Module 9: Wellbeing policy impact assessment
Five overarching considerations
This module has explored five overarching considerations for prospective policy impact assessment from a wellbeing economy perspective. They are impacts on:
root causes
current wellbeing
future wellbeing
wellbeing inequalities
wellbeing elsewhere
As outlined in the previous section, several governments have taken important steps to develop practical tools to apply these lenses. However, to date, most of the initiatives apply several of these considerations, rather than systematically incorporating all five perspectives. The aim of the five overarching considerations in this Module is to encourage policymakers to compare existing impact assessments against the wellbeing economy framing, to identify which impact considerations might be missing or could be strengthened, for both existing and new government programmes and policies. In doing so, it is both the consideration of the five perspectives as well as the level of ambition that is set for each of them that matters.
Share your thoughts
Thinking about policy impact assessments in your department:
Which of the five perspectives are systematically considered when assessing the impact of policy initiatives?
Which of the five perspectives are not systematically considered when assessing the impact of policy initiatives?
Which of the case study examples in this Module has inspired you to strengthen policy impact assessments in your organisation or department?
Share your thoughts on the discussion board.
A culture of continuous learning
What underpins the succesful consideration of all five perspectives is a culture of continuous learning. When it comes to transformative change, high levels of uncertainty are a given, which can make it difficult to assess impacts and to define meaningful targets upfront. Rather than approaching the world as a static reality and focusing on certainty and hitting targets, a wellbeing economy approach asks policymakers to adopt learning as their overarching strategy.
For example, Human Learning Systems (HLS) aim to embed continuous learning in the public service, to help it better address complex societal challenges. HLS emphasises complexity, human relationships, and learning over mechanistic and target-driven methods. HLS start from the idea that outcomes cannot be 'delivered' by governments - they are created by systems of actors and stakeholders. Better outcomes rely on systems in which all the people and organisations involved can collaborate and learn together. HLS therefore focuses on the need for genuine relationship building and continuously learning together.
Case studies show how creating Human Learning Systems can lead to more effective interventions, more integrated and cohesive service provision with a focus on shared goals and mutual support, and improved outcomes through adaptive learning [1] [2] [3].
Human Learning Systems
Click on the card to find out more about Human Learning Systems, including its theory, methods and tools as well as case studies.
References:
[1] www.humanlearning.systems/
[2] Centre for Public Impact, Human Learning Systems. A practical guide for the curious, www.centreforpublicimpact.org/assets/pdfs/hls-practical-guide.pdf
[3] Lowe, T., French, M., Hawkins, M., Hesselgreaves, H., & Wilson, R. (2020). New development: Responding to complexity in public services—the human learning systems approach. Public Money & Management, 41(7), 573–576. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2020.1832738