Rules-of-thumb for problem-structuring policy design

Abstract

This article provides practitioners with rules-of-thumb for policy design as both problem finding and problem solving. From their perspective, policy design is an inevitable moving back and forth between thinking out ("puzzling") and fighting over policy ("powering"). It is, simultaneously, problem-structuring: "wicked" or unstructured problems are translated from problems as "messes" of undesirable situations to problems as specific, timeand-space bound opportunities for improvement. This article decomposes problem-structuring as an iterative process of problem sensing, problem categorization, problem decomposition and problem definition. For each of these problem-structuring functions, appropriate rules-of-thumb can be suggested that induce thought habits and styles for responsive and solid policy designs. ARTICLE HISTORY

Integrating Empirical Analysis and Normative Inquiry in Health Technology Assessment: The Values in Doing Assessments of Health Technologies Approach

“…A relevant question is, of course, whether such steps should always be taken, or in case of specific subjects only (e.g., where substantial controversy may be expected). To answer this question, we would suggest that the sort of activities that are advocated in the VALIDATE approach should be considered as a means to identify the nature of the policy problem for which the HTA is being conducted: Is it a well-structured, moderately structured, or ill-structured policy problem (19)? If substantial differences in background theories, normative commitments, or both could be retrieved, giving rise to different problem definitions and associated solutions, the problem is ill-structured or moderately structured.…”

Conectando problemas, soluções e expectativas: mapeando a literatura sobre análise do desenho de políticas públicas

“…A partir da literatura mapeada, delimitamos algumas ideias que perpassam as discussões sobre os problemas. Em primeiro lugar, embora a literatura localize a construção do problema na base dos processos de desenho, ela não acolhe a relação causal e automática entre problema e solução (HOPPE, 2018;SCHNEIDER;DELEON, 2007;TURNBULL, 2006). Identificou-se que os trabalhos que tomam os problemas como dados tratam sua modelagem como uma dinâmica exógena ao processo de desenho, o que se deve ao foco dos estudos, em geral, voltados aos instrumentos das políticas.…”

“…Identificou-se que os trabalhos que tomam os problemas como dados tratam sua modelagem como uma dinâmica exógena ao processo de desenho, o que se deve ao foco dos estudos, em geral, voltados aos instrumentos das políticas. Outros se debruçaram especificamente sobre os processos de modelagem dos problemas, argumentando que a concepção resultante influencia a arena de debates em que o problema será alocado e a escolha das alternativas de resposta (HOPPE, 2018;TURNBULL, 2006).…”

The emergence of problem structuring methods, 1950s–1989: An atlas of the journal literature

“…First, despite the affiliation between PSMs and design thinking (Keys, 2007;Jones, 1970Jones, /1992; also see Georgiou, Heck, & Mrvar, 2019 for a discussion in the context of SCA), the latter has surpassed the former by leaps and bounds in visibility, with the establishment of innumerable associations, such as the Interaction Design Foundation, and of homes in places such as Stanford University. 1 Second, as will be further discussed in Section 5.1, policy science has been concerned with 'PSMs' at least ever since the early 1980s (Dunn, 1981: p. 130), and though interest continues unabated (Coulthart, 2017;Dunn, 2018;Hoppe, 2018), it does so without the participation of the PSM field. Had RAPW1989 engaged with those fields hungry for methods that operationalize the tackling of uncertainty and complexity, one can only wonder at the visibility, not to say prestige, that PSMs might be enjoying today.…”