Center for Scientific Analysis of Policy, LLC http://www.scipolicy.org
White Paper Series: Case Studies Using IPA to Evaluate Policies of 2016 Presidential Candidates
Scott Walker’s Walker’s Economic Policy: Policy: A Structural Case Study Steven E. Wallis, PhD; Bernadette Wright, PhD
Due to the large number of candidates running for president and the complexity of their policy statements, we present this analysis to help voters understand, evaluate, and compare those policies to support decision-making and our democratic process.
same was as a road map with more roads and destination provides a more useful tool for planning a business trip or a vacation. Although there were some statements in the text that might be seen as fuzzy or ambiguous, we made a good-faith effort to reflect the candidate’s position accurately. We are open to additional information and to revised analyses with the goal of creating the most accurate representation possible.
Scott Walker is a 2016 Republican Candidate for U.S. President. In this white paper, we present the results of an Integrative Propositional Analysis (IPA) study of his economic policy as presented on his website: Comparison of Policies https://www.scottwalker.com/news/why1 i%E2%80%99m-running-president
Successful policies should be located in this quadrant
Our goal here is to conduct a scientific, non-partisan evaluation to suggest the potential for success, along with opportunities for improvement, of that policy. It is not our intent to suggest that the policy might be right or wrong, good or bad (as partisan analyses might claim). Instead, our focus is on whether the policy will have the effects anticipated according to the text provided by the candidate.
Depth
0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0
10
20
30
40
50
Breadth Walker’s economic policy
Another way to explain this is that we are looking at the policy as a sense-making device or as a kind of map. Higher scores indicate greater ability to make effective policy decisions. This indicates the policy’s ability to reach its stated goals in much the
Method of Analysis This evaluation is primarily an analysis of the internal logic-structures of the policy. Those
1
provide useful indicators of the policy’s sense-making ability and predictors for its potential success or failure. Two important assumptions may present additional challenges to the effectiveness of any policy. First, the extent to which the claims of the policy are based on good empirical data. Second, the extent to which the policy may be implemented as proposed. Those two issues may present additional challenges to the effectiveness of this policy. However, they are not part of our present analysis.
approach. Many scholarly publications have shown the effectiveness of IPA. You may find these in the fields of policy, organizational learning, management, philosophy, and others. For an overview and background information, please see our white papers: http://scipolicy.org/principles-of-ipa--white-papers.html Results of Analysis We used IPA to identify relevant propositions from the text of Scott Walker’s economic policy and developed the following causal map:
IPA (Integrative Propositional Analysis) is an emerging methodology used to analyze the internal structure of conceptual systems such as theories, strategic plans, and policies. It is a rigorous, objective, and non-partisan
2
casual connections) but not as good as a map where there are multiple connections indicating transformative understanding.
As seen, there are 14 concepts (one per box). Therefore, the “Breadth” of the policy map is equal to fourteen. The Breadth of this policy is low. This indicates a great weakness of the policy because the economy is a very large and complex thing. A small understanding (from looking at a small part of the picture) is not likely to be useful in comprehending or managing a large and complex thing.
The lack of multiple causal connections between concepts in the map creates problems for navigation. Each linear connection suggests that there is only one way to understand an issue and one road to reach the result. When we use a map for navigation, each city may be reached by multiple roads. The present map has too few roads to suggest that it will be useful.
IPA is a rigorous, scientific, non-partisan approach to analyzing the structure of policy maps to indicate their potential for success
This lack also leaves the map open to illogical interpretations, illegitimate claims, spurious criticism, and confusing rhetoric. It means that there is a lack of transparency. If a candidate claims that the map is a guide, but there are missing elements, it is difficult to accept that claim as valid.
The low number of concepts indicates “missing ingredients” that may be necessary for success. Indeed, for every missing ingredient, there is another opportunity for unanticipated consequences.
For example, looking at the map, we see SW2 has only one causal connection. That is not enough to fully and deeply explain what it means to have true freedom and prosperity. This is very important because individuals may have different definitions of what it means to have true freedom and prosperity. Also, the policy does not show what the results of increasing our true freedom and prosperity might be.
There are no “Transformative” concepts (boxes with two causal arrows pointing at it). Therefore, the Depth of the map is equal to zero. “Zero” indicates the least level of Depth while a score of “one” indicates the greatest Depth. Depth is a strong indicator for policy success. With a Depth of zero, we do not expect that this policy will achieve its stated goals. Indeed, we expect far more unanticipated outcomes than anticipated ones. Despite the lack of transformative concepts, it is interesting to note that the policy contains many concepts that are connected through simple, linear causal connections. Linear connections may be understood as showing an understanding that is better than an “atomistic” perspective (where there are no
•
Chance of achieving stated goals: Approaching zero
•
Chance of unanticipated consequences: Approaching 100%
The same is true of every concept on the map. Without that kind of transformative
3
understanding, the map can’t provide sufficient knowledge of a complex situation, or serve as a useful guide for navigating a solution to those issues.
causal connections (to show how changes in each will cause changes in others) based on expert insight and empirical analysis. Policy maps with more Breadth and Depth will be more useful for elected officials to make successful policy decisions, empower the American people to make more informed voting decisions, integrate multiple maps, and reduce divisive argumentation.
Conclusion In this case study, we have presented a structural analysis of an economic policy. In this study, we have avoided partisan arguments around whether the policy might be “good” or “true.” Our sole concern is to understand the extent to which the author of the policy seems to understand our economic situation (as reflected in the text of the policy) and how that understanding relates to the potential for the policy to achieve its stated goals. That is to say, the overall usefulness of the map as a tool for navigation.
Better maps will also improve transparency and accountability by clarifying the candidate’s understanding and anticipated actions to achieve success according to the policy. The Center for Scientific Analysis of Policy, LLC, is an independent research group of scholars and practitioners working in the Policy Analysis field and the STEM specialties (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics). We use our expertise in evaluating documents to determine if they are based on current knowledge and methodologies of those disciplines along with a deep understanding of how the law and policy intersects with social and cultural networks.
Without such analysis, it is more difficult for interested citizens to make informed decisions. IPA provides a scientific, nonpartisan source of policy analyses. The objective insights presented here will help to inform policy discussions and national level decision-making. There is a deep need for this kind of analysis as a new approach to resolving the frequent and divisive arguments that plague our decision making process.
We present the results of our analyses in a clear, concise, and deliberately nonpartisan manner.
Our analysis shows that this is a very weak policy. Its low level of Breadth and Depth indicate that implementing this policy would produce many unanticipated consequences while providing few of the expected benefits. Further, because there are so few causal connections, an individual might make spurious claims about the efficacy or justification for policy action.
By doing so, we hope to promote the adoption of sustainable and generative policies that have the greatest potential benefit to the people of America and the World, avoiding laws and policies that are profligate and injudicious.
To improve its chance for successful implementation, the map should be expanded to include additional concepts and
For more information, contact:
[email protected]
4
