|
|
|
||
|
Students will develop their own understanding of policymaking and evaluation, combining the knowledge of different social sciences branches comprising communication studies, economics, and behavioral science. Thus, students learn the principles of designing public policies as a data-driven process accompanied by mutual communication with stakeholders. Poslední úprava: Moravcová Hana, Ing. Bc., Ph.D. (13.09.2024)
|
|
||
|
Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. A. (2019). The Narrow Corridor: States, Societies, and the Fate of Liberty. Penguin Press. Cerulli, G. (2015). Econometric Evaluation of Socio-Economic Programs Theory and Applications. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46405-2 The rationale for public sector intervention in the economy. (2006). Greater London Authority. https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/gla_migrate_files_destination/rationale_for_public_sector_intervention.pdf Michie, S., Atkins, L., & West, R. (2014). The Behaviour Change Wheel. Silverback Publishing. https://www.behaviourchangewheel.com/online-book#2 OECD. (2022). OECD Report on Public Communication. Organization for Economic Cooperation & Development. https://doi.org/10.1787/22f8031c-en OECD (2019), Tools and Ethics for Applied Behavioural Insights: The BASIC Toolkit, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9ea76a8f-en. Stankova O. I. (2019). Frontiers of Economic Policy Communications. INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND. Poslední úprava: Moravcová Hana, Ing. Bc., Ph.D. (05.09.2024)
|
|
||
|
50 points (activity during the workshops – active participation in the moderated discussion, evaluation directly during the class) 50 points (the written output – the case study, 20-25 of the norm. pages summarizing the common project of the group, the text must document the ability to understand and apply the discussed and trained principles; the lecturer will tutor all capacities to run a project) Max. 100 points. 0–50 % = F, 51–60 % = E, 61–70 % = D, 71–80 % = C, 81–90 % = B a 91 % and more = A). Poslední úprava: Moravcová Hana, Ing. Bc., Ph.D. (05.09.2024)
|
|
||
|
Syllabus 1. week – Introductory remarks, the course design and description 2. week: opening lecture 3. week: opening lecture Aim of the two opening lectures: get the basic knowledge of the source of best practices for designing the communication of economic policies, focusing both on the process of creating and implementing policies. Find an appropriate set of theories that support creating an effective and consistent package aligning policy objectives and fostering dialog with citizens. Topics of the lectures: Public sector interventions – why do we need them? The normative and positive approach – why are some measures too challenging to measure and compare? The substance of the cost-benefit analysis. The nature of costs. Unintended consequences and evidence-based policies, behavioral attitudes, and models. Why do we need prices and markets? The theory of interest groups and why, sometimes, it is so difficult to balance the demands of interest groups and the interests of the general public. Who are opinion leaders? Communication as a stability factor and why the citizens and their economic activity need it? Investment in human and physical capital. Open data – what are the benefits of open data, and are there any threats? The trap of the digital divide. Regulatory Impact Assessment. Digitalization brings the state to citizens as close as citizens want. How to cope with the scarcity of information on the one hand and infodemia, on the other hand. The rest of the semester is devoted to the interactive development of group projects. The lecturer will provide an intensive guidance and support for all stages of the learning process. Students are divided into 4 groups. Each group chooses a case to evaluate the communication and efficiency aspects of creating and implementing any socioeconomic policy; the only condition is that each group has to work on a case from a DIFFERENT country. 4. week Common choosing of a case of a public policy intervention (a measure). Making plans for the evaluation process. Creating the list of elements to be considered, factors to be included into the analysis and the framework for the theoretical background. 5. week Monitoring communication activities related to a chosen case of public policy intervention. Choosing an appropriate method for evaluating its effect on the intervention implementation. 6. week Data handling for qualified decision-making. The architecture of data and the methodology to process them. Communication as a process for raising mutual trust, ensuring the quality of data. 7. week Common elaboration of the evaluation of the public interventions, using the results of the previous seminars and the reasoning for their efficiency. 8. week Phase 1 of preparing an alternative solution with a focus on the dynamics of the decision-making process about interventions – data availability and quality – communication enhancing the trust and amplifying the effect of the intervention. 9. week Phase 2 of preparing an alternative solution. 10. week Phase 3 of preparing an alternative solution. 11. week Finalization of the whole case study and presentation of the results. Comparing perspectives from different countries. Identification of commonalities and differences. Good practice examples. 12. week Finalization of the whole case study and presentation of the results. Comparing perspectives from different countries. Identification of commonalities and differences. Good practice examples. Poslední úprava: Moravcová Hana, Ing. Bc., Ph.D. (13.09.2024)
|