Policy Evaluation and Policy Examination

The chapter focuses on post-implementation evaluation and examination of policy, determining its effectiveness and efficiency and determining whether new policy or modifications to existing policy are necessary. This evaluation assesses the impact of policy and the tools used to implement it. It employs many of the methods used in pre-implementation policy analysis but measures actual performance of the policies against previously relied upon beliefs and projections. The chapter explores learned examination of policy, provides an overview of contemporary policy studies literature and discusses how different methods are employed to undertake such examinations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Buy Now

eBook EUR 32.09 Price includes VAT (France)

Softcover Book EUR 42.19 Price includes VAT (France)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Bibliography

• Ali, C. 2012. Media at the Margins: Policy and Practice in American, Canadian, and British Community Television. International Journal of Communication 6: 1119–1138. Available at https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/1316/750. Accessed 15 Oct 2019. Google Scholar
• Ali, Christopher. 2017. Media Localism: The Policies of Place. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. BookGoogle Scholar
• Aufderheide, Pat. 2006. The 1996 Telecommunications Act: Ten Years Later. The Federal Communications Law Journal 58 (3): 407–413. Google Scholar
• Ball, Stephen J. 1993. What Is Policy? Texts, Trajectories and Toolboxes. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 13 (2): 10–17. Google Scholar
• Becker, Henk A. 2001. Social Impact Assessment. European Journal of Operational Research 128 (2): 311–321. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Benjamin, Stuart M., and James B. Speta. 2015. Telecommunications Law and Policy. 4th ed. Durham: Carolina Academic Press. Google Scholar
• Bickham, David S., and Ronald G. Slaby. 2012. Effects of a Media Literacy Program in the US on Children’s Critical Evaluation of Unhealthy Media Messages About Violence, Smoking, and Food. Journal of Children and Media 6 (2): 255–271. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Birkland, Thomas A. 2015. An Introduction to the Policy Process: Theories, Concepts, and Models of Public Policy Making. 4th ed. Armonk: M. E. Sharpe. BookGoogle Scholar
• Bulmer, Simon, and Stephen Padgett. 2004. Policy Transfer in the European Union: An Institutionalist Perspective. British Journal of Political Science 35 (1): 103–126. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Chalk, Nigel, and Richard Hemming. 2000. Assessing Fiscal Sustainability in Theory and Practice. In International Monetary Fund Working Paper WP/00/81. Washington: International Monetary Fund. Google Scholar
• Cox, Richard H., and Daniel Béland. 2013. Valence, Policy Ideas, and the Rise of Sustainability. Governance 26 (2): 307–328. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Cukier, Judith. 1997. Cost-Benefit Analysis of Telelearning: Developing a Methodology Framework. Distance Education 18 (1): 1357–1152. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Danielson, Caroline. 2007. Social Experiments and Public Policy. In Handbook of Public Policy Analysis: Theory, Politics and Methods, ed. Frank Fisher, Gerald J. Miller, and Mara Sidney, 381–392. Boca Raton: CRC Press/Taylor & Francis. Google Scholar
• Dixon, John A., and Louise A. Fallon. 1989. The Concept of Sustainability: Origins, Extensions, and Usefulness for Policy. Society and Natural Resources 2 (1): 73–84. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Dolowitz, David P., and David Marsh. 2000. Learning from Abroad: The Role of Policy Transfer in Contemporary Policy-Making. Governance 13 (1): 5–53. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Donders, Karen, Caroline Pauwels, and Jan Loisen. 2014. The Palgrave Handbook of European Media Policy. London: Palgrave Macmillan. BookGoogle Scholar
• Dovers, Stephen R. 1996. Sustainability: Demands on Policy. Journal of Public Policy 16 (3): 303–318. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Druckman, James, Donald P. Green, James H. Kuklinski, and Arthur Lupia, eds. 2011. Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
• Eliassen, Kjell A., Marit Sjovaag Nfa, and Marit Sjovaag, eds. 1999. European Telecommunications Liberalisation. London: Routledge. Google Scholar
• Ettelt, S., N. Mays, and P. Allen. 2015. Policy Experiments: Investigating Effectiveness or Confirming Direction? Evaluation 21 (3): 292–307. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Feintuck, Mike, and Mike Varney. 2006. Media Regulation, Public Interest and the Law. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. BookGoogle Scholar
• Finkelstein, Neal D., ed. 2000. Transparency in Public Policy: Great Britain and the United States. Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar
• Fonow, Mary Margaret, and Judith A. Cook. 2005. Feminist Methodology: New Applications in the Academy and Public Policy. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 30 (4): 2211–2236. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Fox, Justin. 2007. Government Transparency and Policymaking. Public Choice 131 (1–2): 23–44. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Freedman, Des. 2008. The Politics of Media Policy. Cambridge: Polity Press. Google Scholar
• Gale, Trevor. 2001. Critical Policy Sociology: Historiography, Archaeology and Genealogy as Methods of Policy Analysis. Journal of Education Policy 16 (5): 379–393. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Gardner, Annette, and Claire Brindis. 2017. Advocacy and Policy Change Evaluation: Theory and Practice. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Google Scholar
• Garnham, Nicholas. 2005. From Cultural to Creative Industries. International Journal of Cultural Policy 11 (1): 15–29. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Gillett, Sharon E., and Ingo Vogelsang, eds. 1999. Competition, Regulation and Convergence: Current Trends in Telecommunication Policy Research. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum. Google Scholar
• Gillwald, Alison. 2005. Good Intentions, Poor Outcomes: Telecommunications Reform in South Africa. Telecommunications Policy 29 (7): 469–491. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Goldsmith, Jack, and Tim Wu. 2008. Who Controls the Internet? Illusions of a Borderless World. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
• Hacker, Jacob S. 2004. Privatizing Risk Without Privatizing the Welfare State: The Hidden Politics of Social Policy Retrenchment in the United States. American Political Science Review 98 (02): 243–260. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Hacker, Jacob S., Paul Pierson, and Kathleen Thelen. 2015. Drift and Conversion: Hidden Faces of Institutional Change. In Advances in Comparative-Historical Analysis, ed. James Mahoney and Kathleen Thelen, 180–210. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ChapterGoogle Scholar
• Hajer, Maartin. 2002. Discourse Analysis and the Study of Policy Making. European Political Science 2 (1): 61–65. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Hawksworth, Mary. 1994. Policy Studies Within a Feminist Frame. Policy Sciences 27 (1–2): 97–118. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Herzog, Christian, and Christopher Ali. 2015. Elite Interviewing in Media and Communications Policy Research. International Journal of Media and Cultural Politics 11 (1): 37–54. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Herzog, Christian, and Hanno Beck. 2016. Experimental Media Policy. International Journal of Digital Television 7 (3): 315–330. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Horwitz, Robert B. 1991. The Irony of Regulatory Reform: The Deregulation of American Telecommunications. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
• ———. 2001. Communication and Democratic Reform in South Africa. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. BookGoogle Scholar
• Humphreys, Peter. 1996. Mass Media and Media Policy in Western Europe. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Google Scholar
• Iosifidis, Petros. 2011. Global Media and Communication Policy: An International Perspective. London: Palgrave Macmillan. BookGoogle Scholar
• Jaeger, Paul T. 2006. Telecommunications Policy and Individuals with Disabilities: Issues of Accessibility and Social Inclusion in the Policy and Research Agenda. Telecommunications Policy 30 (1): 112–124. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• John, Richard R. 2010. Network Nation: Inventing American Telecommunications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. BookGoogle Scholar
• ———. 2015. Projecting Power Oversees: U.S. Postal Policy and International Standards Setting at the 1863 Paris Postal Conference. Journal of Policy History 27 (3): 416–438. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Johns Hopkins Center for Civil Society Studies. 2003. Policy Tools and Government Performance: Report on a Conference Co-Sponsored by the U.S. General Accounting Office, the U.S. Office of Management and Budget, and the Johns Hopkins University. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Center for Civil Society Studies. Google Scholar
• Jome, Hiram L. 1925. Public Policy Toward Radio Broadcasting. The Journal of Land & Public Utility Economics 1 (2): 198–214. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Just, Natascha, and Manuel Puppis, eds. 2012. Trends in Communication Policy Research: New Theories, Methods and Subjects. Bristol: Intellect. Google Scholar
• Kielbowicz, Richard B. 1989. News in the Mail: The Press, Post Office, and Public Information, 1700–1860s. Greenwood: Praeger. Google Scholar
• ———. 1990. Postal Subsidies for the Press and the Business of Mass Culture, 1880–1920. Business History Review 64 (3): 451–488. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• ———. 2005–2006. Preserving Universal Postal Service as a Communication Safety Net: A Policy History and Proposal. Seton Hall Legislative Journal 30: 383. Google Scholar
• Kim, Sung-Kil, and Junseok Oh. 2018. Information Science Techniques for Investigating Research Areas: A Case Study in Telecommunications Policy. The Journal of Supercomputing 74 (12): 6691–6718. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Kim, Han-joo, Sang-kyu Byun, and Myeong-cheol Park. 2004. Mobile Handset Subsidy Policy in Korea: Historical Analysis and Evaluation. Telecommunications Policy 28 (1): 23–42. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Krieg, Jessica. 2004. There’s no Business Like Show Business: Child Entertainers and the Law. University of Pennsylvania Journal of Labor and Employment Law 6 (2): 429–449. Google Scholar
• Larouche, Pierre. 2000. Competition Law and Regulation in European Telecommunications. Oxford: Hart Publishing. Google Scholar
• Lee, Karen. 2017. ACMA Varies Compliance and Monitoring Arrangements for the Telecommunications Consumer Protections Code. Australian Journal of Competition and Consumer Law 25 (1): 62–64. Google Scholar
• Leeuw, Frans L. 2003. Reconstructing Program Theories: Methods Available and Problems to be Solved. American Journal of Evaluation 24 (1): 5–20. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Leff, Nathaniel H. 1984. Externalities, Information Costs, and Social Benefit-Cost Analysis for Economic Development: An Example from Telecommunications. Economic Development and Social Change 32 (2): 255–276. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Levitt, S.D., and J.A. List. 2009. Field Experiments in Economics: The Past, the Present, and the Future. European Economic Review 53 (1): 1–18. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Liu, Chun, and Krishna Jayakar. 2012. The Evolution of Telecommunications Policymaking: Comparative Analysis of China and India. Telecommunications Policy 36 (1): 13–28. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Livingstone, Sonia. 2011. Regulating the Internet in the Interests of Children: Emerging European and International Approaches. In The Handbook of Global Media and Communication Policy, ed. Robin Mansell and Marc Raboy, 505–524. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. ChapterGoogle Scholar
• Lunt, Peter, and Sonia Livingstone. 2011. Media Regulation: Governance and the Interests of Citizens and Consumers. London: Sage. Google Scholar
• Majchrzak, Ann, and M. Lynne Markus. 2013. Methods for Policy Research: Taking Socially Responsible Action. 2nd ed. London: Sage. Google Scholar
• Mansell, Robin, and Marc Raboy, eds. 2014. The Handbook of Global Media and Communication Policy. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. Google Scholar
• Manyozo, Linje. 2012. Media, Communication and Development: Three Approaches. London: Sage. Google Scholar
• Martin, Steve, and Ian Sanderson. 1999. Evaluating Public Policy Experiments: Measuring Outcomes, Monitoring Processes or Managing Pilots? Evaluation 5 (3): 245–258. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Mathew, Bobjoseph, and Thomas Cottier, eds. 2003. Telecom Regulatory Framework and Effect on Competition: The WTO Agreements on Telecommunications. New York: Peter Lang. Google Scholar
• May, Peter J. 1992. Policy Learning and Failure. Journal of Public Policy 12 (4): 331–354. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• May, Christopher. 2000. A Global Political Economy of Intellectual Property Rights. London: Routledge. Google Scholar
• ———. 2006. World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO): Resurgence and Development Agenda. London: Routledge. Google Scholar
• Mayer, Vicki. 2018. Media Policy and Governance. Feminist Media Histories 4 (2): 113–116. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Mazur, Amy G. 2002. Theorizing Feminist Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. BookGoogle Scholar
• McChesney, Robert W. 1993. Telecommunications, Mass Media, and Democracy: The Battle for the Control of U.S. Broadcasting, 1928–1935. New York: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
• McConnell, Allan. 2010. Policy Success, Policy Failure and Grey Areas In-Between. Journal of Public Policy 30 (3): 345–362. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• McCubbins, Mathew D., Roger G. Noll, and Barry R. Weingast. 1987. Administrative Procedures as Instruments of Political Control. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 3 (2): 243–277. Google Scholar
• McPhail, Beverly A. 2003. Feminist Policy Analysis Framework. The Social Policy Journal 2 (2–3): 39–61. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Morton, Rebecca, and Kenneth Williams. 2010. Experimental Political Science and the Study of Causality: From Nature to the Lab. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. BookGoogle Scholar
• Murschetz, Paul Clemens, and Roland Teichmann. 2018. Handbook of State Aid for Film: Finance, Industries and Regulation. Berlin: Springer. BookGoogle Scholar
• Napoli, Philip M. 2001. Foundations of Communication Policy: Principles and Process in the Regulation of Electronic Media. New York: Hampton Press. Google Scholar
• Nielsen, Rasmus Kleis. 2014. ‘Frozen’ Media Subsidies During a Time of Media Change: A Comparative Analysis of Media Policy Drift in Six Western Democracies. Global Media and Communication 10 (2): 121–138. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Noske-Turner, Jessica. 2017. Rethinking Media Development Through Evaluation: Beyond Freedom. London: Palgrave Macmillan. BookGoogle Scholar
• Nuechterlein, Jonathan E., and Philip J. Weiser. 2013. Digital Crossroads: Telecommunications Law and Policy in the Internet Age. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Google Scholar
• Ots, Mart. 2009. Efficient Servants of Pluralism or Marginalized Media Policy Tools? Journal of Communication Inquiry 33 (4): 376–392. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Padovani, Claudia, and Elena Pavan. 2011. Actors and Interactions in Global Communication Governance: The Heuristic Potential of a Network Approach. In The Handbook of Global Media and Communication Policy, ed. Robin Mansell and Marc Raboy, 543–581. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. ChapterGoogle Scholar
• Pandit, Sushmita. 2019. Public Policy and the Digital Deadline: The Implementation of the Digital Addressable System (DAS) in West Bengal. Journal of Digital Media and Policy 10 (2): 217–228. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Picard, Robert G. 1986. State Press Aid During the Era of Economic Readjustment: A Case Study of Scandinavian Nations. European Studies Journal 3: 1–8. Google Scholar
• ———. 2017. Monitoring Media Sustainability: Economic and Business Revisions to Development Indicators. In What Is Sustainable Journalism? Integrating the Environmental, Social, and Economic Challenges of Journalism, ed. Peter Berglez, Ulrika Olausson, and Mart Ots. New York: Peter Lang. Google Scholar
• Picard, Robert G., and Mikko Grönlund. 2003. Development and Effects of Finnish Press Subsidies. Journalism Studies 4 (1): 105–119. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Pickard, Victor. 2014. America’s Battle for Media Democracy: The Triumph of Corporate Libertarianism and the Future of Media Reform. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. BookGoogle Scholar
• Polishuk, Paul. 1976. Telecommunications Policymaking and Institutions of the U.S. Government. Telecommunications Policy 1 (1): 52–67. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Poort, Joost, and Barbara Baarsma. 2016. Measuring the Welfare Effects of Public Television. Journal of Media Economics 29 (1): 31–48. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Prado, Marianna Mota. 2013. Bureaucratic Resistance to Regulatory Reforms: Contrasting Experiences in Electricity and Telecommunications in Brazil. In The Rise of the Regulatory State in the South: Infrastructure and Development in Emerging Economies, ed. Navroz K. Dubash and Bronwen Morgan, 75–97. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
• Price, Monroe. 2002. Media and Sovereignty: The Global Information Revolution and Its Challenge to State Power. Boston: MIT Press. BookGoogle Scholar
• Radaelli, Claudio M. 2000. Policy Transfer in the European Union: Institutional Isomorphism as a Source of Legitimacy. Governance 13 (1): 25–43. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• ———. 2009. Measuring Policy Learning: Regulatory Impact Assessment in Europe. Journal of European Public Policy 16 (8): 1145–1164. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Rennie, Ellie. 2013. Unintended Consequences: Satellite Policy and Indigenous Television Media. Media Information Australia 149 (1): 92–103. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Rodrigo, Delia, Lorenzo Allio, and Pedro Andres-Amo. 2009. Multi-Level Regulatory Governance: Policies, Institutions and Tools for Regulatory Quality and Policy Coherence. OECD Working Papers on Public Governance, No. 13. Paris: OECD Publishing. Google Scholar
• Rowland, Williard D. 1986. American Telecommunications Policy Research: Its Contradictory Origins and Influences. Media, Culture & Society 8 (2): 159–182. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Sanderson, Ian. 2002. Evaluation, Policy Learning and Evidence-Based Policy Making. Public Administration 80 (1): 1–22. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Sarikakis, Katharine, ed. 2007. Media and Cultural Policy in the European Union. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Google Scholar
• Schneider, Volker, Godefroy Dang-Nguyen, and Raymond Werle. 1994. Corporate Actor Networks in European Policy-Making: Harmonizing Telecommunications Policy. Journal of Common Market Studies 32 (4): 473. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Schneir, Juan R., and Yupeng Xiong. 2016. A Cost Study of Fixed Broadband Access Networks for Rural Areas. Telecommunications Policy 40 (8): 755–773. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Schulz, Wolfgang, Peggy Valcke, and Kristina Irion, eds. 2013. The Independence of the Media and its Regulatory Agencies. Bristol: Intellect. Google Scholar
• Scull, Tracy Marie, and Janis Beth Kupersmidt. 2011. An Evaluation of a Media Literacy Program Training Workshop for Late Elementary School Teachers. Journal of Media Literacy Education 2 (3): 199–208. Google Scholar
• Simpson, Seamus, Manuel Puppis, and Hilde van den Bulck, eds. 2016. European Media Policy for the Twenty First Century: Assessing the Past, Setting Agendas for the Future. London: Routledge. Google Scholar
• Stone, Diane. 1999. Learning Lessons and Transferring Policy across Time, Space and Disciplines. Politics 19 (1): 51–59. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Streeter, Thomas. 1996. Selling the Air: A Critique of the Policy of Commercial Broadcasting in the United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. BookGoogle Scholar
• ———. 2009. The Cable Fable Revisited: Discourse, Policy, and the Making of Cable Television. Critical Studies in Mass Communication 4 (2): 174–200. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• ———. 2013. Policy, Politics, and Discourse. Communication, Culture & Critique 6 (4): 488–501. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Sutherland, Ewan. 2016. The Case Study in Telecommunications Policy Research. Info 18 (1): 16–30. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Talvi, Ernesto, and Carlos Végh. 1998. Fiscal Policy Sustainability: A Basic Framework. In Inter-American Development Bank, Working Paper 107. Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank. Google Scholar
• Taylor, Matthew, and Jake Thorold. 2017. Is Policy Failure Inevitable. Royal Society of Arts Blog. https://www.thersa.org/discover/publications-and-articles/matthew-taylor-blog/2017/03/is-policy-failure-inevitable?id=newsletter/fellowship/100417. Accessed 3 Dec 2018.
• Terzis, Georgios, ed. 2008. European Media Governance. The Brussels Dimension. Bristol: Intellect. Google Scholar
• Valcke, Peggy. 2006. The Future of Must-Carry: From Must-Carry to a Concept of Universal Service in the Info-Communications Sector. Media Law and Policy 15: 247–265. Google Scholar
• van den Bulck, Hilde. 2012. Towards a Media Policy Process Analysis Model and Its Methodological Implications. In Trends in Communication Policy Research: New Theories, Methods and Subjects, ed. Natascha Just and Manuel Puppis. Bristol: Intellect. Google Scholar
• van den Bulck, Manuel Puppis Hilde, Karen Donders, and Leo van Audenhove, eds. 2019. The Palgrave Handbook of Methods for Media Policy Research. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar
• van Dijk, Teun A. 1993. Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis. Discourse & Society 4 (2): 249–283. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• van Kranenburg, Hans, ed. 2017. Innovation Policies in the European News Media Industry: A Comparative Study. Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar
• Vanclay, Frank, Ana M. Esteves, Ilse Aucamp, and Daniel M. Franks. 2015. Social Impact Assessment: Guidance for Assessing and Managing Social Impact of Projects. Fargo: International Association for Impact Assessment. Google Scholar
• Vedung, Evert. 2000. Public Policy and Program Evaluation. London: Routledge. Google Scholar
• Walden, Ian. 2018. Telecommunications Law and Regulation. 5th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
• Ward, David. 2004. The European Union Democratic Deficit and the Public Sphere: An Evaluation of EU Media Policy. Amsterdam: IOS Press. Google Scholar
• Wasko, Janet. 1999. The Political Economy of Film. In A Companion to Film Theory, ed. Toby Miller and Robert Stam, 221–233. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Google Scholar
• ———. 2005. Critiquing Hollywood: The Political Economy of Motion Pictures. In A Concise Handbook of Movie Industry Economics, ed. Charles C. Moul, 5–31. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ChapterGoogle Scholar
• Weiss, Carol H. 1997. Evaluation: Methods for Studying Programs and Policies. 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall. Google Scholar
• Weiss, Carol Hirschon. 1999. The Interface Between Evaluation and Public Policy. Evaluation 5 (4): 468–486. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Wetherell, Margaret, Stephanie Taylor, and Simeon J. Yates. 2001. Discourse as Data: A Guide for Analysis. London: Sage. Google Scholar
• Winseck, Dwayne. 2002. The WTO, Emerging Policy Regimes and the Political Economy of Transnational Communications. In Global Media Policy in the New Millennium, ed. Marc Raboy, 19–38. Luton: University of Luton Press. Google Scholar
• Wodak, Ruth, and Michael Meyer. 2009. Methods for Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Sage. Google Scholar
• Wollmann, Helmut. 2006. Policy Evaluation and Evaluation Research. In Handbook of Public Policy Analysis: Theory, Politics, and Methods, ed. Frank Fischer and Gerald J. Miller, 393–404. Boca Raton: CRC Press/Taylor & Francis. ChapterGoogle Scholar

Suggested Readings

• van den Bulck, Hilde, Manuel Puppis, Karen Donders, and Leo van Audenhove, eds. 2019. The Palgrave Handbook of Methods for Media Policy Research. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar
• Vedung, Evert. 2000. Public Policy and Program Evaluation. London: Routledge. Google Scholar
• Weiss, Carol H. 1997. Evaluation: Methods for Studying Programs and Policies, 2nd. Prentice Hall. Google Scholar
• Wollmann, H. 2006. Policy Evaluation and Evaluation Research. In Handbook of Public Policy Analysis: Theory, Politics, and Methods, ed. Frank Fischer, and Gerald J. Miller, 393–404. Boca Raton: CRC Press/Taylor & Francis. Google Scholar