3. Problem Identification and Assessment
The Palestinian Authority uses various forms of data and evidence for problem identification and assessment, but information is not made widely available and is not always up-to-date and comprehensive. There is thus no systematic access to relevant and high-quality data for this stage of policy-making. This section therefore recommends that the PA improves the availability and use of data, promotes more regular use of innovative tools and methods, promotes inter-ministerial exchanges, encourages liaising with relevant external stakeholders, and promotes professional, strategic and innovation civil service skills to support effective problem identification and assessment.
The first step in sound policy-making is properly identifying a problem and designing the right response(s) to address it. Policy-makers need to focus on the observation and analysis of a new issue, challenge or current trend that may require the need to be translated and developed into a policy response. This phase is crucial in the sense that it acts as a filter, by assessing whether a social, economic, political or environmental issue or trend demonstrates the need to be further analysed before a policy is developed or if no action should be taken in this context.
It is thus important that policy-makers fully understand the nature of the challenges that are supposed to be addressed by legislation. The Legislative Drafting Guidelines stress the need for a clear and accurate identification of the policy problem. They recommend the use of digital statistics “to monitor the date of the problem and its development to help us to determine its size and to know if it can develop over time, the relationship of that development to the resulting negatives that could be more severe if there is no attempt or intervention to solve it” (Palestinian Authority Ministry of Justice, 2018[1]). The Guidelines further require policy-makers to clearly differentiate between the actual problem, its outcome and symptoms.
Responses to the OECD questionnaire show that different types of evidence are routinely used in the problem identification process in the PA. Ministries are reported to systematically review and analyse previous policies every three years to identify new issues that need to be translated into policy. They further use systematic reviews, monitoring and evaluation reports as a basis for problem identification. They further consult public statistics and administrative data, reports from international organisations as well as recommendations of control agencies. Responses to the questionnaire also show that line ministries conduct focus group consultations and interviews in addition to surveys and polls. Ex ante and ex post regulatory impact assessments as well as horizon scanning and foresight exercises are not used as evidence by any of the surveyed institutions (for more information on regulatory impact assessments, see Part II).
The broad array of different types of evidence used in the problem identification process in the PA’s line ministries can positively influence the problem identification process. Questionnaire responses, however, also show that not all information is widely available, up-to-date or comprehensive. This observation is in line with the situation described during the interviews with various PA stakeholders in the OECD’s fact-finding missions, where limited access to quality information and data was highlighted as a major challenge.
The Palestinian Authority may thus consider improving the availability and use of data and evidence for problem identification and policy assessment. Data and evidence are crucial to identify policy issues and underpin problem assessment. This relates both to availability of the data, the quality of the data and the processes in place to leverage the data for policy-making. The Palestinian Authority could thus consider mobilising already existing data more systematically. Often line ministries collect data (e.g. from the evaluation of previous policies), but do not fully analyse and use it for problem identification and assessment. In addition, they could leverage accessible data and insights from different non-institutional stakeholders such as the Palestine Area Chamber of Commerce, international organisations or civil society organisations (CSOs). A second recommendation is to develop a systematic approach to the collection and management of data relevant for problem identification and an understanding of when this data should be available – e.g. annually, quarterly - to inform the problem identification process. Due to the line ministries’ responsibilities, such an approach should be developed at ministry level and in cooperation with the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics.
In addition to the availability of good quality evidence, a number of tools and methods (see Box 3.2 for an overview) can help to identify issues that a government should act upon. The PESTLE framework can help structure context analysis, problem-tree analyses can be used to define causalities and prioritise problem dynamics and the design thinking method can be deployed to apply a user-centric approach to problem definition. Responses to the questionnaire, however, showed that the PA’s line ministries use a limited number of these tools. For instance, the Diwan and the Ministry of Justice report the use of SWOT analyses as a tool. Moreover, the Diwan makes use of root cause analyses and institutional assessments by external experts. While the current limited use of a number of tools is a good starting point, the PA’s line ministries could promote more regular use of these instruments and deploy a wider array of tools and methods for improved problem identification. In addition to Box 3.2, more detailed descriptions and user guidance of PESTLE, problem-tree analysis and design thinking can be found in the forthcoming OECD Good Practices Manual for the Palestinian Authority (OECD, forthcoming).
In addition to the limited guidance on the “planning stage” provided in the binding Guidelines on Legislative Drafting, a number of line ministries have developed additional guidance on the policy development process that also includes more detailed information about the problem identification phase. For instance, the Ministry of Local Governance and the Ministry of Education prepared respective guidelines to assist their ministries’ policy-makers. Recognising the risk a proliferation of guidance documents poses, this useful practice of providing additional guidance on the problem identification and assessment, for instance on the use of problem identification instruments, could be further mainstreamed across all line ministries. The Prime Minister’s Office and the Ministry of Justice could take the lead to improve overall practice and avoid a fragmentation of guidance across the PA. New Zealand’s Policy Project (see Box 3.1) is an example of how guidance is communicated and skills and capability development are facilitated in an OECD Member country.
The Policy Project in New Zealand aims at building a high performing policy system that supports and enables good government decision-making and policy development. The Policy Project is a platform that equips policy practitioners with access to relevant instruments and tools, best practices, advice and information to develop their skills and capability for more effective and better government decision-making. The platform includes links to policy improvement frameworks, a policy methods toolbox, case studies, links to policy communities, insights briefings, and development pathways. It provides a dedicated policy community which regularly interacts to provide common standards to support change at a systemic and not only individual level. The long-term insights briefings have been put in place to ensure that the policies go beyond the urgent to tackle longer-term challenges.
The Policy Project is anchored in the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. It is co-developed with policy practitioners from across government and championed by a network across ministries of deputy chief executives with policy responsibilities, who serve as ambassadors of the Policy Project within their institution or agency.
As part of the Policy Project, three improvement frameworks have been co-designed with the policy community to help government agencies improve their policy quality and capability: the Policy Quality Framework, the Policy Skills Framework, and the Policy Capability Framework.
Policy Quality Framework
The Policy Quality Framework provides the policy community with a set of standards that specify what good quality advice means. Government agencies can use the Policy Quality Framework’s standards to hold themselves accountable for the quality of their advice, and to support better government decision-making. Policy advisors and managers can use the framework to help them develop quality policy advice and to peer review the advice of others.
Policy Skills Framework
The Policy Skills Framework sets out the knowledge, applied skills and behaviours that policy practitioners require to deliver quality policy advice. The framework recognises different levels of capability - from new professionals developing their policy craft to seasoned experts at the top of their game. If you are a policy practitioner, you can use the framework to help you map your skills. If you are a policy manager, you can use the framework to help you evaluate your team’s skills. Tools based on the framework support individual performance development and building high performing policy teams.
Policy Capability Framework
The Policy Capability Framework is an organisational improvement tool. It describes the key components of policy capability needed by a government agency or team to produce quality policy advice. The Framework provides a common language for government agencies to reflect on policy performance and identify areas for improvement, while being flexible enough to apply in different operating contexts. Senior leaders and policy managers use the Framework to improve the policy performance of their teams and agencies.
Note: The Policy Project can be found here: https://dpmc.govt.nz/our-programmes/policy-project
Source: Government of New Zealand, The Policy Project, https://dpmc.govt.nz/our-programmes/policy-project/about-policy-project (Government of New Zealand, n.d.[2])
To foster a co-ordinated approach across the PA and allow for a comprehensive definition of policy problems, inter-ministerial exchanges are important at the early stage of problem identification. Exchanges between line ministries allow policy-makers to receive information about other institutions’ legislative intentions prior to the policy formulation and drafting phase. The various ad hoc special committees that are established by decision of the Council of Ministers to review individual legislative proposals should thus not only discuss draft legislation, but could also serve as a forum to exchange views on different policy problems and challenges policy-makers identify and wish to respond to. Ministries could thus prepare and exchange draft legislative proposals at an early stage through policy memoranda (and potentially related documents) including a detailed problem definition to inform each other about challenges and issues they identify and their respective legislative intentions. Such practices would allow for a discussion of the definition of policy problems from different line ministry perspectives. Early-stage policy memoranda may further help staff with the drafting of legislation. The General Secretariat of the Council of Ministers could co-ordinate and facilitate this exchange of policy memoranda.
Therefore, it is advisable to make a ministry’s work plans, the related timetables and working groups accessible to all other ministries, either through the digital file management system or through the General Secretariat of the Council of Ministers. This enables ministries interested in a particular legislative or non-legislative project to signal their interest in it, with a view to being represented on the working group or being consulted. Of course, the prerequisite is careful maintaining and regular up-dating of material and databases available.
PESTL(E): This tool is a framework for the analysis of key factors (political, economic, sociological, technological, legal and environmental) of the external environment of the policy in question. It comprises a checklist of areas to be examined when analysing these factors. It is used to determine the external factors that have or will have an enabling or hindering impact on the policy and which are later either translated into opportunities and threats in the SWOT analysis or used independently.
SWOT analysis: SWOT is one of the most popular tools for analysing the external and internal environment of the policy in question. It is a relatively simple technique that can be used to support the preparation or amendment of policies, and it often follows on from a PESTL analysis. S (strengths) and W (weaknesses) represent internal factors, while O (opportunities) and T (threats) cover external enablers and limitations.
Root cause analysis (RCA): Root cause analysis is a systematic process for identifying the root causes of policy problems. While several different approaches to RCA exist, they generally include the same four steps: 1) identify and describe the problem in detail; 2) create a timeline from the normal situation up to the time the problem occurred; 3) distinguish between the root cause and other causal factors; 4) establish a causal link between the root cause and the problem.
Problem-tree analysis: The "problem tree" technique is a tool, which is useful in the identification and analysis stages. A problem tree usually consists of several levels, a hierarchy of interlinked problems. In this hierarchy, a problem at a lower lever (in conjunction with other problems at that level) leads to the problem positioned one level above it. Connecting lines indicate cause-effect relationships. In the following example, three levels of problems are shown (with the fourth, fifth etc. lower levels continuing downwards).
A more detailed description of these tools and methods for problem identification and definition can be found in the OECD’s forthcoming Good Practice manual for the Palestinian Authority.
Source: Author’s own elaboration based on the OECD’s Good Practice Manual for the Palestinian Authority (forthcoming).
The quality of the problem identification and assessment can further be improved by tapping wider sources of information and perspectives through increased stakeholder engagement already at the early stages of the policy cycle. The OECD Recommendation of the Council on Open Government [OECD/LEGAL/0438] recommends that governments “grant all stakeholders equal and fair opportunities to be informed and consulted and actively engage them in all phases of the policy-cycle and service design and delivery”. The participation of people and civil society can help policy-makers obtain the views of the public, identify potential conflict lines, and gather additional information on previously overlooked issues that require the government’s attention. While the OECD’s 2011 Guide on Regulatory Consultation in the PA (OECD, 2011[3]) points out that the actual consultation should not start too early, as stakeholders need concrete proposals to comment upon, it is equally important to keep stakeholders from across society already informed at the early stages. At an early stage in the decision-making process, there is still scope to influence and shape policy decisions and outcomes. The PA’s line ministries should thus liaise with relevant stakeholders in areas they intend to legislate, in order to profit from their information, knowledge and opinions that can help detect new or emerging policy issues. In addition to early-stage ad hoc consultations, line ministries may consider setting up sectoral policy dialogues to regularly exchange views with external stakeholders.
As with all steps of the policy process, the quality of draft legislation depends on the knowledge and skills of the civil service. To identify and define policy problems it is important to develop professional, strategic and innovation skills. Civil servants need to be capable of detecting and understanding the root causes of policy challenges. This requires “analytical skills that can synthesise multiple disciplines and/or perspectives into a single narrative” (OECD, 2017[4]) including the capacity to interpret and integrate different and sometimes conflicting visions correctly, and to refocus and reframe policies. This also includes networking and digital skills to identify the right stakeholders and the right experts outside the civil service for engagement in problem identification. To foster the development of skills and capability for problem identification, the Palestinian Authority should thus include problem identification in all public service training courses related to policy development.
The existence of a certain problem is considered a main cause for the failure of the existing legislation, provided there is an applicable legislation, and despite its implementation in reality, there is still a problem. However, if we are talking about a problem that is not addressed by any legislation or PA intervention to solve it, it is imperative to identify the problem clearly and accurately. It is preferable if we have digital statistics that monitor the date of the problem and its development to help us to determine its size and to know if it can develop over time, the relationship of that development to the resulting negatives that could be more severe if there is no attempt or intervention to solve it.
When the history of the problem is studied, attention should be paid that there is a difference between the problem, its outcome and its symptoms; for example: the existence of a Traffic Law, with the existence of congestions on some roads. In this respect, it is necessary to determine if the problem is the inability of the applicable legislation to address this issue, or if the party tasked to implement it is not acting as expected from it, or if the members of the community do not abide by the law, or if the problem lies in the narrow roads and the failure to distribute traffic. If we assume that the congestion is the narrow roads, congestion would then be an occasional factor with traffic accidents being the outcome.
The determination of the problem and differentiating it from the symptoms and the outcomes helps the PA to take the proper decision. This is in addition to the determination of those themes accurately without there being any room for interpretation or independent reasoning, with the necessity to clarify the risks that could result from that problem if the situation stays intact. Non-compliance with the standards of accuracy during the preparation of the document leads to a weakness in its contents on the one hand, and on the other hand it would not reflect the PA’s real approach to solve the problem. It is necessary to draft the document in clear language understood by policy-makers to evaluate the extent of intervention, its size, and the suitable time for that intervention and what are the actual needs to be provided.
Source: Palestinian Authority, Ministry of Justice (2018), Legislative Drafting Guidelines, (Palestinian Authority Ministry of Justice, 2018[1])
Recommendation 3.1 - Improve the availability and use of data and evidence for problem identification and assessment.
Mobilise data that already exists in line ministries more systematically for problem identification and assessment.
Leverage accessible data and insights from different non-institutional stakeholders such as the Palestine Area Chamber of Commerce, international organisations or CSOs.
Develop a systematic approach to the collection and management of data (e.g. from the evaluation of previous policies) needed for problem identification. Due to the line ministries’ responsibilities, such approach should be developed at ministry level and in cooperation with the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics. The PA should provide guidance on data collection as part of the legislative drafting guidelines.
Recommendation 3.2 - Promote more regular use of innovative tools and methods for problem identification and assessment.
Encourage and train ministries to use a wider array of various instruments and methods for improved problem identification, including PESTL(E), SWOT analysis, root cause analysis and problem-tree analysis.
Mainstream and promote the use of additional uniform guidance on the use of problem identification instruments across the PA. The Prime Minister’s Office should co-ordinate the development and promote this additional guidance document with the help of the Ministry of Justice.
Recommendation 3.3 - Promote inter-ministerial exchanges at the early stage of problem identification.
Foster a co-ordinated approach to policy- and law-making by exchanging different institutions’ legislative intentions in the various special committees prior to the policy formulation and drafting phase to ensure a comprehensive definition of policy problems.
Use the various ad hoc special committees that are established by decision of the Council of Ministers to exchange on different policy problems and challenges individual institutions wish to react to.
Encourage line ministries to exchange their legislative policy memoranda (and potentially related documents) at an early stage, to inform each other about their legislative intentions. The General Secretariat of the Council of Ministers could co-ordinate and facilitate this exchange.
Recommendation 3.4 - Liaise with relevant external stakeholders to identify and define policy problems
Ensure that line ministries liaise with relevant stakeholders in areas they intend to legislate, in order to profit from their information, knowledge and opinions that can help detect new or emerging policy issues. Implementation of the consultation guidelines should be supported and enforced by a body outside of the ministry carrying out the consultation. A centralised body may take the lead in providing the oversight function for stakeholder engagement to identify and define policy problems.
Consider setting up sectoral policy dialogues between line ministries and external stakeholders to regularly exchange views in addition to early-stage ad hoc consultations.
Recommendation 3.5 - Promote professional, strategic and innovation civil service skills to enable staff to detect and identify policy problems.
References
[2] Government of New Zealand (n.d.), The Policy Project, https://dpmc.govt.nz/our-programmes/policy-project.
[4] OECD (2017), Skills for a High Performing Civil Service, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264280724-en.
[3] OECD (2011), Regulatory Consultation in the Palestinian Authority - A Practitioners’ Guide For Engaging Stakeholders in Democratic Deliberation.
[1] Palestinian Authority Ministry of Justice (2018), The Legislative Drafting Guidelines.