CONTEXTUALISING AND CONCEPTUALISING THE REFORM OF ENVIRONMENTALLY HARMFUL SUBSIDIES IN GERMANY

2005 ◽  
Vol 07 (04) ◽  
pp. 619-650 ◽  
Author(s):  
TILMANN RAVE

While the reform of environmentally harmful subsidies has often been identified as a potential means to simultaneously realise environmental, economic and fiscal benefits, little guidance is available on designing possible paths for subsidy reform. This paper aims to better conceptualise a reform process for Germany. It argues that there is room for designing a broader framework for reform moving beyond isolated and, sometimes, inefficient steps at an environmentally oriented subsidy reform. To do so, the broader policy context is described, characteristics and underlying problem structures are identified and obstacles to policy reform are mentioned. As a result, a number of critical requirements for a potentially successful reform process can be formulated. Using available impact analyses as a "tool box", we draw on experiences with Strategic Environmental Assessments (SEA) as a useful and sufficiently flexible organisational and procedural framework for subsidy reform. Based on SEA concepts, the paper treats various important linkages, steps and actor constellations that the reform process is likely to encounter. Finally, the critical link between assessment and decision-making is addressed and some suggestions on a follow-up for the assessment process are made.

2011 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 494-517 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathrin Frey ◽  
Thomas Widmer

Evidence-based policy-making and other recent reforms in public steering emphasize the role systematic evidence can play in improving decision making and public policies. Increasing deficits heighten the pressure on public authorities to legitimate public spending and to find savings. Existing studies show that the influence of research-based information on decision making is shaped by several factors, but they typically do not distinguish between different types of information. Our contribution aims to compare the influence of efficiency analysis to information about performance effectiveness. We do so by looking at 10 cases in which public policies are being revised at the federal level in Switzerland, and do so by tracing the entire policy reform process. This qualitative analysis sheds light on which actors use efficiency information, how and under which conditions, and highlights the contribution of efficiency analysis for evidence-based policy-making.


2019 ◽  
Vol 69 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-215
Author(s):  
János Vincze

A basic principle of economics is that people always prefer a larger set of opportunities. Money illusion can be considered as the phenomenon when people may not correctly perceive their budget constraints, and may act in ways that run counter to this preference. In this interpretation, money illusion is a cognitive bias, worthwhile to overcome. Herein I argue that taking a view of human decision-making based on certain strands of cognitive psychology, one can reinterpret the evidence for money illusion in two ways. First, I claim that money illusion is inescapable to some extent, and saying that we suffer from it is similar to alleging that we experience optical illusions, only because we are unable to see, say, individual atoms. Second, taking a view on “preferences” different from the traditional one, I contend that it may bring little benefit to get rid of money illusion even in the cases where it is possible to do so. To follow up the visual analogy, even if we can improve our eyesight it is not obviously desirable. These arguments seem to lead to a Candidean disposition: there is no possible improvement on the state of affairs as far as “money illusion” is concerned. Nonetheless, I will make some positive proposals concerning economic policy and economics research.


2006 ◽  
Vol 08 (03) ◽  
pp. 373-398 ◽  
Author(s):  
JENNY POPE ◽  
WILLIAM GRACE

This paper seeks to contribute to the development of principles for effective sustainability assessment. Drawing upon three sustainability assessments of project proposals conducted recently in Western Australia, three important aspects of good process are identified: the "question" that guides the assessment process; the influence of the assessment process on the development of the final proposal; and the basis for sustainability decision-making. These three aspects are closely inter-related, and also influenced by and related to the prevailing policy context and institutional arrangements guiding the assessment. Recommendations are made for more effective sustainability assessment processes in Western Australia; and the ultimate contribution that effective sustainability assessments of project proposals could make to a more sustainable society is considered. The broader Western Australian political, cultural and social context within which the assessments have been conducted is described, in order to facilitate a deeper understanding of the issues discussed and therefore to maximise the potential for others to learn from these experiences.


1996 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 167-174 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathleen Carlin ◽  
Michel Silberfeld ◽  
Raisa B Deber ◽  
Frederick Lowy

Objectives: To report on the perceptions of assessment of competency and its consequences on a group of clients and significant others at follow-up. Methods: Ninety-five interviews were conducted using a carefully developed semistructured telephone interview of 24 clients and 71 family/caregivers, representing the perceptions of about 80 clients. Results: There was general satisfaction in the competency assessment process. There was a perception that interests and rights were protected. Clients were seen to be less involved in all spheres of decision making rergardless of capacity outcome. Clients and families were satisfied with how decisions were made. Conclusions: Follow-up study of competency assessment does not support the conclusions previously drawn based on court record studies that assessments are deleterious and frequently result in violations of rights.


2011 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 121-123
Author(s):  
Jeri A. Logemann

Evidence-based practice requires astute clinicians to blend our best clinical judgment with the best available external evidence and the patient's own values and expectations. Sometimes, we value one more than another during clinical decision-making, though it is never wise to do so, and sometimes other factors that we are unaware of produce unanticipated clinical outcomes. Sometimes, we feel very strongly about one clinical method or another, and hopefully that belief is founded in evidence. Some beliefs, however, are not founded in evidence. The sound use of evidence is the best way to navigate the debates within our field of practice.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janet Michel

BACKGROUND Background: Online forward triage tools (OFTT) or symptom checkers are being widely used during this COVID-19 pandemic. The effects and utility of such tools however, have not been widely assessed. OBJECTIVE Objective: To assess the effects (quantitatively) and the utility (qualitatively) of a COVID-19 OFTT in a pandemic context, exploring patient perspectives as well as eliciting recommendations for tool improvement. METHODS Methods: We employed a mixed-method sequential explanatory study design. Quantitative data of all users of the OFTT between March 2nd, 2020 and May 12th, 2020 were collected. A follow-up survey of people who consented to participation was conducted. Secondly, qualitative data was collected through key informant interviews (n=19) to explain the quantitative findings, as well as explore tool utility, user experience and elicit recommendations. RESULTS Results: An estimate of the effects, (quantitatively) and the utility (qualitatively) of a COVID-19 OFTT in a pandemic context, and recommendations for tool improvement. In the study period, 6,272 users consulted our OFTT; 560 participants consented to a follow-up survey and provided a valid e-mail address. 176 (31.4%) participants returned a complete follow-up questionnaire. 85.2% followed the recommendations given. 41.5% reported that their fear was allayed after using tool and 41.1% would have contacted the GP or visited a hospital had the tool not existed. Qualitatively, seven overarching themes emerged namely i) accessibility of tool, ii) user-friendliness of tool, iii) utility of tool as an information source, iv) utility of tool in allaying fear and anxiety, v) utility of tool in decision making (test or not to test), vi) utility of tool in reducing the potential for onward transmissions (preventing cross infection) and vii) utility of tool in reducing health system burden. CONCLUSIONS Conclusion: Our findings demonstrated that a COVID-19 OFTT does not only reduce the health system burden, but can also serve as an information source, reduce anxiety and fear, reduce cross infections and facilitate decision making (to test or not to test). Further studies are needed to assess the transferability of these COVID-19 OFTT findings to other contexts as the second wave sweeps across Europe.


Author(s):  
John Hunsley ◽  
Eric J. Mash

Evidence-based assessment relies on research and theory to inform the selection of constructs to be assessed for a specific assessment purpose, the methods and measures to be used in the assessment, and the manner in which the assessment process unfolds. An evidence-based approach to clinical assessment necessitates the recognition that, even when evidence-based instruments are used, the assessment process is a decision-making task in which hypotheses must be iteratively formulated and tested. In this chapter, we review (a) the progress that has been made in developing an evidence-based approach to clinical assessment in the past decade and (b) the many challenges that lie ahead if clinical assessment is to be truly evidence-based.


2021 ◽  
pp. 232949652110288
Author(s):  
Meaghan Stiman

In theory, participatory democracies are thought to empower citizens in local decision-making processes. However, in practice, community voice is rarely representative, and even in cases of equal representation, citizens are often disempowered through bureaucratic processes. Drawing on the case of a firearm discharge debate from a rural county’s municipal meetings in Virginia, I extend research about how power operates in participatory settings. Partisan political ideology fueled the debate amongst constituents in expected ways, wherein citizens engaged collectivist and individualist frames to sway the county municipal board ( Celinska 2007 ). However, it was a third frame that ultimately explains the ordinance’s repeal: the bureaucratic frame, an ideological orientation to participatory processes that defers decision-making to disembodied abstract rules and procedures. This frame derives its power from its depoliticization potential, allowing bureaucrats to evade contentious political debates. Whoever is best able to wield this frame not only depoliticizes the debate to gain rationalized legitimacy but can do so in such a way to favor a partisan agenda. This study advances gun research and participatory democracy research by analyzing how the bureaucratic frame, which veils partisanship, offers an alternative political possibility for elected officials, community leaders, and citizens to adjudicate partisan debates.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document