Paradigma de la investigación

•

Relevance

– the extent to which the different policy options are relevant to

the problem;

•

Effectiveness -

the degree to which the policy options are capable of

achieving the policy objectives;

•

Efficiency -

the input or effort required to achieve a given output, where the

latter is determined by the policy objectives;

•

Impacts on different societal groups

- potentially affected by the policy

options (e.g. individuals, businesses and households);

•

Economic and financial impacts

– i.e. the extent to which different policy

options are likely to reduce the negative effects analysed in Section 4; and

•

Feasibility -

the feasibility of the policy options includes considerations of

the practical feasibility in implementing the policy option, including the likely support from stakeholders as well as enforcement considerations.

A certain degree of

relevance

can be taken for granted given that the policy options

have been defined after extensive consultations with key stakeholders.

The assessment of the

effectiveness and efficiency

of the policy options has been

carried out with reference to the specific policy objectives. To do so, we have assessed for each of the policy options how effective they are in achieving the policy objectives.

Efficiency

is assessed at the level of the policy option. With regard to the assessment of

the

effectiveness

of outcomes in achieving the policy options, it should be noted that

safeguarding fundamental rights has been included as a specific objective and is assessed separately. In this regard, it is acknowledged that according to the Impact Assessment Guidelines on fundamental rights, such aspects should be an integral part of all steps of the assignment and be assessed as part of all assessment criteria. While this integral assessment has been done, it is considered important to highlight certain aspects relating

191 The policy options and objectives also need to be coherent, i.e. in line with the EU policies as well as with the Treaty and its high level objectives. This analysis is provided in section 5.

to fundamental rights under one heading. The assessments take into account possible (unintended) consequences in areas that are not covered by the policy objectives.

The

impacts of the policy options

have been rated on a scale from -5 to +5 in terms

of the expected changes compared to the Status Quo. To reflect this, Policy option 1 – Status Quo (no further EU action) has been rated with 0, since the other policy options are compared against the status quo situation. A rating of 0 implies that the other options would not result in any major change compared to the status quo. A minus rating implies that the situation is expected to worsen and a rating on the plus side that the situation would be improved. The ratings are relative and therefore serve to compare the policy options towards each other rather than serve as an absolute assessment. Hence, a rating of 5 would not necessarily imply that the problem would be solved and the objective be achieved.

Estimates of the reduction of the magnitude of the problem have been made based on the relative expected achievements of the policy options. A scale of -1% to -5% reduction of the problem has been used for illustrative purposes. For each policy option, the impacts on reducing the problem have been calculated based on the ratings of the impacts.

7.2 Overview – Impacts of the Policy Options

The detailed assessments of the policy options are provided in Appendix L (qualitative impacts and Appendix M (quantitative estimates). Summaries of the assessments are provided in the following sub-section.

While it is outside the scope of the present assignment to identify a preferred policy option, based on the above assessments, before providing summaries of the detailed

assessment of impacts, the following table provides

a comparison of the ratings of the

impacts of the policy options.

The table also provides a comparison of the expected

impacts of the policy options in terms of the expected reduction of the problem. In this regard, it can be emphasised that also these figures are calculated in relative terms in order to illustrate the different effects that could be achieved, and that the reductions should not be viewed as absolute figures.

The following table provides a summary of assessment of the various policy option impacts:

•

Contribution to EU policy objectives –

i.e. ranking of relative impact of the

policy optionsagainst the objectives defined in Section 6

•

Impact on the problem of identity theft –

impact of the different policy

options in terms of legal/constitutional, economic and social impacts (how the different policy options effect the problem of identity theft as it affects individual citizens, business and wider society);

•

Overall assessment of impacts

– structured around the above assessment

criteria relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impacts and added value as well as feasibility.

The detailed workings for Tables 7.1 (a), (b) and (c), together with the estimate of the cost of implementing the various policy options, are provided in Appendix L.

Table 7.1 (a): Overview of impacts of the policy options - Ranking of relative impacts in achieving the policy objectives

In document Incidencias de la Asesoría Pedagógica en el proceso de enseñanza-aprendizaje de la asignatura de Ciencias Sociales en el octavo grado, en el colegio parroquial Sagrado Corazón de Jesús, del distrito II del municipio de Managua en el departamento de Managu (página 45-50)