Circular No. (2) of 2021 Concerning the Regulatory Framework for Government Policies in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi To all governmental entities and companies in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi, Peace and Allah’s me

Article-level navigation isn't available for this document — showing the full text as extracted.

Circular No. (2) of 2021
Concerning the Regulatory Framework for
Government Policies in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi
To all governmental entities and companies in the Emirate of Abu
Dhabi,
Peace and Allah’s mercy and blessings be upon you,
We are pleased to greet you and express our sincere gratitude for your
continuous cooperation to realise public interest.
Based on the keenness to develop government policies in the Emirate of Abu
Dhabi in line with the vision of the government, and based on the approval of
the Executive Committee, we urge you to adhere to the use and application of
the regulatory framework for government policies in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi
attached to this Circular when submitting requests related to government
policies for your entity to the Executive Council and its committees for approval
thereon.
We value your efforts and thank you for your cooperation
For your necessary action
May Allah guide you
Date: 18/03/2021
Dr. Mohammed Rashid Al Hamli
Secretary-General
For further enquiry, please contact the Department of Analysis and Economic Studies at the Economic Affairs Sector at
Abu Dhabi Executive Office by email: PPF @ECOUNCIL.AE.
• Attachment: Government Policies Manual - The Regulatory Framework for Government Policies in the Emirate of
Abu Dhabi

-- 10 of 100 --

10
The Abu Dhabi
Public Policy Framework
Public Policy Manual: A comprehensive
guide for policy makers
2021
n
THE PUBLIC POLICY FRAMEWORK
Championing evidence-based public policy making in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi

-- 11 of 100 --

11
All Rights Reserved for Abu Dhabi Executive Office © 2021
This manual was prepared by the Economic Analysis and Studies Department – Economic Affairs in
Abu Dhabi Executive Office
For enquiries, please contact us on the following email: PPF@ECOUNCIL.AE
Abu Dhabi Executive Office – Abu Dhabi Government
P.O. Box: 19
Abu Dhabi
United Arab Emirates
THE PUBLIC POLICY FRAMEWORK
Championing evidence-based public policy making in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi
22

-- 12 of 100 --

12
Section 1: Overview
Chapter 1: What is Public Policy?
Chapter 2: The Abu Dhabi Public Policy Framework
2.1 The Public Policy Cycle
2.2 The Public Policy Toolbox
2.3 Approvals
2.4 Roles and Responsibilities
Foreword
About this manual
Section 2: Step-by-step guidance
Chapter 3: Agenda setting
3.1 Diagnose the problem that needs to be addressed
3.2 Establish the rationale for government intervention
3.3 Define the desired objective(s)
Chapter 4: Design and appraise
4.1 Identify a range of intervention options
4.2 Undertake a qualitative appraisal
4.3 Develop high-level design
4.4 Undertake a quantitative appraisal
4.5 Develop detailed design
Chapter 5: Implement
5.1 Prepare for policy implementation
5.2 Launch and execute the policy
Chapter 6: Monitor and evaluate
6.1 Monitor policy implementation
6.2 Evaluate the policy
7
12
13
14
17
20
4
5
22
24
31
33
37
40
43
51
54
63
70
71
72
74
78
83
Table of contents
3

-- 13 of 100 --

13
FOREWORD
An effective and efficient government is paramount to fully realize the future vision of
the Emirate of Abu Dhabi and to meet the opportunities facing us in the decades
ahead.
The Public Policy Framework set out in this document will bring consistency to the way
public policy is made within the Emirate of Abu Dhabi and ensure that evidence and
analysis are at the heart of all interventions and requests. It provides policy-makers within
the Abu Dhabi Government with a step-by-step guide to developing effective public policy,
and emphasizes the importance of continuous improvement by providing tools to monitor,
evaluate, and report on policy implementation.
The framework has been designed using global best practice and experience, and will
ensure that the Emirate of Abu Dhabi is at the forefront of high-quality evidence-based
policymaking for years to come.
I urge all those across the government to read and use this manual. It represents an
important step in our ongoing journey to enhance the quality and services offered by
the Government of Abu Dhabi.
4

-- 14 of 100 --

14
ABOUT THIS MANUAL
Content
Purpose
Figure 1: Legend
Guidance on key topics
Suggested tools and techniques to aid each step
Checklists to review completion of key activities for each step
Guidance for approvals
Guidance on how stakeholders can be engaged
Examples to bring this manual to life
The purpose of this manual is to provide a unified framework to guide public policy-makers,
within government entities and public companies, in drafting consistent and comprehensive
public policies, and to foster continuous improvement through effective reporting cycles. It
is informed by global best practices and aligns with the UAE’s existing policy tools.
This manual offers step-by-step guidelines on how to develop, appraise, implement, and
evaluate public policy interventions. It presents suggested tools and techniques in addition
to highlighting the important role that stakeholders have in the completeness and accuracy
of the policy. Additionally, it provides guidance for developing proposals through a Business
Case to better inform the Executive Council’s decision-making process.
The legend in Figure 1 supports in navigating between the supplementary figures and
information provided within this manual:
5

-- 15 of 100 --

15
Section 1:
Overview
6

-- 16 of 100 --

16
Chapter 1:
What is public policy?
7

-- 17 of 100 --

17
The concept of ‘policy’ is complex, has several dimensions and can lend itself to different interpretations. In
general, a policy is a statement that sets out a government’s intention, guiding principles, and the practical action
that is undertaken to realise a set of desired objectives. However, this broad definition needs to be refined to
reflect how public policy is practiced in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi. This chapter explores the different types of
policies and requests that are produced across the Government and provides guidance and advice on which
should be considered within the scope of this manual and the wider Public Policy Framework.
Chapter 1:
What is public policy?
8
Policies can broadly be broken down into three main types: ‘public policies’, ‘operational policies’ and
‘organisational policies’. The core distinction between the three types is defined by their domain (public or
private) and the impact they have on stakeholders:
• Public policies are the Government’s chosen course of action, or inaction, on an issue of public concern. They
generate economic, social and environmental impacts and involve multiple stakeholders, including government
departments, businesses, households and civil society. Public Policies can be expressed in different forms:
visions, overarching public policies, strategies and specific public policy interventions (Figure 2).
• Operational policies are a course or method of action selected by an entity to deal with operational matters
when engaging with its stakeholders. Examples include facility licensing policies or issuing birth certification
policies; and,
• Organisational policies are a course or method of action selected by an entity to guide and determine how
internal human resource and financial management issues will be dealt with. They dictate rules within the
entity’s administrative procedures. An example of this is business continuity policies.
Types of Policies
The Government Policy Pyramid
Government Policy be expressed in different forms:
• Visions reflect the desired future state and includes specific priorities and ideas;
• Overarching Public Policies are derived from the Government’s vision and outline the high-level public
policy positions on specific issues;
• Strategies are long-term plans for realising the Government’s vision and overarching public policy positions;
and,
• Public Policy Interventions are targeted actions taken by the Government to achieve specific policy
objectives. The scope of this manual is the development of this layer of government policy.
When scoping and designing public policy interventions, and producing the required Business Case, it is
important for requesting entities and policymakers to be aware of the interactions between public policy and
wider Government and departmental strategy. As set out earlier in the chapter, the Business Case that
requesting entities are required to produce is designed specifically for public policy interventions, but in
producing these cases entities will need to consider and discuss the link between the intervention and wider
Government strategy.

-- 18 of 100 --

18
9
Figure 2: Public Policy Pyramid
The example below explains the relationship between the different expressions of public policy using
general healthcare as an example:
To fulfil its Vision DOH designed several overarching
public policies that address the main components of the
Abu Dhabi healthcare system such as the “DOH Policy on
Digital Health”.
Overarching Public Policies
Vision
The vision of the Abu Dhabi Department for Health (DOH)
is ‘a Healthy and Safe Abu Dhabi’.
Strategies
DOH implemented a number of regulatory and non
regulatory public policy interventions, to execute its high
level policy and strategy. For example the establishment of
Malaffi, an innovative, unified health information exchange
(HIE) platform that facilitates a more patient-centric
approach to healthcare provision.
Public Policy Interventions
To realize the above Overarching Public Policy DOH
designed an ‘e-Health Strategy’. This would involve setting
a plan on how to prioritize the ambitions of the DOH Policy
on Digital Health
As the Public Policy Pyramid indicates, public policy interventions can be derived from either the
Government’s overall vision, its overarching public policies, or its longer-term strategies. It is important that the
proposed interventions are aligned with the overall strategic direction of the entity in question, as well as the
priorities of both the Emirate of Abu Dhabi and the UAE.
In an ideal scenario, each level of Government action would flow from the vision and/or overarching public
policies (Figure 2), and this should be discussed in the Business Case. In practice, this will not always be the
case. It should be noted that alternative definitions of public policy exist, but that this is the definition applied
for the purposes of the Public Policy Framework.
Requesting entities submit many different types of requests to ADEO and the Executive Council, including
different types of public policy proposals, different non-public policy requests and a range of other different
documents for consultation and approval (Figure 3).
The different types of requests that qualify as public policy interventions

-- 19 of 100 --

19
10
Figure 3: Types of submissions
New, amendment or exemption to: Scope
In
scope
Out of
scope
Out of
scope
Out of
scope
Out of
scope
Out of
scope
In
scope
In
scope
Fiscal instruments
Information
provision
Additional budget
Memorandums of
understanding /
Agreements
Complaints
Events
Capital projects
(admin)
Regulations
Description
Laws, Emiri decrees, decisions of the Chairman
of the Executive Council, decisions of the
Executive Council, circulars, and executive and
administrative orders.
Government spending or revenue policies
intended to modify the economic behavior of
individuals or private sector actors.
Creation of new bodies that expand, or change
the scope of public services.
Ongoing expenditure to maintain the operational
level of existing assets or government entities or
public companies.
Funding allocated for overages in a planned
budget for a project.
Document containing terms of reference,
timelines and parameters for a project.
Written statements articulating dissatisfaction
with a government service or priority.
A special occasion that is organised and open to
the public.
In
scope
Direct provision Goods and services provided by government
directly to compensate for the lack of private
sector provision (full or partial).
In
scope
Public entities
and/or agencies
The practice of increasing public awareness on a
specific subject to incentivise behavioural
change.
Out of
scope
Committee
appointments
Leadership appointments made jointly by
committee membership or the creation or
replacement of groups to manage workflow.
Out of
scope
Staffing changes Turnover, recruitment or changes to staffing
practices.
Public Policy Interventions
Operational Policy
Organisational Policy
Capital projects
(public)
In
scope
A long-term and large-scale project where the
cost is capitalised or depreciated.
Strategies Out of
scope
A long-term plan for realizing the Government’s
vision and overarching public policy positions

-- 20 of 100 --

20
11
Requesting entities who require approval from the Executive Council for a request that falls ‘in scope’ for any
of the six different types of public policy intervention will be required to produce a supporting Business Case to
accompany their proposal. Requests that fall under organisational or operational policy will not be required to
produce a supporting Business Case, although the tools and techniques that are described throughout this
document can still be applied to support the development of these other requests, as necessary. Similarly, the
requesting entities may use their own equivalent tools when preparing a Business Case.
One of ADEO’s key roles is to continually improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the Abu Dhabi
Government, and to support the Executive Council in making robust, well-evidenced decisions when it comes
to introducing, changing or removing public policy interventions. By producing a Business Case to support
their proposed policy changes, requesting entities will provide the Executive Council with the required
information, evidence and analysis to allow them to appraise different options effectively. Further detail
regarding the Business Case, and how to develop it, is provided in Chapter 2 of this manual.

-- 21 of 100 --

21
Chapter 2:
The Abu Dhabi
Public Policy Framework

-- 22 of 100 --

22
Chapter 2:
The Abu Dhabi Public Policy Framework
This manual, and the accompanying documents, contains the Abu Dhabi Public Policy Framework. The
objectives of the Framework are to bring consistency to public policy development in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi,
to ensure that public policy is made in a holistic, coherent and consultative way, to streamline the interactions
between requesting entities and ADEO, and to link policy design to implementation and review.
2.1 The Public Policy Cycle
Public policy making is the exercise of identifying and selecting initiatives that support a government entity in
achieving specific objectives or goals. It is an iterative process that is conceptualised in this manual in four
stages: Agenda Setting, Design and Appraise, Implement, and Monitor and Evaluate (Figure 4).
This document contains detailed guidance and support to policy-makers on how to navigate each stage of this
cycle, as well as providing advice on how to manage the approval processes during the Agenda Setting and
Design and Appraise stages.
Section 2 of this manual is dedicated to each of these key stages of the Public Policy Cycle and provides support
to policy-makers to guide them through the process. In addition to the core sections, several further pieces of
guidance and tools have been developed to help requesting entities complete each of the Public Policy Cycle
stages.
13
Figure 4: The Public Policy Cycle
The
Public Policy
Cycle
What is the problem and what
do we want to achieve?
What is the best way of
achieving this? How do we launch the policy?
How do we ensure this is
still the best way?
1 Agenda setting
2 Design and appraise 3 Implement
4 Monitor and evaluate

-- 23 of 100 --

23
The Public Policy Manual provides guidance on how to systematically investigate a challenge or opportunity,
compare a number of different potential options, and select the most beneficial initiative to take forward as the
preferred choice. The Public Policy Manual includes suggested applications of these techniques, and also shows
how they can be customized and combined in different ways to meet the specific needs to be identified by policy
practitioners.
In addition, it advises policy makers on the level of detail required at the different design steps in order to build a
comprehensive policy that can be implemented successfully. Both the detail of the intervention design and the
level of supporting evidence should increase as a public policy intervention progresses through the cycle.
The supporting tools and templates, along with this manual, make up the Abu Dhabi Public Policy Toolbox. This
should be used by all requesting entities to help navigate the different stages of the Public Policy Cycle.
Although the Public Policy Toolbox is extensive, it is not exhaustive and requesting entities should make use of
their own analytical tools and internal processes where necessary and appropriate. The three tools are:
2.2 The Public Policy Toolbox
14
The Appraisal Tool: A tool for appraising policy intervention options against each
other.
The Public Policy Manual: Practical guidelines on how to identify, design,
appraise, implement, monitor and evaluate public policy interventions;
The Business Case Template: A template for submitting policy intervention
proposals and supporting evidence;
Figure 5: The Public Policy Toolbox
Stage of the Public Policy Cycle Toolbox
1 Agenda setting
3 Implement
4 Monitor and evaluate
2 Design and appraise
Public Policy
Manual
Business Case
Template
Appraisal
Tool
Appraisal
Tool
Business Case
Template
Public Policy
Manual

-- 24 of 100 --

24
To support requesting entities in building their case, a template has been designed where they can set out
the required information, evidence, data and analysis they need before they submit their proposal for
approval.
The Business Case Template ensures that submitted proposals are holistic, coherent, and supported by a
proportionate level of evidence in order to inform key decision-making at the different approval stages. There
are three core areas that need to be covered in each proposal, and these are set out in more detail in Figure
6.
As shown in Figure 6, in order to allow the Executive Council to make well-informed decisions, requesting
entities need to provide clear evidence of the need for government intervention, detailed information about
the proposed response, and a robust appraisal of the expected impacts across the Emirate of Abu Dhabi.
When completing a template, requesting entities should follow the chronological steps that have been aligned
to the different stages of the Public Policy Cycle. Further detailed support on how to complete the Business
Case Template, including further information around how it aligns with the Appraisal Tool, is included within
the template.
15
Figure 6: The Business Case
What is the problem
to be addressed?
Rationale and
objectives
What is the need and
desired end state?
Policy design
What is the action
proposed for achieving
the desired end state?
Policy appraisal
Why is this action
proposed?
Why should
Government
intervene?
What objectives is it
aiming to achieve?
What is the proposed
policy instrument?
What is the proposed
policy scope?
What is the proposed
implementation plan?
What is the expected
economic, social and
environmental impact?
Is the policy technically,
legally and financially
feasible?
Are there other strategic
considerations?

-- 25 of 100 --

25
16
The Appraisal Tool has been developed to support requesting entities in assessing and comparing a range of
potential policy interventions. The tool allows users to appraise several different options against a pre-
determined set of impact criteria, to help determine which options should be selected for further analysis and
development. The Appraisal Tool includes several different criteria, which cover strategic, feasibility, and impact
considerations. This is shown in more detail in Figure 7.
Figure 7: Appraisal Criteria Framework
Non-exhaustive
Alignment
with objectives
National
security
Alignment with
vision and strategy Organisational
Federal
implications
Stakeholder
support
Legal Cost Technical
Employment Investment GDP Private
sector
Fiscal
revenue
Competition SMEs
GHG emissions
Air pollution
Water pollution
Water
consumption
Waste
Health
Education
Public safety
Quality of life
Technology and
innovation
Diversity and
inclusiveness
Income
distribution
Emirati
business
ownership
Emirati
employment
Economic impact
Social impact
Environmental impact
Impact
Strategic
Fit
Feasibility

-- 26 of 100 --

26
There are two times that a requesting entity will need to obtain approval when submitting a public policy
proposal. The first of these stages is:
2.3 Approvals
Once Pre-Approval has been obtained, ADEO will communicate to requesting entities what is required from
them before coming back at the final approval stage. At a minimum, requesting entities will be required to
produce detailed implementation and monitoring and evaluation plans for their proposed public policy
intervention. Depending on the specific policy in question, they may also be asked to undertake more detailed
quantitative analysis, to help ADEO and the Executive Council to make a well-informed decision.
Further information on what is required at each stage of approval, and the level of evidence and analysis that
should be included for each, is included in Chapter 4 of this document. Additional support and guidance is also
included at the beginning of the Business Case Template.
The Public Policy Framework is depicted, in full, in Figure 8. This infographic brings together all the different
components of the Public Policy Cycle and supporting Public Policy Toolbox, and the individual steps required
of requesting entities within each stage. It also shows how, and when, requesting entities should engage with
ADEO for approval.
At this stage, ADEO will review the implementation and monitoring and evaluation plans
that have been designed by requesting entities. If further analysis was requested at the
Pre-Approval Stage, then this will also be reviewed. Once reviewed, the Executive
Council will either approve or reject the intervention. Note that the intervention may be
rejected because the submission is incomplete or lacks sufficient evidence. In this
instance, the proposal will be returned to the requesting entity for rework.
The Appraisal Tool allows weights to be assigned to each assessment criteria either on an equal basis or
through custom weighting, which allows for user-defined weights based on the relevance of different criteria to
the decision-making.
17
Final
Approval
Pre-
Approval
At this stage, ADEO will review the rationale for government intervention, the list of
potential options that have been identified, and the analysis that has been produced to
assess the impacts that each option will have. The analysis behind each option is
expected to be broadly qualitative and depict the range of impacts that the different
options may have. Detailed, quantitative analysis is not required at the Pre-Approval
stage.

-- 27 of 100 --

27
18
ADEO Interaction
(* = indicates mandatory
step)
Reporting
Approved
Further analysis
required Pre-
Approval*
Evaluation
Sounding
Figure 8: The Abu Dhabi Public Policy Framework
What steps should we undertake to make the case for our preferred public policy intervention?
The Public Policy Cycle
Diagnose the problem that needs to be addressed 1.1
Establish the rationale for government intervention 1.2
Set out the overall objectives of the intervention 1.3
1 Agenda setting
What is the problem and what do we want to achieve?
Identify a range of intervention options 2.1
Undertake a qualitative appraisal 2.2
Develop high-level design(s) 2.3
Undertake a quantitative appraisal (optional) 2.4
Develop detailed design 2.5
2 Design and appraise
What is the best way of achieving the objectives?
Prepare for policy implementation 3.1
Launch and execute the policy 3.2
3 Implement
How do we launch the policy?
Monitor policy implementation 4.1
Evaluate the policy 4.2
4 Monitor and evaluate
How do we ensure this is still the best way?
Final
Approval*
No further analysis
required
18

-- 28 of 100 --

28
19
Appraisal criteria
What questions should we answer to
support our preferred intervention?
• Is the proposed intervention
aligned with Government
vision and strategy?
• Is the proposed intervention
aligned with the desired
objectives?
• Does it have implications on
national security?
Strategic Fit
• Is the intervention feasible
legally?
• Is the intervention feasible
financially?
• Is the intervention feasible
technically?
• Is the intervention feasible
organisationally?
• Does it have Federal
implications?
• Does it have stakeholder
support?
Feasibility
• What are the intended and
unintended economic
impacts?
• What are the intended and
unintended social impacts?
• What are the intended and
unintended environmental
impacts?
Impact
Techniques Toolbox
Benchmarking
Forecasting
Environmental scanning
Root cause analysis
SMART objectives
Primary data gathering
What techniques can we use in
this process?
Stakeholder engagement
What tools are at our disposal?
Economic impact analysis
Social impact analysis
Environmental impact analysis
Multi-criteria analysis
Social cost-benefit analysis
Stakeholder engagement
Business Case
Template
Public Policy
Manual
Appraisal
Tool

-- 29 of 100 --

29
There are various assigned roles and responsibilities along the Public Policy Cycle. Table 1 describes these
for each party involved.
2.4 Roles and Responsibilities
20
Table 1: Roles and responsibilities related to the Public Policy Framework
Entity Responsibilities Role
Provide support to policy makers throughout the Public Policy Cycle
• Provide support to requesting entities throughout the various stages of
the Public Policy Cycle.
• Review options analysis and selection of preferred option(s).
• Review policy appraisal and present final proposed policy to the
Executive Council.
• Review evaluation reports and advise on the policy’s future direction.
Abu Dhabi
Executive
Office
Pre-
Approver
Approve
r
Executive
Council Provide final approval of Public Policy Intervention
• Review final policy appraisal and approve or reject final proposed
public policy intervention.
Own the overall Public Policy Cycle
• Develop policies in accordance with the guidelines presented in this
manual.
• Conduct comprehensive policy appraisals to select the most appropriate
policy option for achieving the desired objectives.
• Complete and submit Business Case and all other supporting documents
to ADEO depending on approval stage.
• Engage with relevant stakeholders throughout the Public Policy Cycle.
• Implement policy in accordance with approved implementation plan.
• Obtain data required from stakeholders to evaluate policies’ effectiveness.
• Evaluate policies’ implementation and effectiveness.
• Prepare and circulate evaluation reports to relevant stakeholders.
Provide legal advice regarding the proposed policy
• Review policies to ensure alignment with the legal framework.
• Provide guidance on suggested amendments to legal documents to
enable policy implementation.
Ensure policy alignment with strategic direction
• Review policies to ensure policy alignment with the UAE and the Emirate
of Abu Dhabi’s overall strategic direction.
• Review policies to ensure alignment with the mandate of the entity.
Requestor
Offer input and support throughout the Public Policy Cycle
• Provide timely insights to ensure effective policies.
• Support in identifying potential intended and unintended impacts,
benefits, and changes relevant to the department or Agency’s area of
specialization.
• Provide requirements needed to enable the implementation of proposed
policies.
• Support in implementation of policies in accordance with approved
implementation plan.
• Collect and record data required for evaluation of policy effectiveness,
where agreed.
Other
stakeholders
Government
Departments
& Agencies
Other
Government
Departments
& Agencies

-- 30 of 100 --

30
Section 2:
Step-by-step
guidance

-- 31 of 100 --

31
Chapter 3:
Agenda setting

-- 32 of 100 --

32
Chapter 3:
Agenda setting
The first stage of the Public Policy Cycle is focused on building a detailed understanding of the
challenge(s) or problem(s) that needs addressing, and assessing whether government intervention is
the best option to alleviate the identified issues. Once this has been determined, high-level objectives
and key performance indicators should be identified to support the policy analysis that takes place in
the next stage.
In developing public policy interventions, governments respond to both opportunities and problems. The
Agenda Setting stage of the Public Policy Cycle is based on a problem-oriented approach to policy analysis.
This approach is characterised by undertaking a detailed analysis of the underlying problem before potential
solutions are identified. This is not to suggest that the government cannot respond to opportunities, but rather
that the approach taken in this manual prioritises a detailed understanding of the challenge to be addressed,
whether the government is proactively or reactively addressing it.
23
ADEO Interaction
(* = indicates mandatory
step)
Figure 9: Agenda setting stage overview
1 Agenda setting
3 Implement
4 Monitor and evaluate
2 Design and appraise
Stage of the Public Policy Cycle
What is the problem and what do we want to achieve?
Establish the rationale for government intervention 1.2
Set out the overall objectives of the intervention 1.3
Diagnose the problem that needs to be addressed 1.1
Sounding

-- 33 of 100 --

33
Evidencing the case for government intervention is a key part of the Agenda Setting stage of the Public Policy
Cycle. A clear rationale for state intervention should be based on a comprehensive understanding of the
challenge. This can be achieved by answering the following core questions:
1. What is the nature of the challenge that needs to be addressed?
2. What is the size of the challenge that needs to be addressed?
3. What are the underlying drivers behind this challenge?
4. Why is government intervention required?
3.1 Identify and diagnose the problem that needs to be addressed
These are some fundamental techniques that can provide crucial insights through primary data, existing bodies
of research, and experiences in other countries.
Establishing a clear definition of the challenge in the early stages of the Public Policy Cycle is necessary to help
identify appropriate solutions. This process is likely to be iterative and require different levels of stakeholder
engagement. Environmental Scanning, which involves identifying and tracking trends in the organisation’s
internal and external environment, covers a broad range of useful techniques for identifying challenges, whether
they are driven by problems, challenges or opportunities.
Horizon scanning (Figure 10) is a useful technique for identifying and monitoring potentially important
developments through the systematic examination of potential threats and opportunities to the policy area in
question. The approach is driven by the analysis of changes, constants and uncertainties over defined time
periods. It requires consideration of both existing and emerging phenomena, but also how different issues may
interact to influence future outcomes.
What is the nature of the challenge that needs to be addressed?
24
01
Literature reviews: Reviewing academic papers, white papers or other theoretically-backed views that
study and analyse the challenge in question;
Benchmarking: Examining the manifestation of the problem in other countries, the evolution of the
challenge and reviewing the lessons learned from elsewhere; and,
Primary data collection: Gathering primary data from first-hand sources, such as surveys, interviews,
focus groups or experiments to generate situation-specific insights.
Some core tools and techniques that can be applied in the early stages of the Public Policy Cycle to develop a
deep understanding of the policy challenge are:

-- 34 of 100 --

34
Figure 10: Horizon scanning
This three horizon model indicates how strategic and policy issues evolve over time:
• Horizon 1 captures immediate strategic and policy priorities which are readily apparent and may
be well understood. If not already, these issues should be on the policy agenda.
• Horizon 2 shows that issues may evolve, or new issues may arise, in the medium term. These
issues, although less well understood, may present opportunities to tackling emerging issues
through public policy interventions.
• Horizon 3 includes long-term strategic and policy issues which are difficult to determine from
the present. Decision makers do not necessarily need to respond to H3 issues right now,
although it is important to identify and track the drivers that will shape these issues.
High
Medium
Low
Long term Medium term Short term Now
H3
H2
H1
Time horizon
Priority
25
A problem-oriented approach to public policy analysis is reliant on a sufficiently rigorous definition of the policy
challenge under consideration. As mentioned at the beginning of this chapter, this can be achieved by
deploying literature reviews, benchmarking studies or primary data collection in order to answer a series of
predefined research questions.
It is important to ask wide-ranging and probing questions in the early stages of the process. While specific
questions will vary by policy area, the example research questions could be:
• Who is affected?
• How are they affected?
• What contributes to the problem?
• When and where is the problem most likely to occur?
In addressing these questions, it is important to be as specific as possible about the different stakeholders who
are impacted by the different aspects of the policy challenge. The following table highlights the key internal
and external stakeholders to consider when identifying the impacted parties during intervention analysis.

-- 35 of 100 --

35
26
Table 2: Stakeholders
The stakeholders listed in Table 2 are deliberately defined at a high-level, and in practice will need to be further
broken down through segmentation and/or demographic analysis. A particular policy issue is likely to impact
specific groups more than others, and identifying the specific agents impacted by a public policy is a key part of
the early analysis. At this stage it is particularly important to perform stakeholder mapping.
Additional research into the nature of the challenge should also consider the specific context, history and
potential evolution of the identified problem(s). Research questions to support this additional assessment could
include:
• What is the history of the challenge?
• Who put this challenge on the agenda?
• What are the specific interests at stake (including demographic, geographic and sectoral)?
• Who is involved in the decision-making?
Through detailed research and analysis of the questions that are set out throughout this chapter, requesting
entities will be able to provide proportionate, well-reasoned evidence of the nature and type of problem(s) or
challenge(s).
Businesses
Economic stakeholders engaged in commercial, industrial, or
professional activities, who transform factors of production into goods
and services.
Households
Economic stakeholders who supply factors of production (labour and
capital) and are consumers of final goods and services.
Civil society Individuals or groups who share a common interest and are not
connected to the government. Civil society organisations can mediate
the relationships between public authorities and citizens.
Government Entities engaged in public sector activities which pass laws,
collect revenues and directly consume economic goods and services.
Description Stakeholder

-- 36 of 100 --

36
The breadth of issues covered by policy-makers often means that a challenge may be identified before the full-
scale or size is understood. The primary purpose of this step is to establish a quantitative understanding of the
challenge. This will require an initial estimation of the size and an understanding of the demographic,
geographic or sectoral variation, as well as a balance between targeted analysis of specific questions with
exploratory analysis to reveal any unknown characteristics of the challenge.
What is the size of the challenge that needs to be addressed?
This will require a range of data sources, including national statistics, departmental data, proprietary data
sources and primary data. The collection of primary data can be particularly important at this stage because it is
likely to be the most specific information about the area in question, however it can be more time consuming to
collect and analyse.
Policy challenges will often draw on a range of aggregate estimates, including both monetary and non-
monetary aggregates. Monetary statistics include market or economic valuations, where as non-monetary
statistics include measures of frequency, prevalence and count, and percentages.
To understand the policy challenge it may be necessary to disaggregate overall estimates by different
characteristics. This can include demographic, geographic and sectoral analysis.
Aggregate statistics may hide important characteristics of the challenge. Consequently, it is important to look
beyond aggregates to understand measures of variation. This includes central tendency (mean, median, and
mode), dispersion (range, variance, standard deviation), and position (percentile, quartile and rank).
Different types of data analysis can be used depending on the salience of the policy area, availability of data,
and urgency of the request. Methods range from descriptive statistics and trend analysis, to more complex
economic or statistical assessments. For example, supply and demand analysis (Figure 11) is particularly
useful for challenges with implications for market outcomes, participants or structures, as it supports the
understanding of the dynamics and determinants of supply and demand. This technique can also be adjusted
to examine both capacity and needs, which provides an unconstrainted economic assessment of the supply or
demand in a given market.
27
02
What data are available?
What aggregate statistics are required to understand the size of the challenge?
What disaggregated statistics are required to understand the size of the challenge?
What measures of variation are required to understand the characteristics of the challenge?

-- 37 of 100 --

37
Figure 11: Supply (capacity) and demand (needs) analysis
Define the market
Divide total supply into its main components and understand production
Forecast the drivers of supply and how this will change over time
Conduct sensitivity analysis to understand assumptions and to gauge the risks
Identify who the suppliers of a product or service are, considering potential substitutes for a
product or service, and the market structure.
Divide industry supply into segments and perform analysis of production variables, such as
production costs, raw material costs, technology and labour costs.
Statistical techniques such as regressions can be used to identify and map these parameters.
Identify and quantify the areas of greatest risk and gauge the likelihood that these events could
occur so as to provide a more accurate understanding of the potential impact on supply.
Define the market
Divide total industry demand into its main components
Forecast the drivers of demand in each segment and how this will change over time
Conduct sensitivity analysis to understand assumptions and to gauge the risks
Identify who the end users of a product or service are, considering potential substitutes for the
product or service, in order to gain a better understanding of the end user’s potential behavior.
Divide industry demand into segments; each category must be small and similar enough so that
drivers of demand will apply consistently, and large enough so the analysis is worth the effort.
Statistical techniques such as regressions can be used to identify and map these parameters.
Identify and quantify areas of greatest risk and gauge the likelihood that these events could occur
so as to provide a more accurate understanding of the potential impact on demand.
Supply and/or capacity analysis
Understand the size and structure of the market, as well as the dynamics and determinants of supply
Demand and/or needs analysis
Understand the size and structure of the market, as well as the dynamics and determinants of demand
28
01
02
03
01
02
03
04
01
02
03
04

-- 38 of 100 --

38
Estimating the size and scale of a problem assists with the creation of a counterfactual, or ‘business as usual’,
scenario during the Design and Appraise stage. This is described in more detail in Chapter 4. The ‘business
as usual’ scenario, or the Status Quo, is the continuation of current arrangements assuming that the proposed
policy is not implemented; this is sometimes referred to as a ‘do nothing’ option, or the counterfactual. Once
the scale of the problem has been assessed, it is possible to start to analyse the underlying drivers of the
challenge or problem in question.
A logic tree is a tool used to break down a problem statement or question into its more simple
subcomponents, allowing for easier identification of potential root causes. The approach helps to group
the causes and drills down further into the details of each grouping until each issue is sufficiently explicit.
This means the issues must be mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive (MECE).
• 'Mutually exclusive’ indicates that there is no overlap between the subcomponents
• 'Collectively exhaustive’ means that the logic tree covers all potential root causes
This exercise will prove helpful when identifying solutions to address the problem statement, as
responses may tackle the actual problem statement or the individual issues defining the causes.
A simple example of a logic tree is outlined below:
What are the underlying drivers behind this challenge?
A comprehensive problem analysis does not only reveal the nature, size and likely evolution of a problem, but
is also an indication of the likely causal-effect relationships that may be underlying it. There a number of
methodologies and techniques that can be deployed at this stage, ranging from qualitative problem solving
tools, such as a root cause analysis, or advanced econometric or statistical techniques. Logic tree analysis
(Figure 12) is one of several methodologies that can be applied to understand the drivers behind a problem.
Figure 12: Logic tree analysis
Issue 1
Sub-issue 1.1 Sub-issue 1.2
Issue 2
Sub-issue 2.1 Sub-issue 2.2
Problem statement
29
03

-- 39 of 100 --

39
Once the drivers behind a challenge have been identified, it may be helpful to map them against a number of
different factors as this can help prioritise which issues should be tackled as a priority.
Driver mapping is used to map the drivers of a policy challenge based on their importance to the policy area
and the certainty of outcome.
Consider the drivers of the challenges identified through others means, such as logic tree or the
analysis of supply or demand, but also consider wider factors through using the Political,
Economic, Sociological, Technological, Legal and Environmental (PESTLE) framework.
Map the drivers based on importance and certainty of the outcome, as shown in the example
below:
E Economic
S Societal
P Political T Technological
L Legislative
E Environmental
More important for the
policy area
Less important for the
policy area
The outcome is
certain
The outcome is
uncertain
So far, this chapter has focused on building a detailed understanding of the problem(s) or issue(s) that are at
hand. The next part now focusses on whether government intervention is the best option for addressing them,
and brings these different assessments together.
Figure 13: Driver mapping
30
01
02

-- 40 of 100 --

40
Why is government intervention required?
Identifying a problem, highlighting the size and scale of the issue, and identifying the root causes of the
challenge are not sufficient on their own to warrant a government response. Before government
intervention can be justified, it is important to showcase why government action is the best way of
dealing with the identified problem and what would happen if no action is taken. There is no single
approach to justifying government intervention, and it is important to consider a range of perspectives,
including what would happen if no intervention were to take place.
31
01
3.2 Establish the rationale for government intervention
Legalistic analysis of the need for government intervention is one approach, and includes addressing
questions such as:
• Is there a legal basis for government intervention?
• Is government intervention proportional to the size of the problem?
• Is the policy area under the exclusive competence of the government or department?
It is also possible to justify government intervention on the basis of economic grounds, including to
address regulatory failure, market failure, or to promote social or public goals. For example, the use of
logic trees may indicate that the root cause of the issue is driven by inappropriate regulatory design,
leading to economic distortions and inefficient economic outcomes. Three examples of possible triggers
for government intervention are provided in Figure 14.

-- 41 of 100 --

41
Market failure
Market failure usually arises when the current market system
fails to efficiently allocate goods or services. For example:
Regulatory
failure
This can occur
when regulations
are not well-
designed to
address an issue
and they result in
unintended
consequences.
This can lead to
costs for
businesses and/or
society.
Social goals
Government
intervention may
be required in
order to address
distributional or
equality objectives,
or advance
specific priorities
for the public
good.
Figure 14: Triggers for government intervention
32
03 01
02
Public goods: these are non-excludable (can be
consumed by all without restriction) and non-rivalrous
(can be consumed by any number of individuals with no
impact on benefits). They are typically not provided by
markets (for example defense services) without
government intervention.
Imperfect information: Information is needed for
markets to operate efficiently. Regulation may be
needed to enforce information disclosure, for example:
providing terms and conditions when rendering services
or providing price transparency on receipts.
Externalities: these are the social costs and benefits
that arise from economic activities which are incurred by
a third party who has no control over the decision to
create that cost or benefit. For example, the cost of
pollution is felt by the public rather than the industry
responsible for creating it.
Market power: this occurs when there is insufficient
competition in the market, due to either the number of
firms or market share of firms, resulting in inefficient
prices, inadequate competition and consumer choice,
bundling goods or services, and dead weight loss. For
example, a market which is dominated by one firm may
result in unjustifiably high consumer prices.

-- 42 of 100 --

42
The various techniques highlighted throughout this chapter are designed to help requesting entities identify
problems across all policy areas, assess them effectively, and to identify whether government intervention is
required. The final part of this chapter addresses how to set effective objectives and performance indicators in
order to tackle the problems that have been identified above.
Term Definition Example
Outputs The products, services or capital goods that
result from an intervention.
Establish a 24-hour service for
customer support by 2021
Outcomes The expected effects of interventions
outputs.
50% reduction in the number of
complaints received by 2025
It is important to engage with stakeholders throughout this process to ensure that the vision and objectives are
aligned between the requesting entity, the wider Abu Dhabi Government and the UAE government. When
identifying the objectives, stakeholders should be consulted and benchmarking should be conducted.
When setting objectives, it is recommended to:
1. Consider alignment with strategy;
2. Engage stakeholders on objectives; and
3. Ensure objectives follow the SMART Framework.
3.3 Define the desired objective(s)
When defining the objectives of a public policy intervention, it is important to reflect how they will contribute to
achieving the government’s overarching priorities. Such objectives may be expressed as outputs or outcomes
and should be aligned to the government’s overall strategic direction and a requesting entities’ mandate. Table 3
clarifies the difference between outputs and outcomes and uses as an example the government attempting to
achieve its strategic priority of enhancing customer satisfaction.
Table 3: Outputs and outcomes
The ability of a policy option to meet the desired objectives is a central criteria in the overall policy appraisal
process. It is therefore important that the objectives defined in the Agenda Setting stage are closely aligned with
the UAE’s, the Emirate of Abu Dhabi’s and the requesting entities’ strategy. The could be achieved by
considering the following questions for each level of government:
• What is the mission and purpose?
• What is the vision and strategy?
• What are the target outcomes?
Consider alignment with strategy
33
01

-- 43 of 100 --

43
It is also important to consider how the objectives might impact the strategy of other government departments,
particularly where the policy area is likely to require collaboration with the departments in question.
The absence of clearly defined objectives may lead to improper policy selection, ineffective appraisals, and
subsequently ineffective policies. The SMART Framework (Figure 16) provides guidance on characteristics that
contribute to well-defined objectives.
Engage stakeholders on objectives
Figure 15: Engaging stakeholders on objectives
The following questions may be useful to help develop an understanding of the specific policy area, the
emerging themes that need to be addressed and the potential sources of conflict:
What is the critical issue for the area being considered?
What is a favourable outcome?
What is an unfavourable outcome?
What are the key operational, structural and cultural changes that need to be made to deliver the
favourable outcome?
What are the key lessons from past experience?
Which decisions must be prioritised?
Figure 16: SMART framework
Specific: S Measurable: M Achievable: A Realistic/Relevant: R Time-limited: T
Well-defined, clear and unambiguous
Specified by criteria to measure progress against
Attainable, not impossible to achieve
Within reach / related to the identified problem
Defined timeframe for achievement
34
02
Ensure objectives follow the SMART framework 03

-- 44 of 100 --

44
35
The next chapter builds on the guidance, advice and tools that have been provided throughout Chapter 3. It
focuses on providing support to requesting entities to allow them to undertake proportionate, robust and
informative analysis of their proposed public policy interventions.
Following, and during, the Agenda Setting stage, there is an opportunity to engage with
the Abu Dhabi Executive Office to obtain direction and guidance on the identified
challenges and/or opportunities, rationale for Government intervention, and objectives,
before proceeding with the Design and Appraise stage.
Sounding
Sounding

-- 45 of 100 --

45
✓
Stakeholder Engagement Checklist
Agenda Setting Stage Checklist
Identify the problem, describe its size and scale, and identify its root causes
Describe the rationale for government intervention, including both the triggers for intervention and
its legal basis
Set SMART objectives, outputs, and/or outcomes to reflect the desired end-state
Confirm alignment of objectives with the UAE’s, the Emirate of Abu Dhabi’s and requesting
entities’ vision and strategic objectives
Identify key stakeholders and the level and type of engagement for each throughout the various
stages of the Public Policy Cycle
Consult with appropriate government departments to ensure alignment with the UAE and the
Emirate of Abu Dhabi’s strategic direction
Solicit input from stakeholders on the proposed policy’s objectives and the legal and regulatory
landscape of the policy area
Consider how stakeholders can support the proposed policy’s objectives and outcomes
Identify, prioritise and map key stakeholders
Contact key individuals within the department from the mapping process and make them aware
of their future involvement in the policy area
Consider the timing requirements and support stakeholders to participate in the Design and
Appraise, Implement and Monitor and Evaluate phases
Consider what types of communication methods will be used to engage with stakeholders (such
as formal written communication, regular presentations, meetings and email)
36

-- 46 of 100 --

46
Chapter 4:
Design and appraise

-- 47 of 100 --

47
ADEO Interaction
(* = indicates mandatory
step)
Chapter 4:
Design and appraise
38
The Design and Appraise stage aims to identify and analyse several policy options to select the one
which is mostly likely to achieve the desired objectives, with limited unintended consequences. The
objectives of a policy can often be met through a variety of different approaches, so it is important to
consider and analyse alternative options to determine the most appropriate public policy intervention
that should be implemented.
As set out in Figure 18, there are different levels of approval that will need to be sought during the Design and
Appraise stage, each with different levels of analysis and appraisal.
Figure 17: Design and appraise stage overview
Stage of the Public Policy Cycle
What is the best way of achieving the objectives?
1 Agenda setting
3 Implement
4 Monitor and evaluate
2 Design and appraise
No further analysis
required
Approved
Further analysis
required Pre-
Approval*
Final
Approval*
Identify a range of intervention options 2.1
Undertake a qualitative appraisal 2.2
Develop high-level design(s) 2.3
Undertake a quantitative appraisal (optional) 2.4
Develop detailed design 2.5

-- 48 of 100 --

48
39
Figure 18: Narrowing down of intervention options
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Option 5
Option n
Option 1
Option 2
Option …
Option n
Preferred
option
Second best
(optional)
Option …
Preferred
option
Preferred
option
Screening
Qualitative
assessment
Quantitative
assessment
Further
analysis required
Approved
Pre-
Approval*
Final
Approval*
Options
initial list
Preferred
option
Options
long-list
Options
short-list
At this stage, ADEO will review the implementation and monitoring and evaluation plans
that have been designed by requesting entities. If further analysis was requested at the
Pre-Approval Stage, then this will also be reviewed. Once reviewed, the Executive
Council will either approve or reject the intervention. Note that the intervention may be
rejected because the submission is incomplete or lacks sufficient evidence. In this
instance, the proposal will be returned to the requesting entity for rework.
Final
Approval
Pre-
Approval
At this stage, ADEO will review the rationale for government intervention, the list of
potential options that have been identified, and the analysis that has been produced to
assess the impacts that each option will have. The analysis behind each option is
expected to be broadly qualitative and depict the range of impacts that the different
options may have. Detailed, quantitative analysis is not required at the Pre-Approval
stage.

-- 49 of 100 --

49
The first step in the Design and Appraise stage is to identify a number of policy options that could be
implemented in order to achieve the desired objectives. These options should address the initially identified
problem(s), or the root cause(s) of the issues as identified in Chapter 3.1. A counterfactual or “do-nothing”
option should also be included as a means of comparison, although it is not considered as a specific option in
and of itself.
4.1 Identify a range of intervention options
40
Table 4: Types of policy instruments
Include tools such as taxes, subsidies,
fines and fees. They incentivise a change
in behavior of economic agents to correct
for market failure, for example: the
over/under consumption or production of
goods and services, or to achieve desired
socio-economic outcomes.
• Excise tax on cigarettes
to incentivise reduced
consumption to address
associated negative
externalities
Laws, Emiri decrees, decisions of the
Chairman of the Executive Council,
decisions of the Executive Council,
circulars, and executive and executive
orders.
• Laws that restrict the
sale of tobacco products
to under 18s
Involves goods and services provided by
the Government directly (such as
infrastructure). These are funded through
revenues or alternative sources.
• Government-funded
libraries that are
accessible to the public
Fiscal
instruments
Regulation
Direct
provision
Aims to increase public awareness on a
specific subject or to provide increased
access to information in order to
incentivise behavioral change and more
efficient or desirable outcomes
• Media campaign to
promote the adoption of
healthy lifestyles
Information
provision
Instrument Description Examples Type
Non-Regulatory

Regulatory
A long-term or large-scale project where
the costs have been capitalised or
depreciated over time
• Significant investment in
climate change or
energy capabilities
Capital
project
The creation of new bodies or
organisations that expand, change or
refine the scope of public services
• A new government
agency with a mandate
in a particular area
Public entity
change

-- 50 of 100 --

50
Identifying potential public policy intervention options is, in most cases, an iterative process. The aim is to
consider as many realistic options as possible, and then to narrow them down to a relevant shortlist for further
analysis. The following research approaches are useful at this stage:
There are two core components to consider when identifying potential policy options: the policy instrument and
the policy scope.
The aim of this step is to think broadly about the challenge or opportunity and to show stakeholders that a
variety of options have been considered. Key questions to ask during this step include: What could affect the
drivers of a problem? What could influence behaviours in a manner that would address the problem and help
achieve the policy objectives?
Responses to these questions should identify as many public policy intervention options as possible, consider
less intrusive instruments as well as more interventionist approaches, and consider classical approaches as
well as more recent thinking (For example: behavioral economics). Further considerations at this stage may
also include questions such as: How could the objectives be reached through alternative policy approaches? If
a policy exists in the area, could “doing less” improve the outcome, or could the outcome be improved through
adjusting existing legislation?
For further details, guidance and information on these research methods. The following steps can be a useful
way to approach options identification:
Generate a wide variety of policy options, preferably using different policy instruments
41
01
Policy instrument: Policy instruments are the tools available to the government to make changes in
order to achieve the desired objectives. These tools can be grouped into four broad categories. Table 4
describes some examples of tools and the groups they fall into.
Policy scope: The scope of a public policy identifies to what, and the extent to which, an intervention
will apply. This may include specifying the target population, industry sectors, geographic locations,
products, services, businesses, or other criteria. For more details and discussion on stakeholder
assessments and mapping,
Literature reviews: Reviewing academic papers, white papers or other theoretically-backed views that
study different policies and their impact;
Benchmark studies: Examining the manifestation of the problem in other countries, the evolution of
the challenge and reviewing the lessons learned from elsewhere; and
Primary data collection: Gathering primary data from first-hand sources, such as surveys, interviews,
focus groups or experiments to generate situation-specific insights.

-- 51 of 100 --

51
42
Example 1: Reduce
consumption of harmful goods
Example 2: Attract foreign
investment
The aim of this step is to focus analysis on viable options and to identify and exclude options that are less
effective. As this is just screening, the exclusion of options should be easy to justify. For consistency, it is
recommended that options are screened in-line with the Framework Appraisal Criteria, The screening criteria
for each option are:
Answers to these questions, particularly on feasibility and impact, can be highly uncertain at this stage and the
purpose here is to screen-out unviable options from the long-list. The output of this stage will be a sub-list of
policy options, such as the example outlined in Figure 19.
At this stage it may be necessary to involve key stakeholders. Stakeholders to involve at this stage include
other government departments who are affected by the policy, as well as the end-users of the policy like
consumers or the private sector.
Screen the initial-list of options into a longlist for further design and analysis Screen the initial-list of options into a shorter list for further design and analysis 02
Figure 19: Public policy intervention options identification
• Option 1: Introduce tax to
disincentivise consumption
• Option 2: Campaign to discourage
consumption
• Option 3: Regulation on producers
to require information on packaging
• Option 4: Regulation on stores able
to sell harmful goods
• Option 1: Enable foreign ownership
• Option 2: Advertisement campaign
• Option 3: Investment in infrastructure
• Options 1 and 2: Consumers in AD
• Option 3: Producers
• Option 4: Distributors / sellers
• Options 1 and 2: Foreign investors
inside and outside the UAE
• Option 3: Internal infrastructure
• Option 1: Fiscal instrument
• Option 2: Information provision
• Option 3 and 4: Regulation
• Option 1: Regulation
• Option 2: Informaiton
• Option 3: Direct provision
Options identification 2.1 Options identification 2.1
Description
Stage
Scope
Policy
instrument
Strategic fit: Is the proposed public policy intervention aligned with the UAE vision, the strategic
direction of the Emirate of Abu Dhabi and the department’s mandate?
Feasibility: Is the proposed public policy intervention legally, financially, technically and
organizationally feasible?
Impact: What is the expected economic, social and environmental impact?
Examples

-- 52 of 100 --

52
43
4.2 Undertake a qualitative appraisal
Most policy decisions involve choosing between alternative public policy intervention options and evaluating
trade-offs. These trade-offs are hard to evaluate, due to their inherent complexity and uncertainty. To manage
this, it is recommended that policy-makers apply a structured assessment framework to analyse proposed
interventions across a set of different appraisal criteria.
The levels of analysis that can be performed on each public policy intervention option include:
Figure 20: Levels of supporting evidence at Pre-Approval
Directional: A high-level qualitative assessment of the expected direction of the impact on each
assessment criteria (i.e. positive or negative impact);
Directional and magnitudinal: A high-level qualitative assessment of the magnitude of the positive or
negative impact on each assessment criteria (For example: high, medium or low impact);
Qualitative Quantitative
Directional
Directional and
magnitudinal
Benchmark
Situation-specific analysis
Robustness
Evidence required at this stage
Level of supporting evidence
Situation-specific analysis: A quantification of the impact based on detailed analysis of the
intervention using the Emirate of Abu Dhabi-specific data.
Benchmarking: A quantification of the impact based on similar interventions implemented in national
or international benchmarks; and

-- 53 of 100 --

53
Each criterion can be assessed through different levels of analysis, ranging from high-level qualitative analysis
based on conceptual logic and judgement, to in-depth quantitative analysis based on the specific context.
Figure 21 again sets out the appraisal criteria framework and contains a non-exhaustive list of criteria that are
frequently used in the public policy appraisal process.
44
It should be noted that qualitative assessments can be subjective and prone to bias. To address this, evidence
based on benchmarks and/or situation specific analysis may be required at a later stage based on ADEO’s
request. The level of analysis for each public policy intervention will be determined in discussion with ADEO
during the Pre-Approval stage.
The appraisal of public policy interventions should be based on the three assessment areas discussed on
page 42. These are discussed in further detail below:
Strategic fit: These criteria are used to assess the alignment of the proposed public policy intervention
with wider strategic considerations. The assessment criteria include different levels of government, as
well as the mandate of the requesting entity in question.
Feasibility: These criteria are used to assess the practicality of a proposed public policy intervention
through analysis of its legal, financial, technical and organisational requirements. Analysis of these
criteria is used to identify the strengths and weaknesses of each option and, when combined with an
assessment of the impact, can be used to understand the cost-effectiveness of a public policy
intervention.
Impact: These criteria are used to determine the expected impact of a proposed public policy
intervention across a range of economic, social and environmental factors. Analysis of these criteria, or
other impact metrics as appropriate, is used to understand the positive and negative impacts of the
proposed intervention on society as a whole.

-- 54 of 100 --

54
45
Figure 21: Appraisal criteria framework
Non-exhaustive
Alignment
with objectives
National
security
Alignment with
vision and strategy Organisational
Federal
implications
Stakeholder
support
Legal Cost Technical
Employment Investment GDP Private
sector
Fiscal
revenue
Competition SMEs
GHG emissions
Air pollution
Water pollution
Water
consumption
Waste
Health
Education
Public safety
Quality of life
Technology and
innovation
Diversity and
inclusiveness
Income
distribution
Emirati
business
ownership
Emirati
employment
Economic impact
Social impact
Environmental impact
Impact
Strategic
Fit
Feasibility

-- 55 of 100 --

55
To aid the qualitative assessment of proposed interventions, the Toolbox includes an Appraisal Tool. The
Appraisal Tool uses multi-criteria analysis (MCA), which provides a consistent framework against which
different interventions can be compared across standardised criteria.
The remainder of this sub-chapter provides an introduction to some of the core concepts used in the appraisal
process, drawing on MCA and other techniques:
1. Select the appraisal criteria
2. Determine the weighting of each appraisal criterion
3. Determine the level of analysis
4. Assess strategic fit and feasibility
5. Assess impact
6. Assign scores
7. Normalise and select the preferred option(s)
Screen the initial-list of options into a longlist for further design and analysis
Screen the initial-list of options into a longlist for further design and analysis
Screen the initial-list of options into a longlist for further design and analysis
46
01
02
03
Requesting entities may opt to apply a different qualitative assessment methodology but, even if this is the
case, the guidance contained within this sub-chapter remains highly relevant.
Select the appraisal criteria
The first step in qualitatively assessing the proposed options is to identify the appropriate appraisal criteria, as
these will define the basis on which each option will be assessed.
The selected criteria will depend on the nature of the intervention, as well as the priorities of the decision
makers. It can be beneficial to consult stakeholders at this stage, as the inclusion of appraisal criteria that are
aligned with stakeholders' objectives can help generate buy-in and support.
Determine the weighting of each appraisal criterion
Qualitative analysis requires reaching a conclusion on the basis of heterogeneous criteria. In an MCA, weights
are assigned to each criterion to allow for greater emphasis to be placed on those that are of particular interest
to policy-makers. Equal weighting is the default setting.
Stakeholders can be consulted at this stage to ensure that both the assessment criteria and weights are
reflective of the potential impacts of the public policy intervention. Their involvement can help set realistic
expectations on what an intervention can achieve.
Determine the level of analysis
As previously discussed on page 44, each criterion can be assessed through different levels of analysis
ranging from high-level qualitative analysis based on conceptual logic and judgement, to in-depth quantitative
analysis based on the specific context.
The levels of analysis that can be performed on each of the potential options include directional, directional
and magnitudinal, benchmarking, and situation-specific analysis.

-- 56 of 100 --

56
Building on the analysis conducted as part of the Agenda Setting stage, the strategic appraisal criteria are
designed to understand the case for change while determining alignment with wider strategic considerations.
The strategic assessment is driven by the following three criteria:
The combination of the strategic and feasibility assessments enables policy-makers to distinguish between
options on the basis of their ability to efficiently achieve specific objectives while furthering wider goals.
47
Alignment with vision and strategy: Assess how the proposed intervention supports the existing
strategies of the UAE, the Emirate of Abu Dhabi and the requesting entity. It is important to identify if
the proposed intervention will further or undermine existing strategic objectives, as well as to consider
interdependencies between different levels of government.
Alignment with objectives: Analyse how likely the proposed public policy intervention is to meet the
desired objective(s), output(s) or outcome(s) that the intervention aims to achieve.
National security: Analyse the impact of the public policy intervention on national security.
Legal feasibility: Assess how easy an intervention is to implement. Where the requesting entity is
uncertain of the implications, the appropriate legal department(s) should be consulted.
Technical feasibility: Assess whether the intervention can be delivered with existing technical and
technological capabilities, or whether additional resources are required.
Organisational capabilities: Assess whether the intervention can be delivered within existing
organisational structures.
Stakeholder engagement: Assess whether there is wider stakeholder support for the proposed
intervention.
Screen the initial-list of options into a longlist for further design and analysis Assess strategic fit and feasibility 04
Cost: Assess the implications of the intervention on government finances. Consideration should be
given to existing organisational budgets, the availability of additional budget and the budgetary
implications for other entities. This will require robust estimates of the fiscal implications of the
proposed intervention.
Federal implications: Identify whether the Emirate of Abu Dhabi has the authority and capability to
implement the proposed intervention.

-- 57 of 100 --

57
When qualitatively assessing the impact of a public policy intervention, it is important to remember that
impacts should always be assessed in relation to the counterfactual, or business as usual scenario.
Screen the initial-list of options into a longlist for further design and analysis Assess impact
Figure 22: Impact pathway
An impact pathway articulates causal chains through a series of “if-then” statements at each step,
and is a process of reflection about how and why change is expected to happen as a result of a
public policy intervention.
48
05
What is the public
policy intervention?
Public policy
intervention
What
stakeholders
are impacted
by this policy?
What is the
behavioural
change of these
stakeholders in
response to this
policy?
What are the
consequences
of this
behavioural
response?
What is the
impact on
indicators of
interest?
Stakeholder(s)
Behavioral
change
Consequence(s)
Impact
A useful tool for assessing different public policy interventions against the impact criteria is an impact pathway
(Figure 22). Interventions, by design, are developed to induce a change in behaviour for a specific stakeholder
group. This change in behaviour can trigger a reaction chain dependent on the interactions between different
stakeholder groups, which will ultimately generate impacts across economic, environmental and social
dimensions.
Impact pathways are a tool which can be used to understand the potential chains of response that result from
different interventions and they can also help identify the different channels through which each intervention
can have impact. They should capture both the direct and intended impacts of an intervention, as well as any
potential indirect and unintended impacts.
Impact pathways can be developed based on various sources of information:
Economic theory and logic to understand the theoretical channels of impact that a proposed
public policy intervention may have.
Literature review to understand the potential impact channel of an intervention, based on the
experiences from similar interventions implemented in other jurisdictions.
Engagement with stakeholders to understand the specific expected implications of proposed
interventions in the context of the Emirate of Abu Dhabi.

-- 58 of 100 --

58
To help assess the magnitude of an intervention’s impact, several considerations should be assessed, which
are listed in Table 5. This list is non-exhaustive, and requesting entities should consider whether there are
further elements they should add that are specific to the areas in which they are working. It should be noted
that these provide guidance only on the potential magnitude and will vary on a case-by-case basis.
As part of the request for Pre-Approval, only a qualitative assessment of each option against the appraisal
criteria is required. The qualitative assessment looks at the direction and magnitude of each option’s effect on
each of the criteria. In all cases, commentary and/or evidence should be provided to explain the qualitative
score.
Screen the initial-list of options into a longlist for further design and analysis Assign scores
Figure 23 shows a worked example of an impact pathway.
Figure 23: Simplified example of an impact pathway
Public policy intervention
Stakeholder(s)
Behavioural change
Consequence(s)
Impact
Reduction in consumption
of sugary drinks
Improvement in diet
Reduction in obesity
rates
Directly impacted
stakeholders:
Consumers
Directly impacted
stakeholders:
Producers and
retailers
Cost of compliance
increases
Reduction in profitability
Directly impacted
stakeholders:
Government
49
06
Decrease in GDP Improved population health
and lower healthcare costs
Increase in fiscal
revenues
Example 1:
Reduce consumption of sugary drinks

-- 59 of 100 --

59
Table 5: Impact assessment considerations
50
Effect on the magnitude of impact Consideration
Type of
instrument Different policy instruments used to achieve the same objective may
result in different magnitudes of impact depending on the behavioural
change they generate. For example, depending on the specific case,
fiscal instruments may be expected to generate larger changes in
behaviour than information provision resulting in larger overall impacts.
Scope of
intervention The scope of a potential intervention identifies stakeholders who will be
targeted, and the geographical location in which the proposed
intervention will apply. Typically, a policy that targets a larger
stakeholder group or geographical location would be expected to
generate a larger impact.
Duration of
intervention In some cases, the direct effect of an intervention on the criteria may be
positive, whilst the indirect effects are negative. For example, an
intervention may increase employment in one sector but decrease it in
another. In this case, the overall effect should be used to determine the
direction of impact.
Likelihood
of impact
occurring
Some impacts are more certain to occur than others.

-- 60 of 100 --

60
MCA provides a consistent and standardised means of comparing options. The final scores calculated can
therefore be compared to help select the preferred option(s). Note that the overall score should not be the only
consideration when selecting a preferred option; each option should be reviewed holistically based on all
evidence gathered.
In some cases, more than one option may be taken forward. The request for Pre-Approval should, under most
circumstances, include no more than three preferred option(s) including:
Screen the initial-list of options into a longlist for further design and analysis Normalise and select the preferred option(s)
In cases where there is a clear preferred option with a significantly higher MCA score compared to all the other
assessed options, alternative options may not be required. This should be determined through discussions
with ADEO.
The next step is to design the preferred option(s) at a high-level, as this is part of the request for Pre-Approval.
This step revisits the two components defined in Chapter 4.1 (policy instrument and scope), and defines
additional design elements depending on the nature of the policy and the policy instrument. For different
instruments this may cover, for example:
4.3 Develop high-level design
51
07
The preferred option: Generally the option with the highest overall score; and,
Alternative options: Up to two alternative options with the next highest overall scores.
Regulation: What are the precise changes in regulation? Will specific markets/industries be targeted?
Are there any conditions which define the stakeholders targeted by the regulation?
Fiscal instruments: What are the specific levels proposed for taxes/subsidies/fines/fees? On what
basis will the instruments apply? Are there any conditions which define which stakeholders are targeted
by the intervention?
Direct provision: In which sector will investment be made? How will the provision be funded? What
are the expected long term operational costs
Information provision: Through what medium will the information be provided? Will it be electronic or
paper-based?

-- 61 of 100 --

61
52
• Foreign
investors
inside and
outside the
UAE
Figure 24: High-level public policy options design
Description
Stage
Scope
Policy
instrument
Options
identification
2.1
Consumption
Tax
Excise Tax
• Consumers
within the
UAE
• Consumers within
the UAE
• Excludes free
zones
• Carbonated and
sugary drinks
• Ad-Valorem Tax
• 5% tax rate on
retail price
Introduce a tax
to disincentivise
consumption
Introduce tax to
disincentivise
consumption
High-level
design
2.3 Options
identification
2.1 High-level
design
2.3
Enable foreign
ownership
Enable foreign
ownership
Foreign
Ownership Law
Foreign
Ownership Law
• Foreign investors
inside and outside the
UAE (targeting
investors from India
and China)
• Real estate properties
300 sqm or less
• Located in the
outskirts of the
Emirate of
Abu Dhabi
The design of options can be based on various sources of information including:
• Design principles applied by leading jurisdictions for similar policies (identified through benchmark analysis);
• Market maturity or social factors which can impact how the targeted stakeholders respond to the policy; and,
• Input from stakeholders to understand the viability of different design options in the specific Abu Dhabi
context.
Pre-
Approval
Once a requesting entity has completed the steps within Chapter 4.3 and filled in the
corresponding sections of the Business Case Template, they should submit the template,
along with any necessary supporting documents, for Pre-Approval
Submit for Pre-Approval
Example 1: Reduce
consumption of harmful goods
Example 2: Attract foreign
investment

-- 62 of 100 --

62
✓
Stakeholder Engagement Checklist
Pre-Approval Checklist
Identify a list of potential option(s) covering different policy instruments and scope
Conduct a high-level analysis on the list of potential options
Develop a high-level design of (usually) no more than 3 preferred options
Fill out the Business Case Template and submit to ADEO for Pre-Approval
Review stakeholder mapping to identify any changes in stakeholders as the scope develops
Communicate with stakeholders the expectations for their involvement at each stage, from policy
design to the implementation plan
Consult stakeholders on design principles, including weights and scoring, and evaluating and
mitigating risks
Consider setting up a working session for key stakeholders to select the preferred option
Agree upon a communications method (including regular presentations, meetings and emails) for
each stakeholder which suits the level of their involvement in the policy
53

-- 63 of 100 --

63
*This step is only required if further evidence is requested after Pre-Approval*
54
Following the review of the request for Pre-Approval, additional evidence may be requested (Figure 25). If
additional analysis or evidence is requested, requesting entities should follow the guidance set out in this sub-
chapter.
Analysis conducted at this stage will require a greater level of rigour compared to the high-level qualitative
assessment described in Chapter 4.2. The additional request will generally ask for quantified evidence relating
to one or more of the appraisal criteria and/or further details on certain aspects of the proposal.
In cases where the proposed budget for the intervention is low, is expected to have a small or limited impact,
or is considered to be relatively low risk, a benchmarking analysis based on similar policies in leading
jurisdictions may be sufficient to provide insight into the potential impacts of the intervention.
In other cases, the request may be for specific analysis to be conducted in the context of the Emirate of Abu
Dhabi to quantitatively estimate the impacts. This will typically require more advanced analytical techniques,
such as Impact Assessment (IA) and Social Cost Benefit Analysis (S-CBA), which help quantify estimates of
the potential direct and indirect impacts of public policy interventions. There may also be subject-matter
specific methodologies that can be applied by requesting entities to quantitatively assess different options.
4.4 Undertake a quantitative appraisal
Figure 25: Levels of supporting evidence at Final Approval (optional)
Directional
Benchmark
Situation-specific analysis
Level of supporting evidence
Robustness
Evidence required at this stage
Qualitative Quantitative
Directional and
magnitudinal

-- 64 of 100 --

64
*This step is only required if further evidence is requested after Pre-Approval*
55
The results of any analysis can be used to update the MCA that was previously completed as part of the
request for Pre-Approval. The MCA can combine this new quantitative evidence with the qualitative
assessment that was undertaken earlier in the development process. The remainder of this sub-chapter
introduces different quantification techniques and further guidance to requesting entities on how to proceed.
Quantification involves using a range of techniques to estimate the size of the impacts of a proposed public
policy intervention. This can help compare different options, assess whether an option is worth pursuing, and
make effective decisions about public spending. More detailed guidance on how to measure, quantify and
compare different types of impact is covered later in this chapter.
Quantification always adds rigour to the analysis provided in support of a public policy intervention. This
provides increased confidence and enables effective decision-making. For example, rather than just knowing
that an exercise programme in schools is likely to decrease obesity levels amongst children, it is helpful to
know by how much the levels are likely to decrease, so that it can be compared to the impacts of a different
policy, such as a sugar tax. However, it is not always possible to quantify all impacts, often due to constraints
on time and resources.
The quantification of impacts should be done through the following steps:
1. Generate a list of potential impacts
2. Prioritise impacts for quantification
3. Select indicators to measure the impact
4. Collect data
5. Design quantification methodology
6. Conduct analysis
7. Document and report results
Screen the initial-list of options into a longlist for further design and analysis Generate a list of potential impacts
The impacts of the intervention should already be well understood at this stage, based on the previous
qualitative analysis. However, it is important to revisit the impact pathway to see if any updates need to be
made in light of recent changes to the proposed intervention or suggestions from Pre-Approval or
stakeholders.
01

-- 65 of 100 --

65
*This step is only required if further evidence is requested after Pre-Approval*
56
Figure 26: Materiality assessment
The magnitude of impact can be assessed by
looking at variables such as:
• The economic sector(s) affected;
• The number of people affected;
• The area affected (for example, the city);
• The size of impact on the sector/people/ area;
• The duration of impact
The importance can be assessed by
considering:
• Political importance;
• Social importance;
• Cultural importance;
• Importance to key stakeholders (including
requests from ADEO to quantify a particular
impact)
Importance of impact
Estimated magnitude of impact
Medium
to high
materiality
High
materiality
No or low
materiality
Medium
to high
materiality
In practice, it will rarely be necessary to measure all of the impacts created by a public policy intervention as
this could require considerable time and resource. It is therefore important to focus on the core costs and
benefits that are associated with a proposal. These are usually the most significant impacts and the ones
which are most important to relevant stakeholders.
The process of identifying these is known as a materiality assessment, and is summarised in Figure 26.. A
materiality assessment focuses on plotting each impact across two axes so as to compare the importance and
magnitude of the effects.
Screen the initial-list of options into a longlist for further design and analysis Prioritise impacts for quantification 02
Once the most material impacts have been selected, the indicator(s) which will be used to quantify them must
be identified. For example, to quantify the impact of a school exercise programme, the reduction in incidence
of obesity amongst school children might be an appropriate indicator.
Good indicators will account for:
• How widely the impacts are felt; and
• How much each stakeholder is affected.
Screen the initial-list of options into a longlist for further design and analysis Select indicators to measure impact 03

-- 66 of 100 --

66
the Emirate of Abu Dhabi-specific data to contextualise the likely impacts: This may include: demographic
data, data about the structure of the Emirate of Abu Dhabi economy (for example: size of sectors, key trading
partners, employment data), social factors (for example: disease prevalence, education levels), environmental
factors (for example: air pollution levels) or data related to a particular industry (for example: number of annual
visitors, revenue per available hotel room).
Depending on the nature of the request for further analysis, it may be sufficient to submit the qualitative data to
ADEO at this point (see Figure 25). This is because benchmarks and/or data from the literature can give a
useful indication of the likely impact in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi even without further analysis.
In this case, the MCA conducted for the request for Pre-Approval should be updated to incorporate the
benchmark data that has been collected. This allows for intervention options to be compared alongside the
other qualitative considerations (for example: feasibility and impacts with low materiality) to select between
options. In other cases, however, there may be a request that data is further analysed to provide a situation-
specific estimate of likely impacts in an Abu Dhabi context.
Screen the initial-list of options into a longlist for further design and analysis Design quantification methodology
There are many different types of quantification techniques and a number of these are outlined in this next
step. Different techniques will be appropriate for different circumstances, and requesting entities will need to
exercise judgement on what is both proportionate and appropriate for the intervention in question. The best
approach to use will be dependent on the policy being appraised, and the type of impacts being considered.
*This step is only required if further evidence is requested after Pre-Approval*
57
05
Screen the initial-list of options into a longlist for further design and analysis Collect data
The next step in the assessment is to collect the data that will be used to measure the identified impacts. The
specific data needed will depend on the specific intervention, but is likely to include:
Data about the likely impacts of a proposal: This can be found through:
04
Literature review: Looking at studies of the impacts of different interventions;
Benchmarking: Review of other jurisdictions or organisations who have implemented a similar
proposal elsewhere in the UAE or globally; and
Primary data collection: For example, interviewing key stakeholders, undertaking surveys, pilots,
focus groups or experiments.

-- 67 of 100 --

67
*This step is only required if further evidence is requested after Pre-Approval*
58
It can be helpful to use the impact pathway developed for the request for Pre-Approval to design a
quantification approach. Each stage can be quantified separately, and the results combined to estimate the
overall impact. Where an impact pathway has multiple branches, separate calculations should be considered
for each branch.
Figure 27: Quantification approach using an impact pathway
How many
stakeholders are
affected?
How many products are
impacted? How is the supply
chain impacted? What size
is the consumer market?
How many businesses
would be eligible for foreign
investment?
How much does
their behaviour
change?
By how much do consumers
reduce purchases as a
result of the tax?
By how much does business
ownership change as a
result of the law?
How big are the
consequences?
What is the average
reduction in risk of obesity
as a result of lower sales?
What is the reduction in
revenue for producers?
What is the increase in
compliance and
administrative costs for
producers?
How much would levels of
FDI increase?
How much would this
increase the
competitiveness of the
Emirate of Abu Dhabi? How
significant would the impact
on Free Zones be?
How big is the
resulting impact?
How large are the avoided
healthcare costs from
reduced obesity?
How large is the economic
impact on the drinks and
related sectors?
How does this impact GFP
and productivity? How does
this impact company
performance?
What is the resulting impact
on consumers?
Quantification
approach
Impact
pathway stage
Example 2: Attract
foreign investment
Example 1: Reduce
consumption of
harmful goods
Stakeholder(s)
Behavioural
change
Consequence(s)
Impact

-- 68 of 100 --

68
The next level of assessment is to deploy advanced analytical techniques. Two common advanced tools which
can be used to conduct situation-specific analysis of policy impacts are Impact Assessment (IA) and Social
Cost-Benefit Analysis (S-CBA). Figure 28 provides a high-level comparison of IA and S-CBA.
Figure 28: Quantitative assessment techniques
What is the impact of the
intervention on the criteria of
interest?
Key
questions
Quantitative analysis of economic, social
or environmental variables
Approach Quantitative analysis and valuation of
impacts on multiple variables
Output A visual comparing the effect of the
proposal on different indicators (assessed
either quantitatively or qualitatively) using
an MCA framework
A visual comparing the effect of the
proposal on different indicators (assessed
either quantitatively or qualitatively) using
an MCA framework
• Economic indicators
• Social indicators
• Environmental indicators
Variables
considered
• Social indicators
• Social welfare implications of economic
and environmental indicators
No normalisation but can be combined
with qualitative assessment using scoring
and weighting
How are
different
impacts
compared
Monetisation of social welfare costs and
benefits, enabling comparison of impacts
on different variables
Results • Impact of the proposal on GDP and
employment (for example: a 3%
increase in GDP)
• Impact of the proposal on health (for
example: 10,000 DALYs avoided)
• Impact of the proposal on green house
gas (GHG) emissions and air pollution
(for example: 20,000kg reduction in
CO2 emissions)
• This can be combined with a qualitative
assessment
• Net social benefits (for example: 10m
AED in social benefits, 7m AED in
social costs, creating net social benefits
of 3m AED)
• Financial feasibility (comparison of the
net social benefits with the financial
cost)
Impact Assessment (IA) Social Cost-Benefit
Analysis (S-CBA)
What is the effect
of the intervention on social
welfare?
*This step is only required if further evidence is requested after Pre-Approval*
59

-- 69 of 100 --

69
The use of advanced quantitative techniques requires training and experience and policy-makers from
requesting entities should seek advice and guidance from the relevant analytical and economic teams within
their organisation if they need further support.
Based on the data collected and the methodology designed in the previous stage, the next step is to conduct
the required analysis. An example calculation methodology is illustrated in Figure 29.
Figure 29: Quantification and attribution of impact
Screen the initial-list of options into a longlist for further design and analysis Conduct analysis
85
0
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
Time
Outcome
with
public policy
intervention
Counterfactual
Energy use (Mwh)
Quantified
Impact of public
policy intervention
Outcome with
public policy
intervention
Counter-
factual
Quantified impact
of public policy
intervention
Quantification
parameter
Quantification
of impact
Future
energy use
Current
energy use
Greenhouse gas
emissions savings
Greenhouse gas
emissions factor
(As relevant)
Mwh Mwh tCO2e / Mwh tCO2e
Example
application
60
06
How much of the impact is caused by the public policy intervention?
When quantifying the impacts of a public policy intervention, it is important to remember that impacts
should always be measured in relation to the counterfactual. This is the scenario which would have
occurred if the intervention had not been put in place, and the world had continued with business as usual
(BAU). Impact should always be compared to the counterfactual to avoid overstating or understating the
potential impact.
*This step is only required if further evidence is requested after Pre-Approval*

-- 70 of 100 --

70
*This step is only required if further evidence is requested after Pre-Approval*
There are a number of other considerations which should also be taken into account when conducting
quantitative analysis. These are set out in more detail Figures 30 and 31.
Figure 30: Making and logging assumptions
Quantitative analysis usually involves making several assumptions. These may include:
These should be clearly documented in an assumptions tracker, with ratings or commentary to indicate how
likely the assumptions are to be true, and how large an impact they will have on the results. An example
assumptions tracker is provided below:
# Description How likely is the assumption
to be true?
How significant is the
assumption to the overall
result?
1 Price elasticity of demand for
sugary drinks M H
2 Time and resources to comply with
administrative requests H L
3 Expected rate of compliance M L
Assumptions on the nature of the proposed intervention;
Assumptions in any primary data collection;
Assumptions in any studies used from literature;
Assumptions in any adjustments made to apply the data to the proposed intervention;
Assumptions to account for unknown data;
Assumption on time-span or duration of intervention; and,
Methodological assumptions
61

-- 71 of 100 --

71
Figure 31: Accounting for uncertainty
*This step is only required if further evidence is requested after Pre-Approval*
How certain is it that this impact will occur?
In practice, it is usually impossible to provide a flawless prediction of the magnitude of the impact of a
public policy intervention. It is therefore important to provide an indication of the level of confidence in
the results. For example, this could depend on:
Wherever possible, it is important to provide an indication of confidence in any quantitative analysis. This
may be done by:
Providing a qualitative rating (for example: high/medium/low, with an explanation)
Providing ranges (a smaller range usually indicates a higher confidence level)
Using statistical techniques (for example: 95% confidence intervals)
The quantification techniques used (for example: high-level/advanced, primary/secondary data
collection and sample size)
The reliability of any studies/models used in the analysis
The relevance of any studies/models used (for example: Emirate of Abu Dhabi-based, Gulf
Cooperation Council benchmark, international benchmark, and the number and type of survey
respondents)
The level of detail of the analysis
Screen the initial-list of options into a longlist for further design and analysis Document and report results
Finally, the results of any quantitative analysis should be clearly documented and submitted alongside the
updated MCA. The results should be reported in a clear, informative way so that they can be understood by
people who have not been involved in the assessment process up to this point. The results should include:
Description of the proposed public policy intervention
Details on the primary data collected
Details covering any wider studies and reports used
Information covering adjustments/quantitative analysis
Confidence levels
The main results (estimates of potential impact(s))
Key assumptions (including the assumptions tracker)
Any further resources that were used
It is often helpful for results to be presented visually, using graphs and diagrams. After Pre-Approval, the MCA
conducted for the request can then be updated to incorporate the quantified impacts estimated using
environmental impact assessment (EIA), S-CBA or other methodologies. This allows for them to be compared
alongside other considerations that have been assessed qualitatively. The results of the MCA and supporting
evidence (including the report above) should then be submitted for review and approval.
62
07

-- 72 of 100 --

72
4.5 Develop detailed design
The final step in the process before re-submitting for Final Approval is to develop the detailed design for the
preferred option, which happens through 3 steps:
1. Finalise the detailed design of the preferred policy option
2. Finalise the implementation plan
3. Produce a monitoring and evaluation plan
The remainder of this chapter focusses on each of these components in turn and provides further advice,
guidance and support to requesting entities on how to produce each of them.
Finalise the detailed design of preferred policy option
This step builds on the components identified in Chapter 4.3 to provide additional detail on the final design of the
preferred policy option. Figure 32 illustrates how the high-level design from the Pre-Approval request is
expanded for the preferred policy option using the examples of tax and regulatory policies discussed earlier in
this manual (please see Chapters 4.1 and 4.3).
Finalise the Implementation Plan
The intervention design provided in the request for Pre-Approval should be supplemented with additional details
to allow for a common understanding across all the stakeholders that will be involved in the implementation of
the policy. As a minimum, this must include:
Clearly defined objectives including detail on:
• Indicators that will be used to measure the effectiveness of the policy, to include: methods for collecting
the required data; targets (value or level) to be achieved within specific timeframes; and a baseline
against which the performance will be compared
• Frequency and timeframe for collecting and reporting information
Well-articulated description of stakeholders, regions, exemptions, and other details to which the policy will or
will not apply.
Requesting entities will receive advice and guidance on what needs to be included in the implementation plan
following clearance at the Pre-Approval stage.
63
01
02
The policy must be given a name that accurately reflects the scope and content
Policy title
Policy objectives
Policy scope

-- 73 of 100 --

73
Figure 32: Detailed public policy intervention options design
Excise tax
Introduce tax to disincentivise consumption
Direct stakeholders:
Consumers, government
Indirect stakeholders:
Retailers, Manufacturers
Geography: UAE
Direct stakeholders: Consumers, government
Indirect stakeholders: Retailers, manufacturers
Geography: UAE (excluding free zones)
Coverage: Carbonated and sugary drinks
Tax type: Ad-Valorem
Tax rate: 5%
Tax base: Retail price
Increase tax rate to 3%;
collect taxes from
retailers
Foreign ownership regulation
Direct
stakeholders:
Foreign investors
Indirect
stakeholders: Local
investors
Geography: Foreign
investors inside and
outside the UAE
Enable foreign ownership
Directly impacted stakeholders: Foreign investors
Indirectly impacted stakeholders: Local investors
Geography: Foreign investors inside and outside
the UAE (targeting investors from India and China)
Coverage: Real estate properties
Region: Outskirts of the Emirate of Abu Dhabi
Size of property: up to 300 sqm
Residential properties in
Yas Island area
64
Options
identification
2.1 High-level
design
2.3
Options
identification
2.1 High-level
design
2.3 Detailed design 2.5
Detailed
design
2.5
Stage
Description
Policy
instrument
Scope
Stage
Description
Scope
Policy
instrument
1. Reduce consumption of harmful goods
2. Attract foreign investment

-- 74 of 100 --

74
Figure 33: RACI Matrix
The entity or entities that will be required to implement or execute the respective
activity or task. More than one responsible entity may be assigned for each
activity.
The entity that will be required to ensure that the activity is completed. There
can only be one accountable entity for each activity.
The entity or entities that will be engaged in the overall activity for input or
insights.
The entity or entities that will be updated on progress but are not required to
provide feedback or direct inputs.
R
I
Responsible
Accountable
Consulted C
A
Informed
65
This step focuses on defining the activities and requirements to enable the implementation of the preferred
option and identifying the key potential risks which may arise during the process. This information is submitted
as part of the request for Final Approval.
This step involves identifying the main activities to be completed as part of implementing the preferred option,
including estimating the required time to complete each activity and indicating the proposed ‘owner’ or each.
Key activities should also be broken down into smaller tasks to support implementation and review. Relevant
stakeholders should be engaged to set clear roles and responsibilities against the identified tasks, and to review
the requirements needed for implementation. This should include:
• Milestones: an achievement that reflects the progress of a specific task;
• Dependencies: identified links between activities where the initiation or completion of a task or milestone
relies on the completion or achievement of another task or milestone;
• Duration: time required to complete each task, and expected start and end dates;
• Owners and supporting entities: parties accountable and/or responsible for completing the relevant task
(a Responsibility Assignment Matrix [RACI Matrix]) can be used as a tool to allocate roles and
responsibilities: as illustrated in Figure 33).
Based on the activities identified, the implementation requirements for the preferred option should be identified.
The potential requirements that need to be considered will depend on the public policy intervention in question,
but further guidance is provided in Table 6.
Activities and milestones
Implementation requirements

-- 75 of 100 --

75
Type of requirement Description
Administrative Requirements for changes in organisational structures, operations, or procedures
Resource Requirements for human capital to fill a capacity, capability, or competency gap
Technical Requirements for new or updated infrastructure, materials, systems, or equipment
Financial
Requirements for budget to fund the implementation including:
• Capital expenditure requirements: Upfront capital investments to implement the
intervention such as vehicles, buildings and infrastructure investment.
• Operating expenditure requirements: Any operational and maintenance
requirements over the expected lifetime of the intervention or over a given time
horizon, such as wages, office supplies and maintenance.
Figure 34: Risk card
Table 6: Types of implementation requirements
Mitigation Risk owner
H
Likelihood Impact
M L H M L
Describe the risk in more detail
Identify magnitude of impact if the risk occurs (high/
medium/ low)
Identify the probability of a particular risk to occur
(high/ medium/ low)
Develop plans that will be implemented to minimise
probability of occurrence and impact should the risk
materialise
Identify entities/departments who will be
responsible for monitoring the risks and acting
accordingly
Identify possible risks that could arise from implementation in advance
66
In addition to defining the activities and requirements, potential risks which could arise during the
implementation of the policy should also be documented. Stakeholders who will be closest to the policy should
be asked to provide input and a risk register should be created and maintained throughout the development and
delivery of the approved policy. A risk card, which is set out in Figure 34, is one method for identifying and
documenting identified risks.
Once implementation risks have been identified, a detailed assessment of these risks is required. This can be
achieved by assessing the likelihood and impact of the risks and the potential mechanisms to avoid, minimise
and manage them. Risk owners should also be identified and briefed.
Implementation risks and mitigants

-- 76 of 100 --

76
Engaging stakeholders at this stage can help identify risks and support in the design of appropriate mitigation
strategies. Stakeholders can pinpoint how certain choices made at this point can lead to unintended
consequences later in the process and propose the most effective mitigation strategy.
Produce a Monitoring and Evaluation Plan
Once the implementation plan is in place, is it important to develop a plan on how the success of the policy will
be monitored and evaluated across different dimensions of interest. At a minimum, the Monitoring and Evaluation
plan should cover the following four dimensions (further advice on how to produce these plans can also be found
in the Business Case Template):
• Dimensions of interest;
• Data collection plan;
• Data analysis plan; and
• Reporting.
67
03
This covers the various angles from which an intervention can be monitored and evaluated. This may include,
but is not limited to, the following:
For each of the selected dimensions, it is important to define a data collection plan which can be tracked and
followed when monitoring the progress of the public policy intervention. Stakeholders should keep in mind that
new data reporting requirements present administrative costs and should be carefully assessed and avoided
where possible.
Relevance focuses on assessing the extent to which the objectives and design still meet the needs and
problems it sought to address. This requires reviewing the importance of the intervention by reassessing
its usefulness in tackling the identified problem at the time of the evaluation (future state). As time goes
by, the overall circumstances may have changed and hence the initially identified problems may also
have changed compared to when the policy was initially designed. Analysing any misalignment between
the need at the time of the evaluation and the policy objectives would support in identifying the
relevance of the policy being assessed;
Effectiveness links the public policy intervention to its desired objectives by assessing the success of
the intervention in achieving or progressing towards these goals. The objectives defined during the
Agenda Setting stage can be used as KPIs;
Efficiency weighs the costs being incurred by the public policy intervention and the actual change it has
achieved. This can be assessed using a cost-benefit analysis of the costs that have resulted from the
public policy intervention and comparing these to the actual changes it has led to (changes can be
positive or negative); and,
Impact, or added value, assesses the actual impacts against those estimated during the appraisal stage
of the policy development cycle. Exceeding the estimated positive impacts (benefits) is considered a
success, while exceeding negative impacts (costs) would suggest that they were likely underestimated
during the policy development cycle.
Dimensions of interest
Data collection plan

-- 77 of 100 --

77
This should cover, but is not limited to, the following areas:
1. Indicators: these represent the criteria against which the public policy intervention will be assessed. For
example, if we consider effectiveness as the dimension of focus, indicators would include the predefined
KPIs against which the policy objectives will be assessed;
2. Source of data: These are the different sources of data required to quantify the predefined indicators;
and,
3. Method and frequency of data collection: This will cover the different ways to collect the required data
(for example, online surveys) as well as the frequency at which this data will be collected.
This last step of the Monitoring and Evaluation plan should cover the following three important areas:
• Type of reporting: This refers to the purpose of the reporting. The main distinction is between progress
updates, or other reports for management, and evaluations of the intervention;
• Target audience: The receiving party or the end user of the evaluation report. The audience can be internal
(within the requesting entity) or external (other departments or the Abu Dhabi Executive Office) or a
combination of both; and,
• Frequency of reporting: The frequency of reporting can be based on the target audience. For instance,
reporting within the requesting entity (internally) might need to be more frequent (for example, monthly) as
opposed to reporting to ADEO (for example, semi-annually).
The use of monitoring and evaluation techniques requires training and experience, and policy-makers from
requesting entities should seek advice and guidance from the relevant analytical and economic teams within
their entity if they need further support. ADEO will also be able to advise on the precise requirements where
necessary.
68
Final
Approval
Once a requesting entity has completed the steps in Chapter 4.5 and filled in the
corresponding sections of the Business Case Template, they should submit the template,
along with any necessary supporting documents, for Final Approval.
Submit for Final Approval
In this step, the requesting entity will describe the methods and techniques of analysis they will adopt to
evaluate the public policy intervention against each of the defined dimensions. Further information for how to
complete this plan can be found in the Business Case Template.
Data analysis plan
Reporting

-- 78 of 100 --

78
✓
Stakeholder Engagement Checklist
Final Approval Checklist
Complete the detailed design of the preferred policy option
Complete a detailed Implementation Plan for the preferred option
Develop a Monitoring and Evaluation Plan for the preferred option
Submit the updated Business Case Template to ADEO for Final Approval
Consider the amount of time stakeholders will need to communicate within their organisation
about the capacity and resources needed to deliver the policy intervention
Seek stakeholder input on the implementation plan, and agree on a defined list of roles and
responsibilities for each stakeholder
Prepare list of stakeholder requirements for implementation
Inform identified contacts of their specific roles and responsibilities, and agree on a timetable for
the communication plans
Inform key stakeholders about the Monitoring and Evaluation Plan and seek agreement as
necessary
69

-- 79 of 100 --

79
Chapter 5:
Implement

-- 80 of 100 --

80
Chapter 5:
Implement
The Implement stage of the Public Policy Cycle aims to ensure the efficient and successful
implementation of public policy interventions. Most of the advice, guidance and support on policy and
project management will be specific to each requesting entity and these entities should ensure that
the relevant sectors and teams within their organisation are sufficiently informed and involved
throughout implementation.
There are two parts to this short chapter: the first provides high-level guidance on how to prepare for the
launch of a public policy intervention; the second provides advice and guidance for requesting entities once
the policy is live.
5.1 Prepare for policy implementation
This step focuses on completing all the tasks that can assist in enabling implementation of the public policy
intervention. It is recommended to fulfill all of the following tasks prior to the official launch of any intervention,
and additional tasks may also be required depending on the design of the specific public policy in question:
71
ADEO Interaction
(* = indicates mandatory
step)
Figure 35: Implement stage overview
Stage of the Public Policy Cycle
1 Agenda setting
3 Implement
4 Monitor and evaluate
2 Design and appraise
Reporting
How do we launch the policy?
Launch and execute the policy 3.2
Prepare for policy implementation 3.1

-- 81 of 100 --

81
• Communicate with stakeholders: Public policy interventions generally require participation from several
different stakeholders, and it is important to align with these organisations early in the process to ensure
the successful implementation of any intervention. This includes internal communications within the entity,
and external communications with other organisations, the private sector and, where necessary, citizens
and consumers. All stakeholder maps should also be reviewed alongside the final implementation plan,
and any new stakeholders should be made aware of their role and how the policy may affect them;
• Raise public awareness: One of the biggest risks that could cause issues during implementation is the
absence of a common understanding amongst the general public on the upcoming changes. As such,
developing an information and/or marketing plan to raise awareness within the relevant communities in
advance of the launch of the policy is vital;
• Establish policy governance: Some policies may require the formation of committees, while others may
require the formation of a team, sector, or department. Regardless of what the requirement is, forming the
governance required for implementation must be covered before the public policy intervention is launched;
and
• Deliver and confirm implementation requirements: All requirements identified for the pre-launch stage
will be completed to ensure effective implementation. This includes the allocation of budget and finance
and the provision of additional resources and skills. This may also involve tasks like obtaining proposals
from vendors or suppliers.
5.2 Launch and execute the policy
The approved option should be delivered in accordance with the implementation plan, the monitoring and
evaluation plan, and any risk mitigation plans that have been created. These plans are all covered in more detail
in earlier parts of this manual.
72
The risks identified during the Design and Appraise stage will need to be managed once a public policy
intervention is implemented, and risk registers and risk cards should be made available to all key
stakeholders responsible for implementation. The implementation plan should have considered how best to
mitigate these risks, and at this stage those who are tasked with delivery should have robust plans in place.
Once the public policy intervention is launched, its delivery should be clearly announced and actively
monitored. This enables improved functioning and data tracking of the intervention, which is critical to
conducting a robust, detailed evaluation at the appropriate time. There are several ways that this can be
done, and further information is provided in Chapter 6.
Managing risks
Monitoring performance
As part of the implementation, entities should provide update reports to relevant
stakeholders on a regular basis.
Reporting
Reporting

-- 82 of 100 --

82
✓
Stakeholder Engagement Checklist
Implement Stage Checklist
Communicate the public policy intervention to all stakeholders to prepare them for
implementation
Announce any changes that impact the intervention and raise awareness of any actions required
Provide all the requirements necessary for the successful implementation of the intervention
(administrative, resourcing, technical, and financial requirements)
Execute the public policy intervention in line with the implementation plan
Issue formal, written communications to all relevant departments and stakeholders to prepare
them for implementation
Provide ongoing support to stakeholders as needs arise
Consider setting up regular check-ins with stakeholders to monitor progress and resolve any
unexpected challenges
73

-- 83 of 100 --

83
Chapter 6:
Monitor and evaluate

-- 84 of 100 --

84
Chapter 6:
Monitor and evaluate
75
The implementation of a public policy intervention does not mark the end of the Public Policy Cycle. Once
introduced, it is important to monitor the effects the policy is having and, at the right time, evaluate its overall
impact. As the fourth and final step in the Public Policy Cycle, it is intended to provide policy-makers with
objective analysis and insights to inform future decision-making.
Within the Public Policy Cycle, monitoring and evaluation have distinct but interrelated roles (Figure 37).
Broadly speaking, monitoring is a continuous process, while full evaluations take place at key milestones.
Figure 36: Monitor and evaluate stage overview
Stage of the Public Policy Cycle
ADEO Interaction
(* = indicates mandatory

Official source ↗