Introduction: What is Public Policy Analysis?

The essence of public policy analysis is the study of processes and actors involved in identifying and solving common problems within communities. It aims to identify these problems, propose potential solutions, implement them as public policies, and evaluate their effectiveness. Public policy analysis is interested in determining what needs to be done to address these problems and who needs to take action. Additionally, it is practice-oriented, aiming to provide specific solutions to specific problems, and it is multidisciplinary, drawing upon the findings, concepts, and theories of various scientific disciplines.

Public problems are those that affect a community or society at large, while personal problems are specific to individuals. Public problems are commonly referred to as problems in a community or society, whereas personal problems are individual challenges that may not have broader societal implications unless they affect a significant number of individuals simultaneously.

Public policy analysis focuses on identifying and solving public problems rather than personal ones. However, personal problems can become of concern to public policy analysis if they affect a significant number of individuals simultaneously, thus transforming into public problems. Public policy analysis involves a series of activities including identifying public problems, formulating appropriate solutions, implementing these solutions, and evaluating their effectiveness. It draws heavily from various disciplines such as political science, economics, law, sociology, psychology, and other scientific areas, making it multidisciplinary. Additionally, public policy analysis is multi-method, utilizing both qualitative and quantitative methods.

The main analysis stages in public policies are as follows:

1. Identification of problems,
2. Searching for solutions to these problems and clearly identifying the solution options, always including the "do nothing" or "let the trends continue" option,
3. Choosing one of these alternative solutions as the solution to be implemented by comparing it with the positive and negative consequences and externalities of all the other solution alternatives,
4. Implementation of the chosen solution,
5. Evaluation of the degree of success (or failure) of the implementation,
6. If the solution is a complete failure in terms of solving the problem, the result can be policy termination,
7. If the solution is partially successful (which also means partial failure) after evaluation, the result is policy change, necessitating repeating and replicating all these steps.

The potential outcomes of evaluating the effectiveness of a public policy solution include:

Policy termination if the solution is a complete failure in terms of solving the problem.
Policy change if the solution is partially successful (which also means partial failure) after evaluation, necessitating repeating and replicating all the analysis stages.

The second dimension of public policy analysis focuses on examining the actors involved in the public policy analysis process. Analysts concentrate on identifying who identifies the problems, proposes solutions, implements these solutions, evaluates the implementation, and ultimately decides whether to change or terminate existing policies based on the evaluation outcome.

Many public policy actors are involved in identifying and solving public problems. While government is one of the most important actors, it is not the only one. Other actors include private firms, international organizations, non-governmental organizations, and citizens. These actors may collaborate individually or in various combinations such as public-private partnerships to address public problems.

Public policy analysis can be conducted at various levels, including international, national, regional, and local levels. Public policy actors operate within and between these levels to produce and implement solutions to public policy problems. Some actors may operate at multiple levels, such as municipalities operating at the local level while cooperating with ministries at the regional or national level, or developing partnerships with international organizations at the international level.

Public policy analysis involves:

• Identifying societal problems.
• Formulating solution alternatives (policies) to address these problems.
• Implementing and evaluating these policies. It is described as a practical, problem-solving subset of public administration that combines qualitative and quantitative data collection methods. It is also multidisciplinary, drawing knowledge from various fields, and action-oriented due to its problem-solving focus. Factors such as demographic, social, economic, and political-cultural considerations are crucial in shaping public policy decisions.

Defining public policy analysis presents several challenges. The field is described as vast, heterogeneous, and dispersed, making it difficult to establish an inclusive and comprehensive system due to differing teaching methods, approaches, methodologies, epistemologies, theories, and subjects across universities. Additionally, efforts to bring the entire field under a single umbrella have been inconclusive.

Radin proposed revising Wildavsky's definition from "speaking truth to power" to "speaking truths to powers." She argued for this change due to the implementation of the principle of separation of powers in many countries, where there are multiple powers rather than a single power, and the application of pluralist perspectives in democratic regimes. This pluralism results in the existence of multiple truths due to different ideological perspectives or personal choices. Radin asserted that advisers should no longer advise decision-makers to solve public policy problems with just one mandatory policy. Instead, they should provide a range of possible solutions from which different people can choose according to their conditions, preferences, and ideological perspectives.

One of the critical issues addressed when analyzing a problem in public policy analysis is determining whether the problem is a root cause (the real problem) or a symptom. This distinction is important because treating symptoms without addressing the root cause will not lead to a healthy and permanent solution. Using the analogy of medicine, treating only the symptom (e.g., fever) without addressing the root cause of the disease will not solve the underlying problem.

Public policy analysis is seen as a tool that serves democratic regimes and democracy itself. The emphasis on "sciences" in the definition indicates that public policy analysts can and should use various qualitative and quantitative methods to shed light on the problems to be solved. Analysts can draw from disciplines such as public administration, business administration, law, economics, sociology, psychology, mathematics, statistics, and operations research to perform a holistic analysis, depending on the nature of the problem.

The debates surrounding the influence of economic interests and political views on public policy analysis are addressed.Public policy analysis is inevitably influenced by the interests of clients who provide resources for the analysis. Economic interests, such as pressure groups, and political views can affect both the process and outcomes of policy analysis. There is a debate about the legitimacy of client intervention in public policy analysis and the extent to which clients can influence variables such as the definition of the problem, criteria used in the analysis process, and the involvement of public policy actors.

The public policy analysis process can theoretically be applied to individual-level decisions as an analytical analysis and decision-making technique. An example is the process of selecting a spouse. The various steps of the public policy analysis process, such as clearly defining the problem, identifying alternatives, and using selection criteria, can be adapted to the decision-making process of choosing a spouse

Bounded rationality, as described by Herbert Simon, refers to the limitations in the human decision-making process due to the inability to collect and analyze all available data thoroughly. This concept applies to decision-making at both the individual and public levels. For example, when choosing a university or a spouse, individuals are limited by their capacity to collect and process information. Similarly, public policymakers face limitations in collecting and analyzing data related to policy decisions, which affects the complexity and conclusiveness of the decision-making process.

These examples include Plato's advising of the Sicilian kings, Aristotle's education of Alexander the Great of Macedonia, Farabi's listing of desired qualifications for public administrators in "El Medinetül Fazıla," and Ibn-i Haldun's discussions on public administration and public policy in his work "Mukaddime." These examples highlight the practical application of public policy thought in advising rulers and shaping governance structures in ancient civilizations.

These include the tradition of cameralism founded by Frederick I, King of Prussia, in the 16th-18th centuries, which aimed to produce practical knowledge and skilled bureaucrats in applied fields such as public finance and taxation. King Frederick I used cameralist policies to establish a modern administrative system in Prussia. The emergence of systematic data collection and analysis efforts in the 1800s to address the challenges of urbanization and improve living standards in newly industrializing cities. Governments and organizations like the Manchester and London Societies in England began collecting data to diagnose and treat public problems, leading to the use of scientific methods such as surveys, statistical analysis, and participant observation by analysts like Adolphe Quetelet, Ernst Engel, and Charles Booth to understand social problems and propose solutions. These efforts aimed to maintain political and social stability during the transition from agricultural to industrial society and shaped systems such as health, education, justice, and childcare based on empirical findings. Despite the introduction of basic data collection and analysis methods, the widespread use of mathematical models and statistics in data processing methods had not yet been introduced during this period.

Three key examples are provided to illustrate the emergence of public policy analysis in the United States at the beginning of the 20th century. Firstly, the Progressive Movement, led by figures like Woodrow Wilson, emphasized data-driven decision-making and reform efforts. Secondly, Franklin Delano Roosevelt's implementation of Keynesian economic policies during the Great Depression highlighted the role of government intervention and expert advisors in shaping policy. Finally, the US Army's use of operations research methods during World War II demonstrated the importance of data analysis in strategic decision-making. These examples showcase the early development of public policy analysis in response to significant societal challenges.

There are some key examples to illustrate the utilization of social science experts and operations research methods during significant historical events, particularly the Second World War and the Vietnam War, in the context of public policy analysis. During the Second World War, social science experts like Harold Lasswell and Daniel Lerner analyzed propaganda tools of the German regime for the US Army, demonstrating the application of scientific analysis in understanding and countering enemy propaganda. Additionally, operations research methods were employed by the US Army in the Vietnam War, as highlighted by Robert McNamara, who served as the US Secretary of Defense at the time. These examples underscore the integration of complex scientific methods, such as operations research, cost-benefit analysis, and mathematical modeling, into data collection and analysis processes in public policy analysis during wartime contexts.