Scientific Analysis Improves Quality of Policy Development

INDIANAPOLIS - Dec. 1, 2014 - PRLog -- The Center for Analysis of Science in Policy is an organization created to improve the quality of policies through employment of a powerful, and innovative scientific approach that will be shared with policy creators of all stripes.

Historically, it has been impossible to forecast the effectiveness of a policy. There is uncertainty until it has been enacted and exercised for a finite period of time. All too often, unintended consequences outnumber the anticipated goals. Recent application of knowledge theory has led to development of Integrative Propositional Analysis (IPA), a scientific method for quantifying the probability of success of a policy and, conversely, its failure.

Application of IPA during document creation allows all sides an objective view of the good and poor components, helping to overcome partisan disputes and keeping discussion focused on the beneficial elements. Once a bill is enacted and a policy is in force, any problems that appear can have their origins traced through IPA, allowing for post-passage modification. These principles apply not only to legislation but to a wide range of extra-governmental documents and ensuing policies.

The goal of IPA is to conduct a scientific, non-partisan evaluation to quantify the potential for success along with opportunities for improvement. It is not the intent to suggest that any specific recommendations of the bill might be right or wrong, good or bad. Instead, the focus is on whether the policy will have the effects anticipated according to the text of the bill.

IPA considers the number of individual concepts and the logical connections between the concepts as a whole. In evaluating the portion of HR 4286: American Energy Renaissance Act of 2014 that concerns the Keystone XL pipeline, the bill was found to have a fairly large number of discrete concepts (27), but they have a very low level of connection; the relationships of the concepts to one another is a mere 0.07 on a scale of zero to one. This suggests that the bill has only about a seven percent chance of attaining its stated goals. Or, to put it another way, the bill has about a 93% chance of producing unanticipated consequences.

HR 4286 has a vast scope with significant implications for energy, economics, the environment, civil rights, and other areas. Given the large scope of the bill, it seems reasonable to suggest that the unanticipated consequences will be of much greater range than the desired results. For detailed information on the methodology, please see the SciPolicy.org Watchdog White Paper.

Forecasting the ability of a policy to achieve its stated goals during development will enable policy makers to more readily compromise on divisive issues and abstain from partisan gridlock. Once a policy has been enacted and yields results different from those anticipated, IPA can facilitate corrective action.