This issue

– Co-design
– COVID-19 in Australia
– Spending reviews
– Infrastructure priorities
Plus what I'm reading.

In these times of uncertainty, evidence-based policy and decision-making are  more vital than ever. Researchers and the public sector should be natural partners in this process but in practice the gap between them can often be wide.  

The Bridge is ANZSOG’s new research translation project that aims to close that gap.  

This is the first of a series of fortnightly emails which will be sent to thousands of engaged readers just like you The Bridge has been developed following a 12-month partnership with The Mandarin where we funded production of ‘The Drop’. 

The Bridge is curated by Maria Katsonis, a former senior Victorian public servant with over 20 years' experience and now a Public Policy Fellow at the University of Melbourne, who brings a practitioner’s perspective to academic research.

Public sector leaders and policy advisors need access to high quality research evidence when developing new policies and programs. The Bridge will make this research with a practical application more visible and accessible across the public sector, giving you a source of thought-provoking and useful information.  

The first issue focuses on the public policy response to COVID-19 and what Australia and New Zealand can learn from other countries and previous pandemics. It also includes short articles on other topics relevant to your work. 

I encourage you to share this with your colleagues as we grow our community of like-minded individuals dedicated to the creation of public value. If your colleagues are interested in subscribing they can do so here. 

Ken Smith, ANZSOG Dean and CEO 

Research brief: Co-design for public policy

Co‐design holds great promise for policy makers but does it deliver on this promise? Read more in our brief about a new paper in the Australian Journal of Public Administration. 

What are the public messaging lessons of overseas COVID-19 responses for Australian policymakers? ​

The COVID-19 global public health emergency demonstrates the importance of effective public engagement, co-ordination of response and messaging to the public. If anything there is too much information about COVID-19 available, but two good international resources are the World Economic Forum’s website for updates on the health and economic impacts, and the Harvard Kennedy School for the public policy response. This ANZSOG article also features list of reliable local and international sources. 

This Inside Story essay examines international responses to COVID-19 and what we can learn. 

What not to do: denial, delay and distrust 

• Iran is the leading example of failed policy and flawed messaging, hiding the outbreak with disastrous consequences. 

• Japan’s early responses are an example of what not to do with the government botching its quarantine of the Diamond Princess cruise ship. 

• Italy’s performance has been poor with the government missing the chance to catch local infection clusters early. 

• Britain’s response faced criticism with suggestions the government was abandoning containment and preparing for an outbreak. 

• The US response has been hamstrung by political infighting and a lack of coordination. 

Success stories 

• Countries combining rapid responses with effective public messaging are weathering the storm of COVID-19. These include Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore.  

• While China’s response has been criticised as draconian, it has had a major impact in bringing infection rates under control. 

• South Korea’s decision to test as many people as possible combined with effective public information has contributed to a declining infection rate. 

Lessons for Australia 

Public messaging can be an effective way of mobilising populations to become stakeholders in damping down the threat of the virus. Messaging: 

• should be clear, transparent and, above all, agile 

• should draw the link between top-level decisions in the public interest and individual circumstances 

• counter fake news, fear mongering and misinformation. 

How to change public behaviour and avoid C-19 panic 

Containing and treating diseases like COVID-19 rely on individual decision-making. This World Economic Forum article looks why these decisions count and what leads to panic. 

Individual behaviour matters 

Public health is a public good, i.e. a good from which everybody can benefit. Health decisions for non-communicable diseases are usually self-contained and personal such as eating healthily, exercising or stopping smoking.  

Infectious diseases are an exception. Individual decision-making becomes a community issue. Why? Because when facing infection control interventions, individual behaviour is essential not only for the self but for society as a whole. 

Mental short cuts 

If individuals were entirely rational, managing a communicable disease through prevention, protection and containment would be straightforward. But people are not always rational and use mental short cuts. This can affect perceptions of infectious diseases. For example, the likelihood of infections can be over or underestimated.  

When the risk is overestimated, the situation is seen as extreme and panic can set in. Individuals ignore social conventions and act selfishly such as stockpiling groceries. But in extreme situations people can also behave altruistically, helping others and reporting selfish behaviour.   

Panic can also set in with people perceiving a lack of escape routes through lockdowns and quarantines. These are seen not as measures to limit transmission of the disease (a public good), but as a costly limitation to individual freedom. Individuals balance the perceived benefits from making contact against the perceived cost of the disease

While COVID-19 dominates headlines, the practice of good government across the board becomes more important than ever. An article in a McKinsey on Government report discusses the role of spending reviews.  

What are spending reviews? 

• Detailed assessments of specific areas of spending with the aim of increasing transparency, improving efficiency and reallocating resources if needed. 

• Several governments have used spending reviews to enhance expenditure performance including the UK, Denmark, Sweden, Australia and Italy. 

How do you design a spending review? 

While there is no blueprint for spending reviews, there are three broad design areas:   

• Institutional setup: In the UK and Denmark, spending reviews have been led by the centre, while Spain and Italy assigned responsibility to an independent authority. 

• Scope and whether the review will examine operating costs, labour costs, external back-office processes and delivery efficiency. Depending on scope, a different set of review skills and capabilities may be required. 

• Individual selection criteria: Do reviews focus on a single ministry/agency or on cross-cutting issues that span multiple areas of government?. 

Infrastructure priorities 

Infrastructure Australia has released its list of priority infrastructure investments Australia needs for a prosperous future. The report identifies a project pipeline worth more than $58 billion. It provides all levels of government with an evidence‑based list of infrastructure opportunities for the near, medium and longer term. 

What the list includes 

• 147 nationally significant infrastructure proposals with six high priority projects, including the need for a national water strategy 

• other high priority projects cover the nation’s rapidly growing waste problem, coastal inundation and road maintenance  

• 37 new proposals across water, energy, health, waste, transport, telecommunications, arts and recreation. 

1. Slow down to make better decisions in a crisis 

The COVID-19 information deluge can make decision-making difficult. Uncertainty and anxiety can lead to short-sighted decisions. According to this Harvard Business Review article, the best way to resist the siren call of action is to slow down. By slowing down, you can use deliberative reasoning with data (called system 2 thinking) to influence your deliberations. 

2. Politics without politicians 

What if our political leaders were chosen at random, like jury members, to direct the nation for a period of time? This question is at the heart of a New Yorker article which envisions what true government by mass leadership could look like. It explores the idea of open democracy - if government by the people is a goal, then people should do the governing. 

‘Til the next issue

Maria Katsonis