet they frequently enter the debate despite this.

The emphasis on speech offers a fascinating insight into the interaction of knowledge and power in
policymaking. KNOTS’s (2006) research on environmental policy processes, for example, finds that “crisis
narratives” are frequently used as justifications for taking resource control away from local users and
giving it to national or international authorities; such interventions are frequently based on natural
sciences and particular visions of agricultural political economy. This implies that they are structured
in a way that appeals to both research and extension services as well as funding organisations, as well
as powerful entities such as bureaucrats with commercial interests.

The policy debate will most likely differ substantially from nation to nation. Jasanoff finds significant
differences between nations in the prevailing participatory decision-making techniques, accountability
mechanisms and public demonstration behaviours. Given that our study concentrated on three wealthy
Western countries, policy discourses in the South are likely to be even more diverse.

It is critical to have a better understanding of these challenges in order to support more effective
policies. Kelsall (2008), for example, claims that the “good governance” goal is stalled in Sub-Saharan
Africa because Western institutions and practises clash with some African fundamental principles and
values. He pinpoints views about authority, accountability and societal morality, as well as extended
family roles and “big man” leadership models. He contends that development must “go with the grain”
of African culture by constructing policies around these concepts.

There is no idea of discourse awareness in the literature. 1. Its invention resonates with Language
Awareness (LA) and Critical Language Awareness (CLA) in this context (CLA). Language Acquisition
(LA is a classroom methodology created by modern language instructors with the goal of improving
students’ language skills. CLA is a pedagogical arm of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), which is a
critique of Discourse Analysis (DA).

One fundamental difficulty that discourse analysts of public policy encounter is the use of positivist
standards that they eventually reject (Yanow, 2006). Because interpretative policy research is held
to traditional criteria of validity, it will fail the test before it even starts. In the pursuit of knowledge,
research that deviates from the positivist paradigm and the criteria for creating and evaluating theory
is deemed inadequately robust (Turner, 1985). Interpretive researchers have solved this restriction. A set

6
UNIT 04: Identifying, Evaluation, Analyse and Advise JGI JAIN
DEEMED-TO-BE UNIVERSIT Y

of evaluation norms was developed based on the realisation that their research could not and should
not be appraised entirely by quantitative approaches owing to disparities in their epistemological and
ontological views.

Conclusion 4.4 CONCLUSION

 Policy analysis refers to the entire process involved in identification of potential policy options that
could effectively solve the problem as well as compare them with the one that is the most feasible,
effective and efficient.
 Problem analysis is the first stage where problem definition/formulation takes place.
 Solution analysis follows problem analysis as the criteria is elected and alternatives are constructed
and compared.
 Possible policy options can be researched and identified by reviewing of research literature,
surveying best practices in order to know what the other communities are doing and conducting an
environmental scan. It is crucial to describe the possible policy options.
 A policy may seem more feasible at a given time and not at others. Situation might also change as
well as the affordability and public acceptability of something.
 Results are then communicated based on the consideration of organisational constraints
(implementation analysis of whether the organisation would be able to put the programme or policy
in place successfully) and implementation and evaluation of the programme (expert analysis- use
of scientific and objective criteria; political and market accountability- citizen support/ opposition).
 Problem definition or framing is the first step for policy analysis. It provides the direction and
structure to the investigation process.
 Beyond the gathering and synthesis of data, a creative and innovative mind with high sophistication
in skills is required for problem framing. The major issue is in the creation of the problem rather
than in its description.
 Problem situation tend to be unsettling collection of political interests, actors, attitudes and values,
sites, resources, as well as bureaucratic unwritten routines and laws, legal interpretations and
regulations.
 According to a policy-as-discourse perspective, policy is a “strategic and political process.” However,
it sees the struggles as taking place not just at the level of wanting or rejecting a specific policy
initiative but also at the level of forming the shape of the problems to be examined.
 Seeing knowledge and power as connected when approaching policy as discourse, for example,
Foucault claims that the act of ruling has become interdependent with particular types of
institutionalised analyses, reflections and knowledge.
 Discourse covers policy-relevant concepts and ideas, as well as the interactive communication and
policy-making processes that help to develop and distribute these ideas (Schmidt and Radaelli 2004).
 One fundamental difficulty that discourse analysts of public policy encounter is the use of positivist
standards that they eventually reject.

7
JGI JAIN
DEEMED-TO-BE UNIVERSIT Y
Leadership and Communication in Public Policy

4.5 GLOSSARY

 Identify: Indicate or establish what something or someone is

 Evaluate: Assess or form an idea about something
 Analyse: Examine something methodically and in detail
 Advise: Suggest the best course of action; recommend

4.6 CASE STUDY: A PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS IN PEEL REGION, ONTARIO,

CANADA
Case Objective
The purpose of this case study is to highlight the effect of policy network and issue framing on the
Environmental Tobacco Smoke bylaw Development in the Region of Peel.

The municipal policy decision making’s explanatory model was applied to understand the role of issue
framing, the network of policy and other local factors in the policy process outcome in the Region of Peel
ETS bylaw development process. Peel Region’s ETS bylaw process shows the features of a weak policy
outcome like outsider proponents’ weak skills of networking, primary economic frame’s use, a powerful
opponent network, and a receptive enough council for an economic argument and other frames. As
a consequence, an ETS bylaw was developed by the Region of Peel which still let some exposure to the
smoke of environmental tobacco in certain rooms for smoking with a ultimate phase out of 2010.

The issue was initially established as an economic as well as a health issue, the level field of playing
being a major concern. The Health Department coordinated with the Regional Council and municipal
staff in the entire process of bylaw development. However, there was not any political champion to
smoothly frame it to the Regional Council. Councillors were kept aware about the bylaw activity and
information of scientific health in the GTA, although they were quite critical of the activities of the
Health Department. Also, external proponents did not manage to involve the community to action and
there activity was very limited especially in phase 2. There was good reception to the economic frame
by the Regional Council which led to the involvement with the hospitality sector and other opponents.
Enough opportunity was provided to both of these in order to advocate against the ETS bylaw.

Explanatory model’s decision making application in the above case helped to better understand the
decision making process for the establishment of the ETS bylaws at the municipal level. As municipalities
address various other areas of public health and develop policy, bureaucrats supporting elected officials
by using the process of policy development shall gain insight from a successful municipal process of
decision making.

Questions
1. What are the features of Peel region’s ETS bylaws?
(Hint: Peel Region’s ETS bylaw process shows the features of a weak policy outcome like outsider
proponents’ weak skills of networking, primary economic frame’s use, a powerful opponent network,
and a receptive enough council for an economic argument and other frames)

8
UNIT 04: Identifying, Evaluation, Analyse and Advise JGI JAIN
DEEMED-TO-BE UNIVERSIT Y

2. What were some of the issues with these ETS bylaws?

(Hint: There was not any political champion to smoothly frame it to the Regional Council. Councillors
were kept aware about the bylaw activity and information of scientific health in the GTA. Also,
external proponents did not manage to involve the community to action and there activity was very
limited especially in phase 2. Enough opportunity was provided to both of these in order to advocate
against the ETS bylaw)

4.7 SELF-ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS

A. Essay Type Questions

1. Explain the concept of framing the problem in policy.
2. Discuss about policy discourse awareness.

4.8 ANSWERS AND HINTS FOR SELF-ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS

A. Hints for Essay Type Questions

1. Problem definition or framing is the first step for policy analysis. It provides the direction and
structure to the investigation process. The conceptualisation of the analysis may vary but framing
the problem is unanimously considered as the first research step across literature. The decisions
adopted during this step related to required information, interrelations, variables, criteria, models
to be utilised for evaluation and forecasting of solutions and values underlying the problem may
decide the ultimate alternatives choice and determine the final policy options. Refer to Section
Frame the Problem

2. According to a policy-as-discourse perspective, policy is a “strategic and political process.” However,

it sees the struggles as taking place not just at the level of wanting or rejecting a specific policy
initiative but also at the level of forming the shape of the problems to be examined. Refer to Section
Policy Discourse Awareness

@ 4.9 POST-UNIT READING MATERIAL

 https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4615-4104-2_1
 https://jech.bmj.com/content/policy-discourse-additional-theory-makes-more-comprehensive-
glossary

4.10 TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION FORUMS

 Discuss with your friends about the framing of the problem in public policy.