Why has there been increased interest in evaluating public policy when in the past this has incurred huge costs? Let’s suppose these were judged as a waste. Will we continue to make new policies using the State’s resources?
Truly, there is valuable information to research in this evaluation. It has been constitutionalized since 2011, however it hasn’t been institutionalized. This delay is due to many obstacles related to the ambiguities in its operationalization. Civil society wants to take part in the evaluation process, however the articles allowing it in the consitution are pending the activation of the law.
Citizens are the main target of public policies. They hasten to see them put into operation. Their intention is to collaborate with local collectivities regarding this evaluation, however they are still waiting for the Parliament to initiate this obligation. Citizens have quickly organized into associations and non-governmental organizations assigning evaluation. How greedy! In response to this demand, a public policy observation method has been developed by the Moroccan Observatory of Public Policies. This proposal aims to achieve an observation project that qualifies associations and civilians to be able to participate in developing public policies and to help collaborate with local collectives.
This is preparation training to the outcome of the results, to fairly define the specific effects of each policy, and to develop a methodical framework. From this, recommendations may be made based on useful analysis.
The chief objective of this approach is to improve public policy formulation by providing public and political activists a platform rich in information to assist in the decisionmaking process. It allows all civilians, education centers and organizations to be true agents of change.
The collected data will be evaluated for it’s advantages and strengths. Each submitted public proposal will be analyzed to determine if there are any unforseen effects, limitations or threats arising from these interventions.
Many limitations that would have tarnished the relevance of the analysis were enumerated and resolved. Subjectivity, narrow observation, the semi-annual nature of reports, weak systematization and other items are all prevarications that we have resolved and overcome in this methodology. We want to avoid decision-making based on information resulted by an analysis based on putative links and a hypothetical systematization of results with their factors.
If concepts are lacking in our approach as “observation field delimitation “, it is due to the fact we are presently referring to an observation methodology of public intervention on the territory and not to an observation methodology of the territory. It is not profitable to ask questions such as, “Which territory? ” or “For how long?” The main point is that the expected policy change is moving forward, as it is difficult to define how long it will take to realize the expected results. The time of action is now which can be defined, unlike the impact and the change.
Without these steps, any recommendation won’t be considered. These steps allow a deeper analysis capable of ensuring their relevance and guaranteeing the effectiveness of the proposals prepared by the observer.
Interpreting figures is therefore a challenge because these embody people and institutions and does not establish a direct relationship with reality. We have chosen examples to demonstrate the sensitivity of interpretation and the importance of its mastery. The purpose of the interpretation step is to complete the analysis and present the most useful and relevant conclusions possible. It is the operation that is critical and justifies any proposed recommendation.
Comments