THE POLICY AND POLITICS OF POLICY APPRAISAL: EMERGING TRENDS AND NEW DIRECTIONS

Over the last 20 years, policy appraisal has emerged as a popular topic for discussion amongst policy-makers and academics alike. Much research effort has been devoted to developing tools and techniques to inform appraisal activities, but there has been, until recently, a distinct paucity of research on what might be termed the ‘policy and politics’ of policy appraisal. This is surprising, since policy appraisal is undoubtedly an important site of political behaviour, with its own institutions, instruments and policy actors. This paper takes stock of recent research on policy appraisal, draws out some common threads, and makes some suggestions for future research on what is a rapidly expanding field of European public policy analysis.

[1]  Harold D. Lasswell,et al.  The Analysis of Political Behaviour: An Empirical Approach. , 1948 .

[2]  H. Lasswell.  The analysis of political behaviour : an empirical approach , 1949 .

[3]  Roger G. Noll,et al.  Administrative Procedures as Instruments of Political Control , 1987 .

[4]  A. Chaker,et al.  A review of strategic environmental assessment in 12 selected countries , 2006 .

[5]  John Turnpenny,et al.  Rationalising the Policy Mess? Ex Ante Policy Assessment and the Utilisation of Knowledge in the Policy Process , 2009 .

[6]  William N. Dunn,et al.  Public Policy Analysis: An Introduction , 1993 .

[7]  Klaus Jacob,et al.  The Production and Use of Knowledge in Regulatory Impact Assessment - An Empirical Analysis , 2009 .

[8]  C. Dunlop.  Impact assessment in the EU: the state of the art and the art of the state by Andrea Renda , 2006 .

[9]  C. Radaelli,et al.  HARD QUESTIONS, AND EQUALLY HARD SOLUTIONS? PROCEDURALIZATION THROUGH IMPACT ASSESSMENT IN THE EUROPEAN UNION , 2008 .

[10]  J. Froud.  Controlling the Regulators , 1998 .

[11]  Claudio M. Radaelli,et al.  The role of knowledge in the policy process , 1995 .

[12]  正弘 中舘.  OECD (経済開発協力機構) : Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development , 1991 .

[13]  I. Sanderson.  Complexity, 'practical rationality' and evidence-based policy making , 2006 .

[14]  Per Mickwitz,et al.  A Framework for Evaluating Environmental Policy Instruments Context and Key Concepts , 2003 .

[15]  Colin Kirkpatrick.  Regulatory Impact Assessment , 2006 .

[16]  J. Dowie,et al.  ‘Evidence-based’, ‘Cost-Effective’ and ‘Preference-Driven’ Medicine: Decision Analysis Based Medical Decision Making is the Pre-Requisite , 1996, Journal of health services research & policy.

[17]  William N. Dunn,et al.  Public Policy Analysis , 1981 .

[18]  Claudio M. Radaelli,et al.  The diffusion of regulatory impact analysis – Best practice or lesson‐drawing? , 2004 .

[19]  Thomas Müller-Bohn,et al.  Cost-Benefit Analysis , 2015 .

[20]  John Turnpenny,et al.  A FRAMEWORK FOR TOOL SELECTION AND USE IN INTEGRATED ASSESSMENT FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT , 2007 .

[21]  Camilla Adelle,et al.  Sustainable development 'outside' the European Union: What role for impact assessment? , 2006 .

[22]  Norman Lee,et al.  METHODOLOGIES FOR SUSTAINABILITY IMPACT ASSESSMENTS OF PROPOSALS FOR NEW TRADE AGREEMENTS , 2001 .

[23]  C. Radaelli.  Desperately Seeking Regulatory Impact Assessments , 2009 .

[24]  R. Layard,et al.  Cost-Benefit Analysis: THEORETICAL ISSUES , 1994 .

[25]  Frank Vanclay,et al.  Environmental and social impact assessment , 1995 .

[26]  R. Baldwin.  Is better regulation smarter regulation , 2005 .

[27]  C. Hood,et al.  The Middle Aging of New Public Management: Into the Age of Paradox? , 2004 .

[28]  H. Simon,et al.  Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organization. , 1959 .

[29]  David A. Tansik,et al.  Analysis for Public Decisions , 1976 .

[30]  Pierre Lascoumes,et al.  Introduction: Understanding Public Policy through Its Instruments—From the Nature of Instruments to the Sociology of Public Policy Instrumentation , 2007 .

[31]  O. Bina,et al.  New Agendas for Appraisal: Reflections on Theory, Practice, and Research , 2004 .

[32]  Michael Carley,et al.  Rational techniques in policy analysis , 1980 .

[33]  Claudio M. Radaelli,et al.  Diffusion without convergence: how political context shapes the adoption of regulatory impact assessment , 2005 .

[34]  André Martinuzzi.  SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT EVALUATIONS IN EUROPE — MARKET ANALYSIS, META EVALUATION AND FUTURE CHALLENGES , 2004 .

[35]  H. Davies,et al.  Using Evidence: How research can inform public services , 2007 .

[36]  Ray Pawson,et al.  Evidence-based Policy: In Search of a Method , 2002 .

[37]  Robert W. Hahn,et al.  Has Economic Analysis Improved Regulatory Decisions , 2008 .

[38]  B. Nykvist,et al.  The use and non-use of policy appraisal tools in public policy making: an analysis of three European countries and the European Union , 2008 .

[39]  B. Nykvist,et al.  Why is integrating policy assessment so hard? A comparative analysis of the institutional capacities and constraints , 2008 .

[40]  A. Jordan,et al.  Joining up or Pulling Apart? The Use of Appraisal to Coordinate Policy Making for Sustainable Development , 2009 .

[41]  Steve Martin,et al.  Evaluating Public Policy Experiments , 1999 .

[42]  M. Patton.  Politics and Evaluation , 1988 .

[43]  A. Garg.  Regulatory impact assessment – towards better regulation , 2008 .

[44]  Jacopo Torriti.  Impact Assessment in the EU: A Tool for Better Regulation, Less Regulation or Less Bad Regulation? , 2007 .

[45]  C. Weiss.  The many meanings of research utilization. , 1979 .

[46]  C. Hood,et al.  Intellectual Obsolescence and Intellectual Makeovers: Reflections on the Tools of Government after Two Decades , 2007 .

[47]  Impact Assessment of European Commission Policies : Achievements And Prospects Statement of the EEAC Working Group on Governance , 2006 .

[48]  Måns Nilsson,et al.  Are impact assessment procedures actually promoting sustainable development? Institutional perspectives on barriers and opportunities found in the Swedish committee system , 2009 .