Evaluating the Effectiveness of Government Policies

Chapter Two: Literature Review

Chapter Introduction

As noted above, the problem of interest to this study concerns the relative effectiveness of public administration’s activities dedicated to the evaluation of the life quality and standards. Therefore, this chapter provides a review of the relevant literature concerning current public administration research, focusing on governance\'s role in evaluating and enhancing societal wellbeing globally. For this purpose, the chapter assesses recurring themes, limitations, influential works, and implications for future studies in this field. A summary of the findings are presented in the chapter conclusion.

Common Themes, Assumptions, and Approaches

The identification of common themes, assumptions and approaches used in public administration and evaluating their effectiveness in assessing and improving citizen life quality and standards is critically important for several reasons. Perhaps most importantly, the process serves to provide accountability concerning how well governance bodies are meeting public needs which enhances transparency of performance on wellbeing metrics. In addition, comparative analysis of successful and unsuccessful administrative approaches allows identifying hard-learned and expensive best practices that can be scaled while reforming or discontinuing ineffective policies. The review of the relevant literature revealed a number of common themes, assumptions and approaches that have garnered mixed results which are discussed below.

Furthermore, resilient, citizen-centric governance emerged from the reviewed literature as a shared thematic priority across multiple sources. Citizen-centric governance refers to public administration that prioritizes meeting the needs and preferences of citizens through co-creation and user-driven policy and services (Hanbal et al., 2023). For instance, Ansell et al. (2021) highlight robust strategies such as modularization that enabled targeted Covid-19 pandemic-era responses. In many cases, these types of initiatives involve innovative e-governance models that encourage citizens to more actively participate in the local decision-making processes (Lo et al., 2022).

In sum, instead of a model of government that acts on passive citizens, citizen-centric governance places a high priority on collaborative engagement, participatory processes, and individualization. In this regard, Singh et al. (2022) report that, “A citizen centric approach mainly concerns the needs of the citizens or develops products and services with the orientation of benefits to the citizens. Additionally, citizen centricity is all about creating value for citizens” (p. 540). Therefore, by adopting informed and timely citizen-centric governance, policymakers can create a democratic system that not only addresses citizens\' needs but also empowers them as active contributors to the decision-making process, fostering a sense of ownership and accountability within society in mutually beneficial ways. For example, according to Ju et al. (2019), “Citizen participation in E -governance is, essentially, a social exchange between individuals and their government through which the citizen creates public value as well as acquires private value” (p. 37).

Some of the core principles of citizen-centric governance include transparency, accountability, accessibility, human-focused design, and prompt responsiveness and potential approaches include participatory budgeting and crowdsourcing citizen feedback and insights (Lazaroiu, 2017). The overarching aim of citizen-centric governance is responsiveness to citizens’ values and priorities across the policy cycle. A growing body of research confirms that well-implemented citizen-centric governance can enhance satisfaction, trust, and collective problem-solving processes (Lazaroiu, 2017).

Similarly, Frijters et al. (2020) trace the historical foundations of wellbeing economics, providing policymakers preliminary models like the UK’s What Works Centre for Wellbeing to emphasize happiness in governance. Although proponents differ in their precise views, they generally share the notion that the overarching goal of wellbeing economies and public policy should be maximizing human wellbeing/happiness rather than solely focusing on economic growth. In this regard, Henscher (2023) reports that, “The wellbeing economy draw heavily upon a range of heterodox schools of economic thought; these schools differ in many respects, but all share the central common insight that the economy is best conceived as a social provisioning system for humanity\'s needs” (p. 1). In this context, wellbeing is comprised of multiple dimensions including physical health, mental health, social connectedness, purpose, financial security, among others (Henscher, 2023).

Digital innovation is also a recurrent theme in the relevant literature, with Helander et al. (2020) using activity theory to examine collaborative e-government services and Bullock (2019) assessing AI’s transformative potential. Likewise, Lo et al. (2022) cite the example of E-governance technologies to enhance government operations and services involving citizens, businesses, and other stakeholders. As technology rapidly progresses and Moore’s law continues to hold true, there is a growing assumption among public sector policymakers that establishing e-governance models has become absolutely essential for streamlining processes, integrating multi-actor governance, and adopting a digital-by-default approach aimed at efficiency, reduced bureaucracy, improved capabilities, and increased trust among stakeholders (Lo et al., 2022). There is likewise a prominent and unjustified assumption among many scholars and policymakers alike that if sufficient resources are allocated to these initiatives, achieving optimal outcomes is possible and perhaps even inevitable.

It is important to note, though, that virtually all of the resources reviewed emphasized that a number of significant challenges remain in fully implementing these types of distributed data sharing solutions at all levels of government (Valenzuela-Fernández et al., 2023). In this context, E-governance can be regarded as encompassing the full range of changes in politics and public services brought about by innovations in digital technologies and online platforms. This evolution highlights the interaction between e-governance, as the digital-enabled collaboration among government, citizens, and stakeholders, and e-government, or the provision of digitized public services (Umbach & Tkalec, 2022). Implementing and evaluating e-governance reveals challenges and pitfalls across different policy domains and geographic regions. The research to date indicates that the factors influencing e-governance success are highly context-specific, including policy area, institutional climate, and administrative customs. Consequently, comprehensively evaluating e-governance remains especially challenging. Indeed, assessment tends to be limited to analyzing particular tools, projects, and initiatives as operational examples (Umbach & Tkalec, 2022).

Finally, the increasingly influential impacts of trends such as populism and technology are also common themes that was identified in the reviewed literature (Wanvik & Haarstad, 2021). Although these trends have implications for virtually all types and levels of government operations, they are especially salient for environmental initiatives where citizens are becoming increasingly involved and vocal in their protests against what they regard are harmful public and private sector policies. For instance, according to Wanvik and Haarstad (2021), “In local and urban politics, many populist movements have manifested as opposition to road tolls and congestion charging, car-free zones, fuel subsidy removal, and so on” (p. 2096). It is reasonable to expect that these trends will continue to gather momentum as the grim realities of climate change displace tens of millions of people around the world by the end of the century or even in the foreseeable future.

Despite the efforts by researchers and policymakers to forge improved approaches to service delivery, much work remains to be done. In fact, the various approaches used by governments that are reflected in the existing body of knowledge concerning the relative effectiveness of public administration in their activities dedicated to the evaluation of the life quality and standards are all characterized by some significant common weaknesses and limitations which as discussed below.

Common Weaknesses and Limitations

The research to date that is focused on analyzing the effectiveness of public administration in their respective activities concerning the evaluation of the life quality and standards in different venues is characterized by a number of common weaknesses and limitations. One of the key issues to emerge from the review of the literature was that the contextual specificity of cases frequently limits broader generalization of the findings of even the most robust studies. For instance, Kokhanovskaya et al. (2019) focus narrowly on evaluating Russia’s challenges and solutions, while Ramirez-Rubio et al. (2020) analyze Latin American pandemic responses over a comparatively short period of time. In response to this limitation, both qualitative and quantitative comparative approaches could strengthen insights and provide unique insights from stakeholders (Rodríguez et al., 2023).

In addition, short-term perspectives are also prevalent in the reviewed literature, as Lapuente & Van de Walle (2020) note in their study on New Public Management reforms. Longitudinal assessments tracking policies across extended outcomes are lacking but could reveal reforms\' lasting impacts (Lapuente & Van de Walle, 2020). In fact, even among the rare instances where longitudinal assessments have been used to track the effectiveness of public administration policies, these studies have likewise suffered from their contextual specificity which limits the generalizability of their findings (Furuholt & Sæbø, 2018).

Implications for Future Research

Expanded comparative research assessing multiple contexts may illuminate administrative best practices globally. Chen et al. (2020) provide a promising model with their public service innovation typology. Long-term, outcome-based studies are also needed, going beyond short-term policy analyses. Tighter connections between administration models and wellbeing metrics could enhance humanistic governance, aligning with Chater and Loewenstein\'s (2022) critiques of excessively individualistic policymaking.

In addition, examining the links between public administration approaches and quality of life indicators would also provide valuable insights, as current scholarship lacks focus on this relationship. As modernizing trends like digitization continue, sustained research on e-governance, technology innovation, and their implementation challenges remain important. Finally, balancing investigations of individual behaviors with examinations of systemic factors may improve policy outcomes. In summary, broader comparative, longitudinal, and human-centric perspectives represent key opportunities moving forward to build knowledge regarding effective public administration that enhances societal wellbeing (Martin & Boaz, 2010).

Influential Sources

The World Happiness Report, which has helped anchor happiness as a policy goal, appears highly influential given its recurrence across works like Aknin & Whillans (2021). Behavioral Insights Team publications also seem impactful, driving the rise of behavioral public policy. Since its launch in 2012, the World Happiness Report published by the Gallup Poll each year has garnered significant global attention for its potential to guide policymakers in assessing and selecting policies. The report identifies six key variables that account for differences in happiness across countries: GDP per capita, social support systems, life expectancy, freedom of choice, corruption levels, and generosity (Aknin & Whillans, 2021).

By tracking happiness in relation to these factors annually across diverse nations, the World Happiness Report aims to provide valuable data-driven insights about the impacts of various societal conditions on wellbeing. Policymakers can leverage these important findings to evaluate which policy approaches are associated with higher happiness and life satisfaction. In summary, the World Happiness Report constitutes an influential global study that may inform public sector policy decisions by correlating happiness levels with multiple national-level variables (Ulkhaq, 2020).

While happiness is a highly subjective, purely human construct, it is clear that enhancing the happiness levels of the body politic it is an important outcome for governments at all levels (De Paola, & Pirttilä-Backman, 2023). It is therefore little wonder that so much attention has been paid to the World Happiness Report in recent years by public sector policymakers and academicians alike. Indeed, this report serves as a report card of sorts concerning just how well governments are doing in fulfilling their fundamental responsibilities to their citizenry. Since its original publication in 2012, the report has presented happiness data as core indicators of quality of life worldwide. The report ranks countries by self-reported life satisfaction and positive affect scores, affirming happiness as a crucial societal metric that is of particular interest to public sector policymakers (Fereidouni et al., 2013).

The report analyzes factors linked to higher collective happiness, including GDP, social support systems, life expectancy, generosity levels, and freedom of choice. This justifies the case that monitoring subjective wellbeing since it offers vital insights for crafting policies focused on human fulfillment. By highlighting happiness together with corresponding economic data, the World Happiness Report provides a timely and valuable indication concerning the growing prioritization of wellbeing metrics to direct governance. In this regard, Helliwell et al. (2023) emphasize that, “The natural way to measure a nation’s happiness is to ask a nationally-representative sample of people how satisfied they are with their lives these days” (p. 4).

As noted above, happiness is highly subjective and the adage that money cannot buy it may be true. Nevertheless, impoverished nations in Africa and affluent nations in Western Europe continues to rank highest on the World Happiness Report, suggesting that the fulfillment of basic Maslowian needs are absolutely essential before humans can truly realize happiness at any meaningful level. After all, parents with starving children are little interested in the fine arts or the latest entertainment business buzz. Likewise, people who suffer from debilitating diseases are hard-pressed to be happy, and the difference that money can make in securing adequate, high-quality health care is inestimable. As the editors of The World Happiness Report point out, “A population will only experience high levels of overall life satisfaction if its people are also pro-social, healthy, and prosperous. In other words, its people must have high levels of what Aristotle called ‘eudaimonia.’ So at the level of society, life satisfaction and eudaimonia go hand-in-hand” (Helliwell et al., 2023, p. 4).