Chapter 7

Evaluating Policy Performance

Values Are Central to Policy Analysis

Learning Objectives
Bandingkan dan monitoring dan evaluasi kontras Menjelaskan dan menggambarkan kriteria untuk mengevaluasi kinerja kebijakan Kontras evaluasi kausal, evaluasi resmi, dan evaluasi partisipatif Jelaskan bagaimana etika mempengaruhi pasarberpusat dan perspektif polis yang berpusat pada kebijakan dan manajemen Jelaskan proses penalaran tentang nilai-nilai Tunjukkan bagaimana penilaian mempengaruhi evaluasi kebijakan desentralisasi fiskal di Makedonia

Criteria for Evaluating Policy Performance

efektivitas efisiensi kecukupan keadilan responsiveness kepantasan

Three Approaches to Evaluation

Approach Aims Assumptions Example

Causal Evaluation

Analysts determine outcomes

Values can be described but not justified

Field experiment

Official Evaluation

Policymakers Values can be Summative determine stated and need evaluation objectives no justification

Participative Stakeholders Values can be Evaluability Evaluation determine stated and need assessment objectives no justification

Two Perspectives of Values

MARKET-CENTERED Individual as focus Self-interest primary motivation Performance through private competition Society governed by fixed and impersonal economic laws (laws of matter) Personal decision criteria are individual interest maximization and cost minimization Change occurs through material exchange and the satisfaction of aggregate individual interests Public administration is unproductive (bureaucracy) POLIS-CENTERED Community as focus Public and self-interest are primary motivations Performance through cooperation and publicly managed competition Society governed by laws that are subject to human change (laws of passion) Personal decision criteria are loyalty, public commitment, and individual interest Information relatively incomplete and subjective

Change occurs through persuasion, alliances, and the satisfaction of public and community interests
Public administration can be productive (public trust)

Reasoning About Values

Group Simulation
Break into three groups. Assume that your group is an expert commission responsible for making a recommendation about the formula that should be used for the local government equalization fund in Macedonia. The groups should use these rules: Group I: Rules 1, 2, and/or 3 Group II: Rules 4 and/or 5 Group III: Rules 6, 7, and/or 8 Use the structural model of argument to develop a well-justified recommendation.

Key Terms and Concepts

Value duality Effectiveness Efficiency Equity Responsiveness Appropriateness Evaluation Normative ethics Multiattribute utility analysis Evaluability assessment User survey analysis Values Norms Teleological (utilitarian) Deontological Valuation Metaethics Terminal values Instrumental values