First method is trend analysis by tracing the duration of policymaking cycles, which is a minimum of ten years (Sabatier, 2007) and determining the historical and social context of policies (Sabatier, 2007) to provide a contextual understanding of the impact of policies. In application to the present study, the trend analysis would consider the key policies on HIV/AIDS implemented by the South African government in the past two decades. Key policies refer to the policies with strong impact and represent a major policy change.
The life cycle of the key policies together with developments were followed to determine the outcomes. This method addresses the retrospective aspect of policy analysis. Second method is stakeholder analysis, which refers to the identification of the different parties affected by the policies and the evaluation of the relative position, power, characteristics as players, and perception of these different parties towards the policy (Roberts et al. , 2004).
The core idea of stakeholder analysis is that policies should reflect the interest and power of the parties intended as beneficiaries. If not, then there could be flaws in the policies and the policymaking process. Utilising the stakeholder analysis in the present study involved identifying the stakeholders of the key policies and then assessing these stakeholders in terms of position, power, player and perception. This method supports the prospective aspect of policy analysis.
Third method is the assessment of the policymaking process in terms of the five areas, which also comprise the key elements of a good policy, which are 1) problem addressed by the policy, 2) policy options or alternatives, 3) objectives of the policy, 4) budget and costs and benefits, and 5) measurable targets. (Bardach, 2008) The fit between the problem addressed by the policy and the solution innate in the policy reflects a good policy. This targets both the retrospective and prospective aspects of policy analysis by determining problems in policies and indicating solutions.
In application to the present study, the key policies would be considered in terms these key elements. Employing policy analysis was able to determine the different alternative policies that are most likely to achieve the set of goals (Nagel, 1999). This was possible because the use of policy analysis employed multiple methods to look at the complex landscape that has developed in South Africa that underpins their effort in seeking to meeting the related MDGs. This component of the project consisted of review of South Africa national policies regarding HIV/AIDS-related health provision.
Since policy analysis is prescriptive in approach, the employment of this analytical approach in the research helped in coming up with recommendations or proposals that can be implemented in order to improve the policy (Buhrs & Bartlett, 1993). The proposals were based on the historical and social context of the key policies, evaluation of the various factors or elements for consideration in policies and the policymaking process, government strategies, obstacles and possible opportunities. Overall, there are specific steps in doing policy analysis using data from relevant documents.
First, documents on the policies on HIV/AIDS in South Africa, the influence of the MDGs in national health policymaking in South Africa, and the outcomes of the HIV/AIDS policies in South Africa were collected. Once the information was gathered, the three methods of policy analysis were implemented to uncover the recommendation and directions that will ensure that South Africa is on the path of achieving the MDG targets. After obtaining the results of the three methods of doing policy analysis, recommendations and other solutions were formulated in accordance to the purpose of the research.
In formulating the recommendations, synthesis of the gathered evidence was necessary to translate these into viable recommendations. Data synthesis involved condensed notes and implications. The formulation of recommendations is most commonly a process that involves groups of academics, professionals as well as lay representatives from relevant regions and practices (Michie et al. , 2007). Therefore, the current study was able to provide synthesis of the evidence that can further assist appropriate Guideline Development Groups.