Assessment of policies and detection of unintended effects: Guiding principles for the consideration of methods and tools in policy-packaging

Single policies or entire policy packages are often assessed using different methods aiming at a quantification of effects as well as the detection of undesired outcomes. The knowledge of potential impacts is essential to take informed policy actions. Hence, there is a constant need for efficient assessment approaches to support policy decision-making. A broad range of such assessment methods is used in policymaking. Some of them are using quantitative data; others are characterized by qualitative information, observations or opinions. Practical experiences with transport policy prove that these methods all have their pros and cons, but none of them are able to detect the full range of effects. This leads to important questions this article deals with, such as what are the strengths and limitations of the different tools and methods for assessing impacts, and how should different approaches be integrated into the policymaking processes?

[1]  David A. Hensher,et al.  Handbook of Transport Modelling , 2000 .

[2]  Riki Therivel,et al.  Strategic Environmental Assessment in Action , 2004 .

[3]  Vincent Marchau,et al.  Addressing deep uncertainty using adaptive policies: introduction to section 2 , 2010 .

[4]  T. Webler,et al.  Fairness and competence in citizen participation : evaluating models for environmental discourse , 1995 .

[5]  Armin Grunwald,et al.  Working Towards Sustainable Development in the Face of Uncertainty and Incomplete Knowledge , 2007 .

[6]  Alan Campbell McKinnon.  'Logistical Restructuring, Road Freight Traffic Growth and the Environment', in D. Banister (ed.), Transport Policy and Environment , 1998 .

[7]  Farideh Ramjerdi,et al.  Inventory of measures, typology of non-intentional effects and a framework for policy packaging , 2010 .

[8]  D. Morgan.  Focus groups for qualitative research. , 1988, Hospital guest relations report.

[9]  A.W.M. Meijers,et al.  Philosophy of technology and engineering sciences , 2009 .

[10]  David Banister,et al.  Transport policy and the environment , 1998 .

[11]  Sven Ove Hansson,et al.  Decision Making Under Great Uncertainty , 1996 .

[12]  Farideh Ramjerdi,et al.  Risk and irreversibility of transport interventions , 2014 .

[13]  Araz Taeihagh,et al.  A Virtual Environment for the Formulation of Policy Packages , 2014 .

[14]  Hannah Kosow,et al.  Methoden der Zukunfts- und Szenarioanalyse Überblick, Bewertung und Auswahlkriterien , 2008 .

[15]  F. Knight.  The economic nature of the firm: From Risk, Uncertainty, and Profit , 2009 .

[16]  Moshe Givoni,et al.  A process for designing policy packaging: Ideals and realities , 2014 .

[17]  Ennio Cascetta,et al.  Transportation Systems Analysis: Models and Applications , 2009 .

[18]  Ortwin Renn.  Risk Governance: Coping with Uncertainty in a Complex World , 2008 .

[19]  Armin Grunwald,et al.  Technology Assessment: Concepts and Methods , 2009 .

[20]  Torsten Fleischer,et al.  A problem‐oriented categorisation of FTA‐methods for transport planning , 2012 .

[21]  Moshe Givoni,et al.  Addressing transport policy challenges through Policy-Packaging , 2014 .

[22]  Farideh Ramjerdi,et al.  Best Practice in Policy Package Design , 2010 .

[23]  René von Schomberg,et al.  The Precautionary Principle and its Normative Challenges , 2006 .

[24]  Araz Taeihagh,et al.  Which Policy First? A Network-Centric Approach for the Analysis and Ranking of Policy Measures , 2013 .

[25]  Eran Feitelson,et al.  From Policy Measures to Policy Packages , 2013 .

[26]  R. Barbour.  Doing Focus Groups , 2008 .

[27]  Felix Rauschmayer,et al.  A framework for the selection of participatory approaches for SEA , 2005 .