Search

This study explores the policy process in the Namibian Electricity Supply Industry in relation to the development of the Modified Single Buyer market model. The research employs the Advocacy Coalition Framework as a theoretical framework wherein actors within a policy subsystem are conceptualized as forming advocacy coalitions based on shared beliefs and engaging in coordinated efforts over time to influence policy direction. The analysis has uncovered the existence of two prominent coalitions: the progressive coalition is advocating for market liberalisation, while the conservative coalition is seeking to preserve the status quo and resist the adoption of the new electricity market model. The study concludes that powerful actors in the Electricity Supply Industry, although equipped with enormous economic resources and strong political ties, could not prevent the regulator from implementing comprehensive changes in the electricity sector. However, the conservative coalition has managed to negotiate for a phased implementation of the policy to ensure minimal disruption in the industry and to guarantee the security of the electricity supply in the long run. The phased implementation also allows sufficient time for this coalition to realign their business strategies within the new regulation policy and maintain their status as relevant and critical actors.

During crises, do emergency politics impair the EU polity by alienating Europeans? Recent literature suggests that executive decisions in hard times can spur negative European sentiment, increase polarisation in the public and thus create more problems than solutions. The Covid-19 pandemic offers an ideal opportunity to study this important issue. However, studying mass sentiment towards the EU is mostly constrained by imperfect survey data. We tackle this challenge with an empirical strategy that combines two original data sources: first, we use policy process analysis to identify key EU decisions; second, we leverage Twitter data to measure sentiment. As a result, we can study whether key EU decisions impacted EU sentiment and whether this impact is conditional on the level of EU competence, prior politicisation and problem pressure. We find that EU decisions impact EU sentiment positively and do not polarise it (even among highly politicised decisions). Low prior politicisation and healthcare-related decisions increase the positive impact of EU actions. There is thus no punishment of the EU for acting outside its remit. Our findings have important implications for the politics of polity maintenance in the EU. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study explores the policy process in the Namibian Electricity Supply Industry in relation to the development of the Modified Single Buyer market model. The research employs the Advocacy Coalition Framework as a theoretical framework wherein actors within a policy subsystem are conceptualized as forming advocacy coalitions based on shared beliefs and engaging in coordinated efforts over time to influence policy direction. The analysis has uncovered the existence of two prominent coalitions: the progressive coalition is advocating for market liberalisation, while the conservative coalition is seeking to preserve the status quo and resist the adoption of the new electricity market model. The study concludes that powerful actors in the Electricity Supply Industry, although equipped with enormous economic resources and strong political ties, could not prevent the regulator from implementing comprehensive changes in the electricity sector. However, the conservative coalition has managed to negotiate for a phased implementation of the policy to ensure minimal disruption in the industry and to guarantee the security of the electricity supply in the long run. The phased implementation also allows sufficient time for this coalition to realign their business strategies within the new regulation policy and maintain their status as relevant and critical actors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Insufficient transparency in prioritization of health services, multiple health insurance organizations with various and not-aligned policies, plus limited resources to provide comprehensive health coverage are among the challenges to design appropriate Health Insurance Benefit Package (HIBP) in Iran. This study aims to analyze Policy Process of Health Insurance Benefit Package in Iran. Method Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 25 experts, plus document analysis and observation, from February 2014 until October 2016. Using both deductive and inductive approaches, two independent researchers conducted data content analysis. We used MAXQDA.11 software for data management. Results We identified 10 main themes, plus 81 sub-themes related to development and implementation of HIBP. These included: lack of transparent criteria for inclusion of services within HIBP, inadequate use of scientific evidence to determine the HIBP, lack of evaluation systems, and weak decision-making process. We propose 11 solutions and 25 policy options to improve the situation. Conclusion The design and implementation of HIBP did not follow an evidence-based and logical algorithm in Iran. Rather, political and financial influences at the macro level determined the decisions. This is rooted in social, cultural, and economic norms in the country, whereby political and economic factors had the greatest impact on the implementation of HIBP. To define a cost-effective HIBP in Iran, it is pivotal to develop transparent and evidence-based guidelines about the processes and the stewardship of HIBP, which are in line with upstream policies and societal characteristics. In addition, the possible conflict of interests and its harms should be minimized in advance.

We present several completely general diversity metrics to quantify the problem-solving capacity of any public policy decision-making process. These metrics can be used alongside existing policy process analysis methods and capture aspects of the policy process that have not been considered before. This is performed by modelling the policy process using a declarative process paradigm. We introduce a class of traces, called first-passage traces, to represent different executions of the declarative processes. Heuristics of what properties a diversity measure of such processes ought to satisfy are used to derive two different metrics for these processes in terms of the set of first-passage traces. These metrics turn out to have formulations in terms of the entropies of two different random variables on the set of traces of the processes. In addition, we introduce a measure of "goodness" that allows for comparisons of policy processes with respect to the prescribed notion of "goodness". [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Insufficient transparency in prioritization of health services, multiple health insurance organizations with various and not-aligned policies, plus limited resources to provide comprehensive health coverage are among the challenges to design appropriate Health Insurance Benefit Package (HIBP) in Iran. This study aims to analyze Policy Process of Health Insurance Benefit Package in Iran.Method: Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 25 experts, plus document analysis and observation, from February 2014 until October 2016. Using both deductive and inductive approaches, two independent researchers conducted data content analysis. We used MAXQDA.11 software for data management.Results: We identified 10 main themes, plus 81 sub-themes related to development and implementation of HIBP. These included: lack of transparent criteria for inclusion of services within HIBP, inadequate use of scientific evidence to determine the HIBP, lack of evaluation systems, and weak decision-making process. We propose 11 solutions and 25 policy options to improve the situation.Conclusion: The design and implementation of HIBP did not follow an evidence-based and logical algorithm in Iran. Rather, political and financial influences at the macro level determined the decisions. This is rooted in social, cultural, and economic norms in the country, whereby political and economic factors had the greatest impact on the implementation of HIBP. To define a cost-effective HIBP in Iran, it is pivotal to develop transparent and evidence-based guidelines about the processes and the stewardship of HIBP, which are in line with upstream policies and societal characteristics. In addition, the possible conflict of interests and its harms should be minimized in advance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]