Identifying Alternatives in the Context of Policies

Identifying alternatives in the context of policies is not an easy task. As an analyst, getting to identify an alternative is a matter of choice; however, not based on bias or likeness. Choosing the best-suited alternative is a process of analysis from a list of possible alternatives. These alternatives are not merely choices but strong alternatives designed in line with the problem they seek to solve. Therefore, it is true to say that without a problem, no feasible alternative can exist. Listing possible alternatives beckon the act of choice where the analyst can constructively scrutinize the alternatives without running the risk of leaving out important alternatives. But where do these alternatives come from? Some scholars like Alexander argue that alternatives should come from the past but be related to the problem to be solved. However, for the choices to be effective, they must have been chosen with some degree of creativity and adoption. Listing and making alternative choices has to come from a particular source. For an analyst to get an alternative to list, they have to get it from somewhere. The basic and first alternative should always be a status quo (do nothing hoping the situation will change for the better). Other alternatives are derived from the experience of other alternatives. Weimer and Vining further classify the sources into an existing policy, generic solutions, modified generic solutions, and custom-made solutions. These sources all reference an existing alternative as a benchmark. A different approach for sourcing is through idealizations where there are no restrictions; then constraints added later to determine feasibility, parallel situation where analysts search in other fields for suggestions of a solution, and the morphological approach to identify individual basic components that can be put together to form an alternative. After understanding the sources, the analyst begins the search for possible policy alternatives. Searching follows a predetermined methodology where the analyst has choices to which to consider. For instance, the best would be research; however, it takes time, and most alternatives are meant to solve immediate problems. Then analysts are left with more speedy options like doing nothing, quick surveys, literature reviews, comparisons with real experiences, and brainstorming, among other options of searching for alternatives. The last level would be the creation of an alternative, which entails choosing the best alternative from the list. The general rule is to make feasible manipulations and add on existing alternatives to get the best fit. Problems have to arise to be solved, and the best way to handle a problem is by researching a solution that takes time. Relying on past alternatives is not effective because the problem morphs into something else over time. It is better to anticipate a problem and have enough time for research to get the best-fit alternatives with benchmarks from the past. 

Reference 

Patton, C. V., Sawicki, D. S., & Clarke, J. J. (2013). Basic Methods of Policy Analysis and Planning (3rd ed.). Pearson Education, NY