Three pillars of policy development

Government policy refers to the laws, strategies, plans, programmes, and services it develops to achieve its objectives and deliver public goods and services.

The term policy can have many meanings, for example:

• policy can refer to a particular philosophy or ideology that sets the context for decision making, for example: socialist policies, capitalist policies
• policy can refer to a purposeful objective or ambition, for example: a policy of moving to net-zero carbon emissions, or the achievement of a united Ireland
• policy can refer to a principled position, for example, a united Ireland only by consent
• policy can refer to a plan and course of action, for example: we will achieve net zero by a combination of decarbonising energy production, retrofitting buildings, and changing land use

The work of the civil service, and the focus of this rough guide, is primarily concerned with policy as a plan and course of action. In Ireland, government policies are concerned with the generation, allocation, and organisation of public resources to meet social, economic, and environmental goals, where the mandate for the pursuit of these goals is derived from the democratic process.

The role of the civil service is to inform and support Government both to help it formulate its policy agenda and to then take ownership of, and implement, this agenda.

Supporting Government in policy development and implementation is the central concern and duty of the civil service.

Good policy development needs to:

• be clear on the issue at hand
• establish how it should be addressed
• engage appropriately with interested stakeholders
• follow through with careful design and implementation of the selected policy option
• adapt the policy based on experience during implementation and in response to changing circumstances

In order to develop and deliver good policy civil and public servants usually need to work across organisation boundaries requiring:

• collaboration between people with the right skills – including research, analysis, data experts, statisticians, financial, legal, design, project management, communications, people management, and systems development
• cross-organisational commitment and support, including through the allocation of capacity and technical knowledge, and appropriate governance structures
• public buy-in and political commitment, achieved through public engagement and clear, concise, and timely communication

The three-pillar framework set out in this handbook was adapted from the work of the UK Policy Profession Board. Having been adapted to the Irish context, it now forms the touchstone for the development of policy in Ireland.

As its name suggests the framework is based on three pillars:

• data and evidence
• feasibility and implementation
• legitimacy

Combined, these three pillars provide the framework to approach good policy making in the Irish context.

We outline the three-pillar framework below.

Data and evidence are central to good policy development. Together they provide a sound basis for informed decision making.

Data refers to the facts and information about an issue.

Evidence is the use of that data and information to help draw a conclusion about an issue.

Data and evidence alone do not make policy. But, if policy is to be properly informed, it is important to use evidence to weigh up policy options and priorities.

The importance of data and evidence

Data can provide concrete, objective information which can be analysed. This might, for example, include data relating to the take-up or costs of a public service. Research methods such as surveys can be used to gather data on views and opinions (for example, on the level of satisfaction with a public service) for further analysis.

Evidence involves the application of analytical methods to understand what the data is telling us. It helps to shed light on the nature of the issue in question – the size, scale, and complexity of the policy issue.

Evidence helps us to assess the effectiveness of existing policy options or interventions in place elsewhere.

We need data and evidence throughout the five phases of policy development and implementation. For example, We can use data and evidence to help assess the need for a policy intervention and to refine the definition of the policy issue in Phase 1 (Demand for policy).

We can use data and evidence during Phase 2 (Deepen understanding) and Phase 3 (Design with best advice) to design the policy.

We may also use this data to:

• understand the resources needed to deliver a policy intervention and estimate the potential costs and benefits of any intervention
• establish the feasibility of a policy intervention
• help to establish the legitimacy (that is, public and political support) for a policy
• inform decisions on policy in Phase 4 (Decide Policy Proposals)

We may later use this data to inform performance targets during policy implementation in Phase 5 (Deliver policy to achieve intent).

Sometimes, particularly with a new initiative, there may be limited data available within an Irish context. In these cases, it may be useful to seek data and evidence from other countries. In doing this, we must be aware that it is risky to assume that a successful policy can be simply ‘transplanted’ from one context to another. Our analysis of data and evidence in other countries needs to take account of differences, for example, in demographic, legal, financial, cultural, and social, conditions.

All of this work requires the use of appropriate tools by people with the skills to use these tools. We cannot be expected to have the full array of tools and skills but should draw on resources available across the civil service to assist you as necessary.

Appendix C provides a list of some tools and resources to support this pillar.

Primary and secondary data

Primary data refers to new data collected directly for the purpose of informing a particular decision. This data can include statistical data drawn from administrative systems, data obtained through observation, or data obtained through surveys of stakeholders or service users.

Secondary data refers to existing data and evidence, for example, the report of a research body or an expert group, usually created for another purpose but of relevance to the policy issue in question.

To assess the merits of a policy intervention or to understand if an existing policy or programme is working as intended, we need to decide:

• what data is needed to inform the assessment
• how to gather it
• if we need support to gather and analyse the data

For example, a school meals programme found it needed new data to gain a comprehensive understanding of where and how well the programme was working and where it could be improved.

To know what data they needed, they:

1. listed the questions they wanted to answer about the school meals programme (see column 1 in Figure 4 below)

2. listed where they could get these answers (see column 2)

3. wrote a tender for research expertise to gather and analyse the data sources to get the answers they needed

Figure 4: Evaluation of the School Meals Programme – Request for Tender

Some of the data above is secondary data, such as the literature review. However, most of the data was primary data that came from interviews and workshops with stakeholders such as officials, school principals, and school children.

The study was designed so that the evaluation had at least three sources of evidence for each question. This allowed the merits of one data set to compensate for weaknesses in another. For example, the financial modelling might identify the potential to make the programme more cost effective if it was possible to procure cheaper food. However, stakeholder interviews might stress that it was important the food provided was healthy and that children would eat it. Different sources of data help us to see different perspectives and ultimately make a balanced recommendation.

Summary

Data and evidence is a key input to the analysis, appraisal, and the weighing up of policy gaps, options and priorities. We need to make sure we have the capacity to do all of this. We may need appropriate research expertise to generate data and evidence and to help us to interpret it.

When assessing data to create evidence and inform policy, it is important to:

• specify the questions the data is required to answer
• identify and understand the potential sources of primary and secondary data
• use multiple sources of data wherever possible to ensure a comprehensive understanding of the policy issue
• use appropriate tools and apply the necessary skills to the analysis of the data to translate it into meaningful evidence

While evidence plays a crucial part in developing policy proposals, you need to consider it along with the other pillars of the framework for policy development.

The second critical pillar of the policy development framework is feasibility and implementation. Can the issue in question be successfully addressed? And, if so, how? It is through answering these questions that we move beyond the realm of idea and aspiration to something that is real and tangible, something that can achieve the goals of Government.

Assessing feasibility

Often policy issues are addressed through simple statements of abstract policy objectives, such as what if:

• …every child had a hot school meal
• …waiting times in emergency departments were reduced to no more than two hours
• …every child who needed an appointment could get an appointment with an orthodontist within 4 weeks
• …every home in Ireland had a minimum B BER rating, etc.?

However, while it is legitimate to ask questions such as these, good policy development also demands that we accompany the answers with some assessment of the feasibility of how these objectives might be achieved.

A failure to associate valid policy objectives with an informed consideration of how these objectives might be delivered often results in unrealistic expectations. This, in turn, gives rise to assessments of ‘implementation’ failure, which, in turn, call into question the policy and delivery capacity of the civil service. Accordingly, when developing policy and assessing policy options, we should engage, in good time, with all of the bodies and organisations that will be involved in implementing the policies concerned.

In doing so, we should strive to fully understand the resource, legal, systems and organisational challenges associated with implementing policy choices together with the costs involved, the benefits to be derived and the implementation timeline. These should be clearly documented, with a clear statement of underlying assumptions, and communicated to decision makers.

We should also understand how changes in key assumptions and decisions such as policy design features, time, cost, and wider economic circumstances could impact on project delivery. This can be done by undertaking a sensitivity analysis.

We should ensure that robust governance and project management structures and processes are put in place to:

• agree a detailed project plan and timelines
• identify, assess, and respond to risk
• identify responsible owners for each element of the policy and allocate tasks accordingly
• monitor implementation progress including cost

We should ensure that the departments or agencies who will implement the policy choice sign-off on that choice or at least have the opportunity to present any concerns they may have to the relevant decision makers. Policy practitioners could consider gathering a ‘challenge team’ of colleagues to examine and challenge each of the key assumptions behind the implementation design. Every policy recommendation brought for decision should clearly set out an assessment of feasibility based on, and addressing, the activities set out above.

A well-designed policy

A well-designed policy, taking account of implementation challenges as set out above, explains up-front the changes it is trying to bring about and how these will be achieved. This includes identifying and discussing assumptions we, or others, may have made. We need to use this insight to help us think about how:

• a programme might fall short and put mitigating measures in place
• how we can monitor and evaluate progress to make sure it achieves the desired policy solution

For example, the benefits of providing meals to children will only accrue if they eat them! We all know that may not happen despite our best efforts. This requires us to think, in advance, both about how we assess whether or not the children are eating their meals and, if not, how we might tailor meals to suit a variety of tastes. Therefore, to help us translate and tailor policies into concrete outcomes we must engage with everybody involved in the delivery process. Naturally, this engagement includes those persons, groups, or sectors who are the subject of a policy change but also extends to providers and practitioners who can help to establish whether, how, and when, a policy can be delivered. In addition, it must also involve all organisations responsible for delivery.

Summary

A well-designed policy should be feasible, based on a proper assessment of implementation challenges. This assessment will help to inform the choice of policy instruments and to identify and mitigate against the inevitable risks that will be faced in translating policy choices into practice.

When we are considering policy implementation, we need to be engaging with everybody in the value chain who will be involved and be clear about who is doing what and when. This will help to establish accountability and is part of good project management. As part of this, we also to need to put in place a robust governance mechanism to monitor both the delivery of the policy and its effectiveness and to take, or seek authority for, corrective action where required. This will assist us in being responsive to challenges which may arise once the policy is in place.

We must always remember that, in a parliamentary democracy such as Ireland, the government’s mandate to make policy choices ultimately comes from the electorate. Government can only implement policy when it can command the support of the Oireachtas. Oireachtas members, in turn, depend on the support of the constituents they are elected to serve and represent.

Accordingly, any policy intervention, no matter how well intentioned or designed, cannot succeed if it does not have sufficient political or public support. The legitimacy of the policy choice is dependent on this support.

Policy initiatives, therefore, also need to be backed up by:

• buy-in, or at least acceptance, by the people who will be affected by the policy, and/or
• a clear, prominent and sustained political commitment at government level, supported by
• engagement with the Oireachtas to explain the policy and to build the broad political support needed to make sure the initial and long-term implementation of a policy is effective

Stakeholder engagement

Stakeholders are the people and organisations that have an interest in the policy issue. They will always include the people and organisations directly affected by a policy change but can also include advocacy and other organisations representing the interest of affected parties, the general public, academic and research organisations, media organisations, and public representatives.

We need effective stakeholder engagement when developing policy. The insights, in particular of direct stakeholders and their representative bodies, can help us to understand the role, views, and experiences, of interested parties. These can often help us not just to formulate policy objectives but to turn these objectives into real action.

The public perception on a policy issue can change quickly. In addition to direct stakeholders and their representative organisations, the views and opinions of academics, media, and political commentators, can all affect how the public and the Oireachtas view a policy initiative.

We need a deep and ongoing engagement with stakeholders to ensure that we are aware of what is being said about an issue, and, if needed, to challenge misinformation and explain nuances of policy that might not be fully understood.

Deeper engagement opportunities can include:

• meetings with representative bodies
• in-depth interviews with key stakeholders across different sectors and other departments
• public consultations
• thematic forums such as the National Forum on International Security Policy, Energy Poverty Stakeholder Forum and Social Inclusion Forum

These types of activities allow all sides the time and space to elaborate on the complexities of policy choices, potential trade-offs, and what data and evidence is or isn’t telling us.

Summary

At a societal level, legitimacy is about building and sustaining public confidence. Public confidence means the public trust in Government to act in the general interest, and to do so in a way that, as far as possible, does not unnecessarily or arbitrarily penalise or advantage any particular group.

While not all public policy can achieve widespread public support, it is important to assess and establish the legitimacy of proposed policy actions and to work to ensure that policy initiatives can sustain public and political support.