4 Chapter 4: Developing Solutions to Policy Problems

Public policies are theoretical solutions to public broad societal or community problems. They are theoretical in the sense that we often have a limited understanding of the nature of public problems, and there is often uncertainty surrounding the effectiveness of the actions taken to address problems. Many public policies are deemed ineffective because either the policy problems are not clearly defined or the crafted solutions do not address the causes and consequences of the problems. This is a policy design issue. Effective policy solutions are naturally and logically linked to policy problems. Without a thorough understanding and description of problems, developing viable solutions becomes difficult.

Before we can develop sound recommendations, we must make explicit linkages to the problem. Policy recommendations must also account for implementation, including the departments and agencies that would be involved and the actions they would need to take to put the policy into practice. Fortunately, policy ideas do not have to be new; thus, policy actors do not always have to employ newly created solutions to policy problems. Solutions can be borrowed from different governments or from existing research investigating the causes and consequences of policy problems.

The Elements of a Finding

The “elements of a finding” framework introduced in Chapter 3 can help link solutions with the problems and their causes. The framework allows users to fully explain problems, their causes, and the impacts they have. After establishing the criteria, identifying the condition and causes, and explaining the significance of the problem, policy recommendations can be developed. Policy recommendations are potential solutions to policy problems. Ideally, recommendations should be well-researched as to address the causes of problems. Policy recommendations that do not speak to the causes of problems are bound to have little impact on resolution. The Policy Elements Framework is useful for thinking about and framing policy solutions.

The Policy Elements Framework consists of a solution’s intent, goals, and programs and activities. Intent refers to the broad impact the policy solution is expected to have on the problem as defined. The goals are specific measures that must be met or things that must be accomplished in pursuit of meeting the intent. Programs and activities consist of policy tools and are the drivers of policy solutions. They are what must be implemented to meet goals.

Policy tools are the various mechanisms used to put policies into action. Governments employ these mechanisms in different combinations to encourage or discourage behaviors of target populations in such a way as to effectively achieve policy goals. Policy tools carry assumptions about both the policy problems and solutions. Furthermore, tools are thought to have capabilities and technical requisites that must be carefully aligned with expectations of their use (Howlett, 2018). The policy tools are vital in comparing the linkages between a described policy problem and prescribed solutions to that problem. Policy design is not value free; however, the tools used should be aligned with defined problems in such a way as to justify their use. Table 4.1 lists and describes common policy tools governments use to achieve policy goals.

Federal legislation typically illustrates the Policy Elements Framework in the bill description and sections. There is a concern that foreign adversarial governments use information and communications technologies, such as social media, in ways that are harmful to U.S. citizens or pose a risk to U.S. national security. For example, S. 686, the Restricting the Emergence of Security Threats that Risk Information and Communications Technology Act (RESTRICT Act) was proposed as a means to mitigate such potential risks.^[1] The policy intent usually follows the bill number and provides an overall description of the bill’s aim. The RESTRICT Act’s intent is to allow for the review and prohibition of certain types of transactions between people in the United States and foreign adversaries. Bill section headings can be used to identify goals. One goal, outlined in Section 4, is to address information and communications technology products and services holdings that pose undue or acceptable risks. Identification of these products and services can help to mitigate the risks associated with them, thus aiding the meeting of the intent. In order to work toward this goal, Congress authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to review holdings to determine whether they pose an undue or unacceptable risk and refer these holdings to the President.

The policy elements are not always as clear in the structure of state and local government policies. In 2022, the Tennessee General Assembly adopted and the governor signed into law Tennessee Public Chapter No. 493, Section 51 in response to the idea of critical race theory being taught in the state’s K–12 schools.^[2] The intent is to prohibit the inclusion or promotion of certain concepts in course instructions. It can be argued that the goal is to limit teachings of racism and sexism because such teaching may be deemed to cause emotional or mental discomfort for some students. Regulation is the primary policy tool employed because the law allows the education commissioner to withhold funds from schools that are found to violate provisions of the law.

Applying the policy elements framework to existing legislation can provide insights into how policies are designed. Policy design not only considers the aim of policy efforts but also the specific tools that are to be used to affect change. Design further considers whose or what behaviors need to change to achieve policy goals.

Policy Design

As Howlett (2018) notes, policy design is about understanding the nature of public problems, the government resources available, and the capabilities and requisites of policy tools that can be used to address problems. Importantly, policy design is challenged with complex and often poorly defined problems as well as the uncertain linkages between policy actions and expected outcomes (Capano & Woo, 2017).

Policy design also considers the contents of policy and includes the following observable elements: (a) target populations, (b) underlying values, (c) rules promoting or inhibiting certain actions, (d) policy justifications, and (e)policy assumptions (Smith & Larimer, 2017). Target populations refer to who benefits or takes on costs associated with public policy initiatives.Values are inherent in policymaking. The values are deliberate and subjective (Smith & Larimer, 2017). Values are evident in how problems are defined, how the causes and consequences of problems are interpreted,and in how solutions are crafted. The values are thus reflected in the rules promoting or inhibiting actions through a deliberate use of certain policy tools. Policy justifications include statements of why a policy solution is needed. Justifications are closely tied to the theoretical assumptions about and causes of policy problems. Policy design also includes assumptions about the potential impact policy tools have on policy targets and thus the impact changes in target behavior will have on the policy problem.

Concepts in Action: Policy Solutions to Food Deserts

It is reasonable to expect that food desert policies would contain tools to address the causes and consequences of food deserts discussed in Chapter 3. Effectively addressing these demand- and supply-side factors could have a positive impact in mitigating the negative consequences associated with food deserts. Figure 4.2 highlights a food desert policy model, including explanations for food desert formation, the consequences of food deserts, the policy tools used to remedy them, and the policy targets.

Between 2009 and 2019, at least 24 state legislatures considered food desert policies. Of these, 9 (37.5%) states—Alabama, Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, New Jersey, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Washington, and Wisconsin—have adopted food desert policies.^[3] These policies vary in their scope and the delivery of policy tools used.

Policy Targets

Most of the adopting states target businesses, namely, food retail establishments such as grocery stores, as their policy audience. Some states, such as Louisiana and Washington, target farmers’ markets as well. Tennessee does not directly target grocery stores or farmers markets in its food desert policy. However, Tennessee targets local development authorities by authorizing them to issue revenue bonds and use bond proceeds to make loans to grocery stores and farmers markets. Two states, New Jersey and Washington, target residents. Washington provides vouchers for qualifying residents to use at farmers’ markets or grocery stores. New Jersey also provides vouchers for residents to use at weekly markets operated by qualifying providers.

Economic Factors

Demand-side policy strategies aim to increase the demand for grocery stores, whereas supply-side strategies subsidize grocery stores with the aim of increasing the supply of stores (Cuffey & Beatty, 2022). Most state policies adopt supply-side strategies in addressing food desert policies. Alabama, Oklahoma, and Louisiana allow financing to be used for workforce training. No state addresses demand-side factors in its policies.

Socioeconomic Factors

Only Alabama, Louisiana, and Oklahoma directly address socioeconomic factors in food desert policies. Each of these states make provisions to address limited employment opportunities. All three states’ policies contain provisions to promote the creation and retention of jobs for local residents.

Food Desert Consequences

Only the Washington policy acknowledges the poor dietary and health outcome consequences associated with food deserts. For the most part, resident welfare is not addressed in state food desert policies. Eight of the state policies do not explicitly address poor health outcomes or improvement of health outcomes. Furthermore, these state policies do not directly address resident dietary consumption or specify provisions to improve diets.

Policy Tools

Alabama, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Washington each provide grants to businesses. Each state, except New Jersey and Washington, relies on loans as the primary policy tool used to remedy food desert conditions. Two states, Maryland and Washington, provide direct financing to businesses. Maryland may pay for loan application and origination fees. It may also provide direct financial assistance to stores operating in food deserts. Alabama is the only state using tax expenditures.

Concluding Thoughts

Crafting solutions to policy problems is not always easy. Solutions require careful research, consideration of the political context of the policy problem, critical thinking, and creativity. Recommendations must address the causes of problems and consider the policy elements, including intent, goals, and programs and activities. These elements provide a framework from which policies can be designed. In designing policies, consideration should be given to justifications, values, policy assumptions, target population(s), and rules promoting or inhibiting actions. Each of these factors should be evident when making recommendations to policymakers. Chapter 5 gives insights on ways to ensure the presence of these factors through writing policy memos and making effective presentations.

Discussion Questions

1. Find a bill related to a policy area you are interested in. Identify its intent, goals, and programs and activities.
2. Using the bill identified in Question 1, identify the policy tools and policy targets.
3. What departments or agencies are tasked with implementing
   provisions of the bill?

Skill Development: Developing Policy Solutions

Problem definition requires (a) problem identification, (b) gathering data and evidence, and (c) analyzing and interpreting the data and evidence. It is not enough to simply present this information. It must be contextualized in a rational, meaningful way. One way to contextualize the defined problem and link it to solutions is to adhere to the 5C Framework. This framework requires specifying the criteria, condition, causes, significance, and recommendations associated with a policy problem. As a refresher, review the following:

1. 1. Criteria: The criteria establish a basis of comparison. This could be a legislative mandate, societal norms, a professional standard, best practices, or baseline data. Criteria establish that something is supposed to be happening or that it should be a certain way. If your audience does not know what should be, it will be hard for them to interpret the condition as being problematic.
   2. Condition: The condition establishes the heart of the policy problem. It provides the context for the problem and is established in problem identification. Explanation of how things are gives your audience an opportunity to understand the magnitude of the problem and often is defined in terms of deficits or excess. Demonstration of deficits or excess requires comparison with the criteria.
   3. Cause: Explanation of policy problems requires an understanding of the causes of the problem. You must explain why the problem exists. Doing so demands thorough research into the problem, examining it from multiple perspectives. If the cause is not established, meaningful solutions are difficult to develop.
   4. Significance: Significance establishes why policymakers should care. You must describe the consequences of the problem. Address what adverse conditions have occurred or will occur as a result of the problem you identify.
   5. Recommendation: Every problem needs a fix. Providing problems without solutions can damage your credibility. Policy recommendations must be valid in that they are perceived to be able to rectify the problem. Recommendations should also provide insights on how the policy would be implemented. You cannot offer recommendations without providing the criteria, condition, cause, and significance.

Consider the following scenario:

A prominent member of your state legislature has suggested that all applicants to state colleges and universities be tested for drugs before being admitted. The legislative member contends this suggestion is based on evidence that drug use among high school and college students has increased over the years. Furthermore, universities have faced increased costs and lawsuits associated with students overdosing on college campuses. Use the “elements of a finding” framework to develop a set of policy recommendations to help the member. Recommendations should include, at a minimum, the policy tools needed, the policy targets, and the departments or agencies that will implement the policy and how they could implement it.

Resources

Bill Structure: https://www.govinfo.gov/help/bills

How Laws Are Made:https://www.congress.gov/help/learn-about-the-legislative-process/how-our-laws-are-made

Works Cited

Capano, G., & Woo, J. J. (2017). Resilience and robustness in policy design: A critical appraisal. Policy Sciences, 50: 399–426. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11077-016-9273-x

Cuffey, J., & Beatty, T. K. M. (2022). Effects of competing food desert policies on store format choice among SNAP participants. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 104(4): 1485–1511. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajae.12275

Howlett, M. (2018). The criteria for effective policy design: Character and context in policy instrument choice. Journal of Asian Public Policy, 11(3): 245–266.

Smith, K. B., & Larimer, C. W. (2017). The public policy primer (3rd ed.). Westview Press.