A near miss: The North Korean nuclear crisis

Don Oberdorfer, The Two Koreas (New York: Addison‐Wesley, 1998), xvii, 472 pp./$30.00 cloth; Leon V. Sigal, Disarming Strangers (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998), xi, 321 pp./$29.95 cloth.     

Determining the Optimal Size of Local Government: The Case of Tasmanian Councils

We estimated the optimal size of the most significant functions performed by Tasmanian councils between 1999 and 2008 using a non‐parametric technique based on the shared input data envelopment analysis model. The principal advantage of this technique is that it not only provides an overall estimate of efficiency but it also allows for the estimation of ‘partial efficiencies’ and ‘cost shares’ when one input is shared among multiple outputs. Our results indicate that water supply and sewerage services, on average, were more efficient, whereas activities related to community health and safety and information systems warrant improvement. However, because the costs associated with water supply and sewerage services are considerably higher than the costs related to community health and safety and information systems, the elimination of these inefficiencies would result in greater cost savings for the Tasmanian local government sector.     

Toward More “Evidence‐Informed” Policy Making?

The quality of public decision making depends significantly on the quality of analysis and advice provided through public organizations. Champions of “evidence‐informed” policy making claim that rigorous evaluation practices can significantly improve attainment of cost‐effective outcomes. After decades of experience, performance information is more sophisticated, but evaluation practices and capabilities vary enormously. Public agencies gather and process vast amounts of information, but there has been little analysis of how this information is actually utilized for policy and program improvement. This article examines how government agencies use evidence about policy and program effectiveness, with attention to four themes: (1) the prospects for improving “evidence‐informed” policy making, (2) the diversity of practices concerning evidence utilization and evaluation across types of public agencies and policy arenas, (3) recent attempts to “institutionalize” evaluation as a core feature of policy development and budget approval, and (4) the relationships between public agencies and nongovernmental sources of expertise.