The 1914 Case

1965 ◽  
Vol 59 (2) ◽  
pp. 365-378 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ole R. Holsti
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Content Analysis ◽  
National Policy ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Distant Future ◽  
Policy Alternatives ◽  
Salient Factor ◽  
As Stress ◽  
The Great War

This paper will employ techniques of content analysis to examine some features of top-level communications between national policy makers during a momentous period of stress. It is concerned with the effects of stress upon: (1) the manner in which decision-makers perceive time as a factor in their formulation of policy; (2) the contrasting ways in which they view policy alternatives for their own nations, for their allies, and for their adversaries; and (3) the flow of communications among them.Specifically, the following hypotheses will be tested with data from the 1914 crisis leading up to the Great War in Europe:Hypothesis 1. As stress increases in a crisis situation:(a) time will be perceived as an increasingly salient factor in decision-making.(b) decision-makers will become increasingly concerned with the immediate rather than the distant future.

scholarly journals Research use at the Ministry of Health in Burkina Faso: the decision-makers’ perspective

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Dagenais
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Knowledge Transfer ◽  
Burkina Faso ◽  
Informed Decision ◽  
Communication Strategy ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Research Use ◽  
Informed Decision Making ◽  
Ministry Of Health ◽  
Policy Makers

Abstract Background Despite the increased emphasis placed on the use of evidence for policy development, relatively few initiatives have been developed to support evidence-informed decision-making, especially in West Africa. Moreover, studies examining the conditions under which policy-makers use research-based evidence are still scarce, but they show that their attitudes and opinions about research are one of the main determinants of such use. In February 2017, Burkina Faso’s Minister of Health planned to create a unit to promote evidence-informed decision-making within the ministry. Before the unit was set up, documenting the attitudes towards research at the highest levels of his Ministry appeared profitable to the unit’s planning. Method Individual interviews were conducted by the author with 14 actors positioned to consider evidence during decision-making from the Burkina Faso’s Minister of health cabinet. An interview grid was used to explore several themes such as attitudes towards research, obstacles and facilitators to research use, example of research use in decision-making and finally, ways to increase decision-makers’ participation in knowledge transfer activities. Interviews were partially transcribed and analysed by the author. Results The results show a mixed attitude towards research and relatively little indication of research use reported by respondents. Important obstacles were identified: evidence inaccessibility, lack of implementation guidelines, absence of clear communication strategy and studies’ lack of relevance for decision-making. Many suggestions were proposed such as raising awareness, improving access and research communication and prioritizing interactions with researchers. Respondents agree with the low participation of decision-makers in knowledge transfer activities: more leadership from the senior officials was suggested and greater awareness of the importance of their presence. Conclusions The conclusion presents avenues for reflection and action to increase the potential impact of the knowledge transfer unit planned within the Ministry of Health of Burkina Faso. This innovative initiative will be impactful if the obstacles identified in this study and policy-makers’ preferences and needs are taken into account during its development and implementation.

scholarly journals Weight Approximation for Spatial Outcomes

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (14) ◽  
pp. 5588
Author(s):  
Jay Simon
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Approximation Methods ◽  
Water Usage ◽  
Census Block ◽  
Ordinal Ranking ◽  
New Methods ◽  
Policy Alternatives ◽  
Multi Attribute Decision Making ◽  
Geographic Regions

When preferences explicitly include a spatial component, it can be challenging to assign weights to geographic regions in a way that is both pragmatic and accurate. In multi-attribute decision making, weights reflect cardinal information about preferences that can be difficult to assess thoroughly in practice. Recognizing this challenge, researchers have developed several methods for using ordinal rankings to approximate sets of cardinal weights. However, when the set of weights reflects a set of geographic regions, the number of weights can be enormous, and it may be cognitively challenging for decision makers to provide even a coherent ordinal ranking. This is often the case in policy decisions with widespread impacts. This paper uses a simulation study for spatial preferences to evaluate the performance of several rank-based weight approximation methods, as well as several new methods based on assigning each region to a tier expressing the extent to which it should influence the evaluation of policy alternatives. The tier-based methods do not become more cognitively complex as the number of regions increases, they allow decision makers to express a wider range of preferences, and they are similar in accuracy to rank-based methods when the number of regions is large. The paper then demonstrates all of these approximation methods with preferences for water usage by census block in a United States county.

scholarly journals Resilience–Vulnerability Analysis: A Decision-Making Framework for Systems Assessment

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (22) ◽  
pp. 9306
Author(s):  
Nikolaos A. Skondras ◽  
Demetrios E. Tsesmelis ◽  
Constantina G. Vasilakou ◽  
Christos A. Karavitis
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Complex Systems ◽  
Forest Fire ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Initial Assessment ◽  
Analysis Framework ◽  
Current Effort ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Combined Use

The terms ‘resilience’ and ‘vulnerability’ have been widely used, with multiple interpretations in a plethora of disciplines. Such a variety may easily become confusing, and could create misconceptions among the different users. Policy makers who are bound to make decisions in key spatial and temporal points may especially suffer from these misconceptions. The need for decisions may become even more pressing in times of crisis, where the weaknesses of a system are exposed, and immediate actions to enhance the systemic strengths should be made. The analysis framework proposed in the current effort, and demonstrated in hypothetical forest fire cases, tries to focus on the combined use of simplified versions of the resilience and vulnerability concepts. Their relations and outcomes are also explored, in an effort to provide decision makers with an initial assessment of the information required to deal with complex systems. It is believed that the framework may offer some service towards the development of a more integrated and applicable tool, in order to further expand the concepts of resilience and vulnerability. Additionally, the results of the framework can be used as inputs in other decision making techniques and approaches. This increases the added value of the framework as a tool.

scholarly journals Patients as equal partners in decision-making: The global reality

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anubha Taneja Mukherjee
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Decision Maker ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Medical Science ◽  
National Policy ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Developed Country ◽  
The World ◽  
The Government ◽  
To Come

Decision making is an inherently complicated procedure, which by its very nature requires the decision-maker to co-opt all the stakeholders concerned. The procedure of decision-making may vary from country to country, depending on its size, culture, history and special demographic circumstances. Around the world, key decision-makers include the executive, the legislature and the judiciary. While the distribution of powers between these three may vary in tandem with their relation to each other, their roles remain the same. While the legislature enacts laws for its citizens, the executive, popularly known as the government, implements these laws and while doing so promulgates policies that are in alignment with the said laws. Mostly, the executive is also authorised to promulgate some laws of its own. The judiciary, on the other hand, comes into the picture when there is a dispute with regard to such laws. It also steps in on its own at times. While settling such disputes, the judiciary also ends up setting what we know as precedents, which also become a part of the legal fabric of a society. In a nutshell, these three are the key decision makers in any country. As mentioned above, while making decisions, these authorities are mostly required to co-opt all the stakeholders concerned, thereby making decision making a consultative process. These stakeholders include think tanks, research bodies, media and most importantly the affected party. The reason for having such a consultative procedure in place is that the decision makers are not experts in every subject or issue that comes their way. For instance, when a need to promulgate a national policy on thalassemia presents itself to a certain government, whether it be owing to media reportage or representations from the civil society, the decision makers will look towards people considered to be the experts in the subject to come forward and be a part of the policy making. One could say that this sounds like an ideal situation where the government actually invites people concerned with thalassemia to come forward and share views about it for the purpose of policy making. It is, however, true! It is as true for India as it is for any developed country. What we must ensure then is that the government or the decision maker considers us, the patients, as the experts. While it does sound obvious that those impacted with the disorder would be the ones with the first-hand knowledge about the disorder, the very fact that there is a topic in this conference on the role of patients in decision making speaks volumes about the distance that remains to be covered by the patients of thalassemia as far as participation in decision-making is concerned. With the massive strides in the field of medical science and the unflinching support of organisations like Thalassemia International Federation (TIF), we have now reached the stage where we must step out of the victim mode and represent ourselves before the decision-makers, whether by forming Patients Advocacy Groups or otherwise. One may take cue from various associations around the world. Global HD Organisations are a good example. They are known to have got together to give patients a voice in clinical research. The most popular strategy for reaching out to the decision makers is to unite, engage, and partner both in private meetings and consultative fora like events, task forces and projects. “Unite, Engage & Partner” can therefore be the most successful mantra for engaging with the decision makers. Talking of examples of advocacy and participation by patients, while there are numerous examples in Europe and North America of the power of patient advocacy so much so that patients are on the same level as doctors when it comes to voicing opinions in policy making, TIF on an international level has created since 2009 the Expert Patients Programme, and is now moving forward in giving patients a voice through its educational platform. Recently, India also launched its first Thalassemia Patients Advocacy Group (PAG) in the august presence of the Deputy Chief Minister of the capital of the country. The India PAG has seven patients from the fields of law, psychology, education and IT. The Group is already involved with the government on the formulation of the National Thalassemia Policy. This is a great start and this should give enough and more encouragement to thalassemics across the world to UNITE, ENGAGE AND PARTNER in the process that impacts them the most – decision-making!

scholarly journals Lessons from COVID-19 Pandemic: A Preliminary Analysis of Bangladesh’s Responses

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 165-177
Author(s):  
Rifat Mahmud
Keyword(s):  
Content Analysis ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Crisis Management ◽  
Preliminary Analysis ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
The World ◽  
The Government ◽  
Crisis Responses ◽  
Second Wave

The first wave of the COVID- 19 disease has caused a daunting and unprecedented challenge for governments of the world. Decision-makers worldwide, including that of Bangladesh, had to initiate responses that were beyond the conventional measures. This paper offers the decision-makers in Bangladesh on the possible learning in the field of crisis management during this pandemic. The paper aims in focusing on the first phase of responses to COVID-19 (March-May) from the initial lockdown to the reopening of offices by the government of Bangladesh. Methodologically, the paper is a content analysis involving netnography approach of data collection from websites. The paper presents a finding of possible lessons of crisis responses in Bangladesh. The paper aims to create an agenda for learning lessons from the situation of the largest crisis to hit the world in centuries. The paper induces substantial value for policy-makers to be prepared for the second wave of the COVID- 19 crisis, to meet the challenges of the pandemic.

scholarly journals A conceptual competitive intelligence quality assurance model

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 685-696
Author(s):  
Tshilidzi Eric Nenzhelele
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Quality Assurance ◽  
Content Analysis ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Competitive Intelligence ◽  
Quality Of Information ◽  
Quality Problem

Competitive Intelligence (CI) improves the quality of product and service, decision-making and it improves quality of life. However, it has been established that decision makers are not happy about the quality of CI. This is because enterprises fail in quality assurance of CI. It has been concluded that most enterprises are clueless concerning CI quality assurance. Studies that previously attempted to resolve CI quality problem were limited in scope and focused too much on the quality of information than the overall CI quality. The purpose of this study is to propose a conceptual CI quality assurance model which will help in quality assurance of CI. The research was qualitative in nature and used content analysis.

Track 6.b Introduction

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Liv Merete Nielsen ◽  
Eva Lutnæs ◽  
Mia Porko-Hudd ◽  
Úrsula Bravo ◽  
Catalina Cortés ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
General Public ◽  
Design Education ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Concept Design ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Design Processes ◽  
Lay Persons ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Sustainable Societies

Norwegian research group Design Literacy at Oslo Metropolitan University (OsloMet) which is led by professor Liv Merete Nielsen has initiative to this paper track. The paper track was accompanied by a workshop. Design Literacy can be regarded as a catalyst for a move towards a better citizens participation in innovative design processes. By educating the general public to become design literate, there is a chance to support critical innovation and a possible move towards sustainable societies (Stegall, 2006). The challenge is to articulate content, performance and continuity for a critical decision-making process and how this influence critical innovation and design education at large. The concept ‘Design Literacy’ addresses the complex matter of objectives, content and practices in design processes and education. Research on multiple literacies has evoked considerable debate and redefinition within several areas of educational research (Coiro et al. 2008); the understanding of literacy is no longer bound to the ability to read and write verbal text or numeracy. Design Literacy (Nielsen and Brænne, 2013) are among newly coined literacies. Design Literacy is connected both to the creation and understanding of design innovation in a broad sense. In today’s mostly artificial world, the Design Literacy is regarded as a competence not only for the professional designer, but also for the general public in their position as citizens, consumers, users and decision makers in innovative processes. Designed artefacts and services influence our lives and values, both from personal and societal perspectives. Designers, decision makers and investors hold different positions in the design process, but they all make choices that will influence new innovations and our future. In order to solve crucial global challenges, designers and investors must cooperate; for this purpose, we argue that design literacy is necessary for all. We argue that the Design Literacies can support practices associated with innovation, democratic participation in design processes, developing and enacting ethical responsibilities, and understanding and supporting sustainable aspects of production and consumption. The track called for researchers to explore the following points: How development of Design Literacy can support critical innovation and sustainable issues Progressions in scaffolding Design Literacies from a pre-school to a university level The potential of Design Literacy to support collaborative and experimental approaches of projects between: investors/designers, general public/designers, children/designers How design education for the general public can represent both a foundation for professional design education and a prequalification for lay persons’ competence for decision-making and critical innovation How might Design Literacy influence sustainability issues in society? What are the challenges of professional design, when everyone wants to design? Research submnited for this track addressing the points above have been useful as a point of departure for the Design Literacy workshop and the creation of the Design Literacy International network. The papers have also been useful for the promotion of critical innovation and to inform policy and for educational implementation. The importance lies in the needs to better inform design education itself, to improve the approach of design educators, and to educate reflective citizens, policy makers, entrepreneurs and consumers in perspective of critical innovation.

The Effect of Option Framing in Self-Other Decision Making

Marketing ZFP ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 33-47
Author(s):  
Michaela Grösch ◽  
Martina Steul-Fischer
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Social Values ◽  
Framing Effect ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
The Self ◽  
Choice Behaviour ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Growing Body ◽  
Proxy Decision Making ◽  
Insurance Decisions

Option framing can be divided into additive and subtractive framing. In additive framing, individuals are asked to add desired options to a base model, i. e., to a core product which does not include any extras, whereas in subtractive framing, individuals are asked to deselect undesired options from a fully loaded model, i. e., a product that does already include all possible extras (Biswas and Grau 2008; Park et al. 2000). In additive framing, individuals must take action if they want to choose the option, e. g., by checking a box in an online configuration. In subtractive framing, individuals find preselected options, and they receive a preselected option unless they actively decide against it, e. g., by unchecking a box in an online configuration (Brown and Krishna 2004; Park et al. 2000). While option framing has received considerable attention with regard to decision making for the self (e. g., Biswas and Grau 2008; Herrmann et al. 2013; Levin et al. 2002; Park et al. 2000; Park and Kim 2012), no researchers have focused on option framing in self-other decision-making contexts. The aim of this paper is to examine the influence of option framing on decision making either for oneself or on behalf of another person. In two studies, we investigate choice behaviour for oneself or on behalf of someone else, namely ones mother, when either one option (Study 1) or more options (Study 2) are presented in additive and subtractive framing. The effect of option framing on decision making for a family member is a relevant question for firms and policy makers since it helps to clarify how an individual’s benefits and expenditures can be influenced by the way a choice is presented when deciding for someone else. In accordance with previous studies (e. g., Biswas and Grau 2008; Levin et al. 2002; Park and Kim 2012), we found the option framing effect when individuals decided on insurances for themselves; i. e., individuals were more likely to choose an option in subtractive framing than in additive framing. When individuals were asked to decide on behalf of their mother, we could not prove an option framing effect when a single option was considered (Study 1). When several options were available (Study 2), the option framing effect emerged; decision makers chose more options for their mother in subtractive framing than in additive framing. We believe that having the opportunity to vary the number of options is the underlying reason. In both studies, individuals deciding on behalf of their mother had a greater tendency to add an option in additive framing than did those deciding for themselves. The greater likelihood of choosing an option in additive framing when deciding for the mother corresponds to our assumption, derived from social values analysis, that decision makers engage in risk-minimizing behaviour as the socially preferred behaviour for proxy decision making. In both studies, no choice differences could be found for subtractive framing. Accepting the insurance option and the number of accepted insurance options remained stable when individuals decided for themselves or for their mother. We assume that for both framing, individuals who decided for their mother acted according to social values and therefore were likely to choose protection for their mother. Moreover, there might be a kind of ceiling effect for insurance decisions because some individuals either may not expect an insurance event to occur for themselves or their mother or may have a general aversion to insurance. Our results add to a growing body of evidence that decision making for others is more dependent on social norms than is decision making for oneself.

scholarly journals Evidence-Based Decision Making for Nutrition Policy and Programme Formulation in Ethiopia: A Qualitative Study Exploring Barriers and Facilitators

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. 1366-1366
Author(s):  
Solomon Eshetu Hailu ◽  
Tesfaye Bekele ◽  
Namukolo Covic ◽  
Desalegn Kuche ◽  
Beza Teshome ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Nutrition Policy ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Program Coordinators ◽  
Nutrition Research ◽  
Evidence Based Decision Making ◽  
Evidence Dissemination ◽  
Program Decisions

Abstract Objectives Despite much nutrition research conducted in Ethiopia, none has described existing opportunities for synergy or possible missed opportunities to use research to inform policy and program decisions to foster accelerated progress. The study aimed to describe prevailing processes on evidence use in formulating nutrition policy and program decisions and identify potential barriers and opportunities for evidence-based decision-making for nutrition for Ethiopia's context. Methods In 2017, 29 purposively selected key informants (KIs) were interviewed. They were identified using a consultative stakeholder mapping workshop and represented National Nutrition Program coordinators, key actors in government sectors, program coordinators from selected local and international NGOs, local and international universities and research institutes involved in nutrition research and key actors in policy decision-making. A framework analysis including identifying themes, coding, indexing, charting, mapping and interpretation was used. A validation workshop discussed findings and added perspectives to interpretation. Results The KIs perceived that demand for evidence from the Ethiopian government had been increasing over time. Majority referred to poor research quality as a barrier for using research in decision-making processes. Other challenges identified included limited cross-linkage, coordination gaps between researchers and decision makers, and inadequate translation of research evidence into meaningful information for policy makers. Availability of different forums, research dissemination conferences and suitable institutional structures that enable research and evidence dissemination were considered to be opportunities that should be leveraged to inform policy making. Conclusions The quality of research, and of collaborative engagement between those who produce evidence and decision makers who formulate policies need to be strengthened. Regular evidence dissemination events and publication of action oriented easy to read briefs could increase use of evidence among nutrition policy makers. Funding Sources Ethiopian Public Health Institute and Evidence-informed Decision-making in Health and Nutrition Network.

scholarly journals À propos du contrôle social de la politique énergétique

2005 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 713-736
Author(s):  
Louis Constans
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Energy Policy ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Freedom Of Choice ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Parliamentary Debates ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Time Frames ◽  
Made In

This paper attempts to clarify the basic issues underlying the discussion of citizens' participation in public decision-making on energy policy and projects. It questions the assumption that such participation is possible, and recalls that energy policy is at present, at least in the French context, an area of conflict between government and various interest groups. It warns of possible misunderstandings due to the lack of an agreed definition of participation. Three major points are made in this connection. The first is that the usual instruments of citizens' participation in decision-making (public inquiries, parliamentary debates, etc.) have, for a number of technical and institutional reasons, become largely irrelevant as regards energy matters — as indeed in several other areas of policy. The second is that decision-making on energy policy and projects really allows for very little freedom of choice on the part of decision-makers : such freedom rarely goes beyond the setting of time-frames for the achievement of goals imposed by circumstances. Finally, it is suggested that invocation of the ideals of democracy is unhelpful : what is realistically possible amounts only to a greater openness and objectivity in decision-making processes aimed at giving citizens, not an illusory power to decide themselves or to block decisions by policy-makers, but the capacity to forewarn the latter about public feelings on energy issues.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document