Policy analysis for sustainable development: The toolbox for the environmental social scientist

Abstract

Purpose

The paper seeks to propose the basic competencies of environmental social scientists regarding policy analysis for sustainable development. The ultimate goal is to contribute to an improvement of educational programmes in higher education by suggesting a toolbox that should be integrated in the curriculum.

Design/methodology/approach

Starting from the basic research questions regarding governance for sustainable development, five methods are identified capable of answering the following questions: reconstruction of policy theories; stakeholder analysis; impact assessment; cost‐benefit analysis; discourse analysis. Relevant information was collected through a literature review and practical experience by the authors.

Findings

These include: minimum content of the toolbox with methods of policy analysis for sustainable development; examples of how the toolbox can be applied; strengths and weaknesses of the methods; specification of competencies of environmental social scientists active in the area of policy analysis for sustainable development.

Practical implications

The paper proposes which methods of policy analysis for sustainable development should be integrated in higher education as well as how this should be done.

Originality/value

The paper systematically analyses the implications of the policy context in the domain of sustainable development for policy analysis in this area. In addition it gives a review of five basic methods: how they can be used to analyse policy issues from a sustainable development perspective. Aiming at reinforcing the input of scientific research in policy‐making, the paper eventually aims to promote sustainable development.

Citation

Runhaar, H., Dieperink, C. and Driessen, P. (2006), "Policy analysis for sustainable development: The toolbox for the environmental social scientist", International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 34-56. https://doi.org/10.1108/14676370610639236