UNIVERSITY STUDENTS CONSENSUS FORUM APRIL 2015

Varsity students to attend forum at UN headquarters in New York.

By Correspondent Paul Mabeja, Dodoma

The Guardian 22^nd April 2015

The University of Dodoma (UDOM).

Students from the University of Dodoma (UDOM) will later this year attend a forum on formulation of the Post 2015 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) to be held at the United Nation headquarters in the United States.

The students will be selected from those who recently participated in the ‘Post- 2015 Consensus International Youth Forum’ which was held at the varsity in collaboration with the UN-based Copenhagen Consensus Centre (CCC).

The forum was meant to collect continental ideas for the formulation of the said global development agenda.

Dr Paul Mushi from the University of Dar es Salaam (UDSM) who chaired the forum here yesterday said they have already submitted video clips to the UN that show students’ contribution at the forum.

He said the youth forum is a platform created by the Post 2015 consensus to enable young people of between 18 and 30 years to present their views on the development of the MDGs to the world, media, decision makers and national governments.

“Post 2015 youth forum gave youth the chance to present their views on development targets, making use of experts’ economic analyses and cost-benefit ratios, judgment on what are the most important priorities for the world and more,” he cited.  

 He said during the course of the forum, participants read newspaper articles on various topics based on academic research papers and discussed what the proposed targets mean for the world over the next 15 years.

“The students will use benefit-cost rations as the basis for their judgment and their rating. The benefit cost-ratio says how much social, economic and environmental benefits are retuned for every dollar spent,” he explained.  He said views gathered from the youth will be taken back to the Copenhagen Consensus Centre (CCC) for further consideration.

For his part, Co-Facilitator of the forum, Assistant Lecturer at UDOM (College of Education), Majiyd Suru said most students demonstrated intellectual maturity in the course of the Forum.

He said they covered some of the target areas  like air pollution, biodiversity, climate change, conflict and violence, date for development, education, energy, food security, gender equality, governance and institutions, heath system and chronic diseases to mention but a few. 

He said in the past, university students were not involved in prioritising the global goals for their future, as such opportunities were only granted to ministry officials at the central level of the country’s governance.

But with increased participation of youth in the prioritisation of the goals, they will no longer remain as implementers, but part of the changing processes of the crucial global goals, particularly in economics, education and the social equality.

“This forum has given opportunity to the youth to be exposed to future global agendas worldwide and hence, stand a chance to disseminate relevant educative information to their counterparts through the use of media,” he said. 

“The Forum plays pivotal role in getting relevant and focused goals for the African continent because the context differs,” he added. South Africa, Ghana, Nigeria and Senegal are among countries that have previously participated in the debate.

SOURCE: THE GUARDIAN

PUBLIC POLICY ANALYSIS

Policy analysis can be defined as "determining which of various alternative policies will most achieve a given set of goals in light of the relations between the policies and the goals" ^[1]. However, policy analysis can be divided into two major fields. Analysis of policy is analytical and descriptive, i.e. it attempts to explain policies and its development. Analysis for policy is prescriptive, i.e. it is involved with formulating policies and proposals (e.g. to improve social welfare)^[2]. It depends on the area of interest and the purpose of analysis to determine what type of analysis is conducted.
It is frequently deployed in the public sector but is equally applicable to other kinds of organizations. Most policy analysts have graduated from public policy schools with public policy degrees. Policy analysis has its roots in systems analysis as instituted by United States Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara during the Vietnam War.^[3]
Policy analysts can come from many backgrounds including sociology, psychology, economics, geography, law, political science, anthropology, public policy, policy studies, social work, environmental planning, and public administration.

Approaches to policy analysis

Although various approaches to policy analysis exist, three general approaches can be distinguished: the analycentric, the policy process, and the meta-policy approach^[4].
The analycentric approach focuses on individual problems and its solutions; its scope is the micro-scale and its problem interpretation is usually of a technical nature. The primary aim is to identify the most effective and efficient solution in technical and economic terms (e.g. the most efficient allocation of resources).
The policy process approach puts its focal point onto political processes and involved stakeholders; its scope is the meso-scale and its problem interpretation is usually of a political nature. It aims at determining what processes and means are used and tries to explain the role and influence of stakeholders within the policy process. By changing the relative power and influence of certain groups (e.g enhancing public participation and consultation), solutions to problems may be identified.
The meta-policy approach is a system and context approach, i.e. its scope is the macro-scale and its problem interpretation is usually of a structural nature. It aims at explaining the contextual factors of the policy process, i.e. what are the political, economic and socio-cultural factors influencing it. As problems may result because of structural factors, e.g. a certain economic system or certain political institutions, solutions may include the change of the structure itself.

Methodology

Policy analysis is methodologically diverse using both qualitative methods and quantitative methods, including case studies, survey research, statistical analysis, and model building among others. One common methodology is to define the problem and evaluation criteria; identify all alternatives; evaluate them; and recommend the best policy option.

Models of policy analysis

Many models exist to analyze the creation and application of public policy. Analysts use these models to identify important aspects of policy, as well as explain and predict policy and its consequences.
Some models are:

Institutional model

Public policy is determined by political institutions, which give policy legitimacy. Government universally applies policy to all citizens of society and monopolizes the use of force in applying policy.

 Process model

Policy creation is a process following these steps:

• Identification of a problem and demand for government action.
• Formulation of policy proposals by various parties (e.g, congressional committees, think tanks, interest groups).
• Selection and enactment of policy; this is known as Policy Legitimization.
• Evaluation of policy.

Rational model

Policy is intended to achieve maximum social gain. Rationally, the policy that maximizes benefits while minimizing costs is the best policy. It is a part of rational choice theory.

Incremental model

Policy is a continuation of previous government activity, with minimal changes made to previous policy. The goal is a systematic periodic review.

Group model

The political system's role is to establish and enforce compromise between various, conflicting interests in society.

Elite model

Policy is a reflection of the interests of those individuals within a society that have the most power, rather than the demands of the masses.

Policy Analysis in six easy steps

1. Verify, define and detail the problem
2. Establish an evaluation criteria
3. Identify alterative policies
4. Evaluate alternative policies
5. Display and distinguish among alternative policies
6. Monitoring the implanted policy

See also

• Policy studies
• Public policy
• Think tanks
• Eightfold Path (policy analysis)

References

1. ^ Nagel, Stuart S. (Ed.), 1999, Policy Analysis Methods. New Science Publishers, Inc.
2. ^ Bührs, Ton and Bartlett, Robert V., 1993. Environmental Policy in New Zealand. The Politics of Clean and Green. Oxford University Press
3. ^ Radin, Beryl (2000), Beyond Machiavelli : Policy Analysis Comes of Age. Georgetown University Press.
4. ^ see Bührs, Ton and Bartlett, Robert V., 1993. Environmental Policy in New Zealand. The Politics of Clean and Green. Oxford University Press

Further reading

• Eugene Bardach, A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The Eightfold Path to More Effective Problem Solving
• David L. Weimer and Aidan R. Vining, Policy Analysis: Concepts and Practice, Prentice Hall
• Frank Fischer, Gerald J. Miller. & Mara S. Sidney (eds.) Handbook of Public Policy Analysis: Theory, Methods, and Politics, New York, Marcel Dekker Inc. 2006.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Policy_analysis"