Prescribing Policies

This form of the dilemma is characterized by variable costs and variable efficacy. In that case, the type II challenge is the selection of the most advantageous budget that will optimize the efficacy and achievement of organization goals. Variable-cost-variable-effectiveness examination refers to a response to a type III challenge. As a result, it would ensure optimum productivity at the lowest possible expense.
Budgetary spending that is appropriate is generally directed at fixed costs. The main aim of this budget is to achieve maximum effectiveness within the limits of the existing resources such as costs. To achieve maximized effectiveness with a fixed cost of $10,000, a policy that will be recommended to the individual should be able to address type I problems. The policy analyst evaluates the effectiveness and variable costs while maintaining a level of overall efficiency at a fixed cost.
Achieve a fixed effectiveness level of 6,000 units of service at a fixed cost of $20,000: In this scenario, the problems of the program are equal to the cost as well as the effectiveness. In such a case, Type IV problems are experienced whereby fixed cost and effectiveness analysis of the situation is not easy to solve. The analysis of the situation is not only restricted by the requirement of ensuring that a set cost does not exceed, but also it is restricted by the limitations that the options elected have to satisfy a particular fixed level of effectiveness.
Maximize net benefits, assuming that each unit of service has a market price of $10: In this scenario, the aim is to lessen the costs as the problems tend to engage equal effectiveness and variable cost. Program II is the most preferable in this situation because it can achieve high levels of effectiveness while remaining within the stipulated limitation, i.e., $10.
Maximize the ratio of benefits to costs, assuming that each unit of service has a market price of $10: This situation involves variable costs and variable effectiveness. A policy analyst has to determine the choice of the most favorable budget and then make the most of the accomplishments of agency objectives in a Type III scenario. The reaction of the problem in Type III is called variable-cost-variable-effectiveness examination. Therefore, the cost and overall effectiveness are variable in this situation.
Determine which of the two main programs (Program I and Program II) should be selected under each of these criteria. Justify your position.
In scenario A, the preferable program is Program II. The selection of this program in the situation will ensure that the maximum effectiveness is achieved with respect to the cost of the policy. In scenario B, the preferred program is Program II because the criteria enable the policy to achieve high levels of effectiveness within the limits of the fixed costs. The program will be the most favorable selection for scenario C because it can make achieve most of the set objectives while still managing to stay within the limits of fixed expenditure. The most suitable program for scenario D is program I. This program is recommended in that situation because the policy analyst can diverge costs but still come up with equal effectiveness hence costs will be maximized and the set level of effectiveness achieved. Lastly, scenario E can select Program II because the policy focuses on maximizing the ratio of effectiveness while observing the costs.
Describe the conditions under which each criterion may be an adequate measure of the achievement of objectives.
In defining normative futures clarifying goals and objectives are not sufficient because it also requires identification of policies which are relevant to achieve the set goals and objectives. Therefore, utilization of existing policies to specify objectives and develop alternatives is prone to high-risk mistakes occurrence. On the other hand, the new objectives that may be proposed can impose beliefs and values resulting in the creation of policies which are closer to the position of one individual over another.
In type I problems, the analysts use equal-cost analysis to determine the effectiveness. This criterion involves comparing alternatives that vary in effectiveness but have an equal cost. Consequently, in Type II problems the analysts have to base their analysis on a comparison of alternatives that vary in costs but have equal effectiveness (McGuigan, Moyer, & Harris, 2014). Type III problems involve variable costs and variable effectiveness. In this scenario, the analyst observes the variations in costs and effectiveness of alternative policies. Lastly, Type IV problems are the most difficult to solve due to the involvement of equal-cost-equal-effectiveness analysis.
Determine the assumptions that govern estimates of the value of time lost driving, indicating which assumptions (if any) are more tenable than others. Justify your position.
The net efficiency benefits of 55 mph speed limit vary depending on the value of human lives and the cost of time which an individual loses by driving within the limit. According to Dunn (2012), the major issues, in this case, are the impacts of alternative transportation services used by people in the society and low-income groups. A cost-benefit analysis of the national maximum speed limit shows that enforcement costs of the policy outweigh the cost of patrolling. Assumptions made are social equity and justice based on ethical grounds (Dunn 2012). According to Wolff (2011), half of accident that results in lives lost in driving are caused by young drivers below the age of thirty years. The assumptions made in this case are reasonable because of the system of monitoring and forecasting the benefit-cost analysis is not desirable or feasible (Taylor, 2014).
Determine the best way to estimate the value of time. Justify your position.
To determine the value of time, people calculate the comparative time of travel in case of car, train, and bus. These three transportation services are examined for cost and time necessities (Wolff, 2011). The findings of these examinations are in many cases exactly as the anticipated findings. For instance, a person traveling in a train experiences the value of time because they can read or write a book while traveling, whereas an individual using a car cannot engage in these activities because they are driving. Additionally, according to a survey conducted within 170 drivers at a diverse price of gasoline and distance traveled, people were willing to pay higher prices provided they could save time from the long stay in queues on gas stations (Wolff, 2011).
Determine the best way to estimate the cost of a gallon of gasoline. Justify your position.
Several factors can be used to determine the cost of gasoline. The first way is to value the cost of its production. Gasoline is imported in the form of crude oil which is then sent to refineries for purification. The refining companies have to be paid for their services. Hence the cost price should be considered from comprehensive price of crude oil production. Another factor that can be used to determine the cost of gasoline is the national set price and that of the surrounding nations. Gasoline is an international product hence its price can be determined based on the availability of the product in the producing nations which can result in a fixed price for the product in all nations.
Determine the more reliable method to estimate driving speeds and miles per gallon by using the following: (a) official statistics on highway traffic from the Environmental Protection Agency, (b) Engineering studies of the efficiency of gasoline engines by the department.
Engineering studies of the efficiency of gasoline by the Department of energy are one of the most efficient ways of estimating the driving speed and miles per gallon in the country. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), fuel economy projections are bound to increase as a result of 450 million new vehicles which are sold in the country. The figures from EPA also indicate whether a vehicle has met the requirements needs for the car to be considered road worthy currently, it is estimated that federal agencies spend most time conducting the test and verifying new models of vehicles. However, only a few employees are involved in the process hence it cannot be relied upon to determine the driving speeds. Therefore, the driving speed can be determined using engineering studies that will be able to provide a justified determination of the ability of the engine to operate within a certain speed limit.
Estimate the value of a life saved. Justify your position.
The issues of the value of life are the most important in everyday activities. In estimating the value of a life saved, it is important to note the effects of health, environmental, and safety involvement in mortality. The survival curve of an individual determines the financial value that is placed on a person’s life. Shifts in the survival curve imply lives saved and lives gained within a specific period. Therefore, the survival curve can be used to estimate and accident figures can be used to estimate the value per life-year saved or the value per life saved.
Determine which policy is preferable, (a) the 55-mph speed limit or (b) the 65-mph limit. Justify your position.
The preferable policy is the 55 mph speed limit. In most cases, the implementation of this policy has been problematic even with the existing punishment such as ticketing. However, it is important to inform the drivers about the benefits of this policy such as reduced fuel costs as a result of low consumption. The incentive to ensure that drivers observe this limit can be determined by the price increase in the cost of gasoline. The drivers will have to compare the amount saved by driving slow and the value of time which will be helpful in implementing the policy. On the contrary, the value of gasoline saved on highways is much small when driving in at 55 mph than driving at 65 mph. In such case, the value of a life saved will be an incentive that will ensure drivers observed the recommended 55 mph speed limit.
References
Dunn, W. N. (2012). Public policy analysis (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
McGuigan, J. R, Moyer, R.V., & Harris, F. H. de B. (2014). Managerial Economics: Applications, Strategies and Tactics (13th ed.). Stanford, CT: Cengage Learning.
Taylor, B. W. (2016). Introduction to Management Science, Global Edition (12th ed). Harlow, United Kingdom: Pearson.
Wolff, E. (2011, March 1). Spillovers, Linkages, and Productivity Growth in the US Economy, 1958 to 2007. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w16864