Developing Joined-up Policy Assessment Frameworks
JONES P and LUCAS K, University of Westminster, UK
Since the last election, most UK government departments have launched major initiatives designed to meet a given set of economic, environmental and social objectives relevant to that particular policy sector. While there is growing recognition of some of
Since the last election, most UK government departments have launched major initiatives designed to meet a given set of economic, environmental and social objectives relevant to that particular policy sector. While there is growing recognition of some of the key links between sectors - notably the encouraging cross-referencing between the Transport and Health White Papers (DETR, 1998a; Department of Health, 1999) - each initiative still tends to develop its own monitoring and evaluation framework, with no real attempt to compare effectiveness across initiatives. The encouraging efforts at 'joined-up' policy thinking are not, as yet, being translated into 'joined-up' policy assessment frameworks.
Yet the latter are essential if the full benefits of policy integration are to be achieved. The aim of this paper is to highlight these issues and to suggest some principles that could be adopted to assist in increasing the consistency of assessment across the various initiatives. This is addressed at two levels. First, in terms of the comparability of treatment of transport impacts across different policy initiatives; and second, in relation to certain other kinds of impact that transport measures can affect. The paper also briefly considers some implications for the use of conventional cost-benefit analysis in the new policy assessment environment.
Section 2 summarises the major new assessment frameworks that are being developed for use by transport planners. These are principally those devised for the Provisional Local Transport Plans, and the Multi-Modal Studies (in drat~ form only). Section 3 presents a number of the assessment frameworks used in conjunction with major non-transport initiatives, but where transport is either a component of the assessment, or it might be argued, should be included in the framework. Section 4 then discusses some means by which comparability of assessment might be strengthened across government initiatives, and Section 5 raises some issues in relation to the application of conventional cost-benefit analysis. Some tentative conclusions and recommendations are set out in Section 6.
Association for European Transport