Policy analysis and policy analytics

Working from a description of what policy analysis entails, we review the emergence of the recent field of analytics and how it may impact public policy making. In particular, we seek to expose current applications of, and future possibilities for, new analytic methods that can be used to support public policy problem-solving and decision processes, which we term policy analytics. We then review key contributions to this special volume, which seek to support policy making or delivery in the areas of energy planning, urban transportation planning, medical emergency planning, healthcare, social services, national security, defence, government finance allocation, understanding public opinion, and fire and police services. An identified challenge, which is specific to policy analytics, is to recognize that public sector applications must balance the need for robust and convincing analysis with the need for satisfying legitimate public expectations about transparency and opportunities for participation. This opens up a range of forms of analysis relevant to public policy distinct from those most common in business, including those that can support democratization and mediation of value conflicts within policy processes. We conclude by identifying some potential research and development issues for the emerging field of policy analytics

Evaluating Participatory Modeling: Developing a Framework for Cross-case Analysis

Participatory modeling is increasingly recognised as an effective way to assist collective decision-making processes in the domain of natural resource management. This paper introduces a framework for evaluating projects that have adopted a participatory modeling approach. This framework – known as the ‘Protocol of Canberra’ – was developed through a collaboration between French and Australian researchers engaged in participatory modeling and evaluation research. The framework seeks to assess the extent to which different participatory modeling practices reinforce or divert from the theoretical assumptions they are built upon. The paper discusses the application of the framework in three case-studies, two from Australia and one from the Pacific island of the Republic of Kiribati. The paper concludes with some comments for future use of the framework in a range of participatory modeling contexts, including fostering consideration of why and how different methodological approaches are used to achieve project aims and to build a collective vision amongst diverse stakeholders.participation, modeling, evaluation, complex systems science

Towards an art and science of decision aiding for water management and planning: a participatory modelling process

Planning and management of water resources are faced with increasingly high levels of complexity, uncertainty and conflict. Traditional technical and top-down management strategies have proved inadequate, forcing a move to more integrated forms of management, planning and decision making that can include stakeholders and communities, as well as technical experts and policy makers. These integrated forms of management require not only good technical or scientific ability, but a range of art-like skills including communication, creativity and the capacity to acknowledge and integrate diverse points of view. However, processes designed to aid such inter-organisational or multi-stakeholder decisionmaking are rare and in need of investigation. This paper proposes a process of participatory modelling using a series of semi-structured collective decision cycles which can aid decisions involving multiple stakeholders in water management and planning. The participatory modelling process outlined in this paper is designed to capture and integrate both tacit and explicit knowledge from stakeholders, right from the problem identification phase through to the final decision making, implementation and ongoing monitoring and evaluation. A brief idealised example of the participatory modelling process testing in Montpellier, France, is highlighted, as well as further questions and identified priority research areas

Towards an art and science of decision aiding for water management and planning: a participatory modelling process

Planning and management of water resources are faced with increasingly high levels of complexity, uncertainty and conflict. Traditional technical and top-down management strategies have proved inadequate, forcing a move to more integrated forms of management, planning and decision making that can include stakeholders and communities, as well as technical experts and policy makers. These integrated forms of management require not only good technical or scientific ability, but a range of art-like skills including communication, creativity and the capacity to acknowledge and integrate diverse points of view. However, processes designed to aid such inter-organisational or multi-stakeholder decisionmaking are rare and in need of investigation. This paper proposes a process of participatory modelling using a series of semi-structured collective decision cycles which can aid decisions involving multiple stakeholders in water management and planning. The participatory modelling process outlined in this paper is designed to capture and integrate both tacit and explicit knowledge from stakeholders, right from the problem identification phase through to the final decision making, implementation and ongoing monitoring and evaluation. A brief idealised example of the participatory modelling process testing in Montpellier, France, is highlighted, as well as further questions and identified priority research areas

Redefining Leadership in the 21st Century: the view from cybernetics

A white paper developed by the ANU School of Cybernetics powered by The Menzies Foundation

Co-engineering participatory water management processes: theory and insights from Australian and Bulgarian interventions

Broad-scale, multi-governance level, participatory water management processes intended to aid collective decision making and learning are rarely initiated, designed, implemented, and managed by one person. These processes mostly emerge from some form of collective planning and organization activities because of the stakes, time, and budgets involved in their implementation. Despite the potential importance of these collective processes for managing complex water-related social-ecological systems, little research focusing on the project teams that design and organize participatory water management processes has ever been undertaken. We have begun to fill this gap by introducing and outlining the concept of a co-engineering process and examining how it impacts the processes and outcomes of participatory water management. We used a hybrid form of intervention research in two broad-scale, multi-governance level, participatory water management processes in Australia and Bulgaria to build insights into these coengineering processes. We examined how divergent objectives and conflict in the project teams were negotiated, and the impacts of this co-engineering on the participatory water management processes. These investigations showed: (1) that language barriers may aid, rather than hinder, the process of stakeholder appropriation, collective learning and skills transferal related to the design and implementation of participatory water management processes; and (2) that diversity in co-engineering groups, if managed positively through collaborative work and integrative negotiations, can present opportunities and not just challenges for achieving a range of desired outcomes for participatory water management processes. A number of areas for future research on co-engineering participatory water management processes are also highlighted

Co-engineering Participatory Water Management Processes: Theory and Insights from Australian and Bulgarian Interventions

Broad-scale, multi-governance level, participatory water management processes intended to aid collective decision making and learning are rarely initiated, designed, implemented, and managed by one person. These processes mostly emerge from some form of collective planning and organization activities because of the stakes, time, and budgets involved in their implementation. Despite the potential importance of these collective processes for managing complex water-related social-ecological systems, little research focusing on the project teams that design and organize participatory water management processes has ever been undertaken. We have begun to fill this gap by introducing and outlining the concept of a co-engineering process and examining how it impacts the processes and outcomes of participatory water management. We used a hybrid form of intervention research in two broad-scale, multi-governance level, participatory water management processes in Australia and Bulgaria to build insights into these coengineering processes. We examined how divergent objectives and conflict in the project teams were negotiated, and the impacts of this co-engineering on the participatory water management processes. These investigations showed: (1) that language barriers may aid, rather than hinder, the process of stakeholder appropriation, collective learning and skills transferal related to the design and implementation of participatory water management processes; and (2) that diversity in co-engineering groups, if managed positively through collaborative work and integrative negotiations, can present opportunities and not just challenges for achieving a range of desired outcomes for participatory water management processes. A number of areas for future research on co-engineering participatory water management processes are also highlighted