Suchergebnisse

ABSTRACTPolitical feasibility analysis examines the actors and events involved in each stage of a political policy‐making process and anticipates the likely resolution of a policy problem as it works its way through the policy process. Despite the prominence of policy analysis in the social sciences over the past decade or so, there has been virtually no scholarly work concerning the analysis of the political feasibility of policy proposals. Political scientists, because of their central concern with the design and effect of the policy‐making process, have a unique responsibility to contribute a way to evaluate systematically political feasibility. While all policy analysts, regardless of their disciplinary backgrounds, need to be concerned with assessing political feasibility, political scientists should be particularly mindful of its importance in improving public policy.While anticipating the likely outcome of a dynamic policy process is necessarily a difficult task, an analysis of the political feasibility of a proposed alternative can provide insight into the nature of the policy process as well as identify the criteria that must be met for an alternative to be successful.This article discusses a variety of factors that need to be considered in assessing political feasibility. After arguing the need to design political feasibility analysis frameworks, this essay reviews political scientists' current treatment of political feasibility analysis and outlines a general way to undertake such efforts.

Though many economists favor a transition to a fully funded pension system, it is not even considered by politicians in Germany. This paper examines the hypothesis that this is in accordance with the preferences of the population. By performing a dynamic CGE analysis referenda on pension policies are simulated. They show that a fully privatizing scheme is not politically feasible in Germany, however long the pre-announcement period, if the alternatives are the current policy or a partially privatizing policy. This explains why a fully privatizing policy is not an issue in the political debate in Germany. In order to examine what are the reasons for this outcome, the German Bismarckian System is compared to a Beveridge-System, which is similar to the British pension system. In the latter case, a transition to a fully funded system is what the majority opts for in a dynamically consistent equilibrium. This is evidence that the future of the pension system depends on its history. 6 Tables, 2 Figures, 52 References. Adapted from the source document.

AbstractThough a transition to a fully funded pension system is favoured by many economists, it is not even considered by politicians in Germany. This paper examines the hypothesis that this is in accordance with the preferences of the population. By performing a dynamic CGE analysis referenda on pension policies are simulated. They show that a fully privatizing scheme is not politically feasible in Germany, however long the pre‐announcement period, if the alternatives are the current policy or a partially privatizing policy. This explains why a fully privatizing policy is not an issue in the political debate in Germany. In order to examine what are the reasons for this outcome, the German Bismarckian System is compared to a Beveridge‐System which is similar to the British pension system. Actually, in the latter case, a transition to a fully funded system is what the majority opts for in a dynamically consistent equilibrium. This is evidence that the future of the pension system depends on its history.

Factors needing consideration in assessing feasibility.

In 1989, after almost two decades of substance-by-substance standard setting, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) promulgated its Air Contaminants Standard, imposing new exposure limits for 376 toxic substances encountered in U.S. industry. In marked contrast to earlier regulations, the Air Contaminants Standard has generated relatively little industry opposition. This paper analyzes the standard in the context of the twenty-year debate over the appropriate role for technological feasibility and economic compliance costs in occupational health policy. The political feasibility of the new standard is traced to OSHA's abandonment of "technology forcing" in favor of reliance on "off-the-shelf" technologies already in use in major firms. While important as an embodiment of OSHA's new "generic" approach to regulation, the Air Contaminants Standard cannot serve as a model for future occupational health policy, due to its reliance on informal, closed-door mechanisms for establishing regulatory priorities and permissible exposure limits.

Factors relevant to political feasibility assessment of public policy include: timeliness, support, ideological consistency, bureaucratic support, definition of policy failure, & policy consensus. These factors form the basis of a framework that can be elaborated both empirically, with reference to successful past policies, & a priori. Current treatment of political feasibility issues by political scientists is critically reviewed. 1 Table, 13 References. J. Peterson

Four criteria are proposed to evaluate the implementation of US federal grant agency project processing procedures. The criteria -- anonymity, nonperversity, implementation of program goals, & adequacy -- go beyond the arguments over rational-analytic vs incremental policy making by suggesting criteria that both models can meet. Examples of two federal programs' selection procedures are used to illustrate the applicability of, & divergency from, the proposed criteria. Factors important to administrators in selecting project processing procedures are also discussed. 24 References. HA.

THIS PAPER PROPOSES FOUR CRITERIA TO EVALUATE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF U.S. FEDERAL GRANT AGENCY PROJECT PROCESSING PROCEDURES. THE CRITERIA - ANONYMITY, NON-PERVERSITY, IMPLEMENTATION OF PROGRAM GOALS AND ADEQUANCY - GO BEYOND THE ARGUMENTS OVER RATIONAL-ANALYTIC VERSUS INCREMENTAL POLICYMAKING BY SUGGESTING CRITERIA WHICH BOTH MODELS CAN MEET. EXAMPLES OF TWO FEDERAL PROGRAMS' SELECTION PROCEDURES ARE USED TO ILLUSTRATE THE APPLICABILITY OF, AND DIVERGENCY FROM, THE PROPOSED CRITERIA. THE PAPER CONCLUDES WITH A DISCUSSION OF THE FACTORS IMPORTANT TO ADMINISTRATORS IN SELECTING PROJECT PROCESSING PROCEDURES.