CAPACITY
How widespread are strategic planning techniques?
Capacity scores are weighted composites. Two qualitative policy assessments [ 
] each contribute one-third of this weighting, with a quantitative measure [ 
] contributing an additional one-third.
Scores and methodology
] each contribute one-third of this weighting, with a quantitative measure [ ] contributing an additional one-third. Scores and methodology
CapacityKey findings: Strategic capacity
Each 
represents an individual country and is positioned on a scale from 1 (lowest) to 10 (best). Position cursor over to see scores for individual countries.
Click country name in list or text for details.
represents an individual country and is positioned on a scale from 1 (lowest) to 10 (best). Position cursor over to see scores for individual countries.Click country name in list or text for details.
Score distribution
8.9
1
8.5
2
8.5
8.1
4
7.6
5
7.5
6
7.5
7.1
8
6.9
9
6.8
10
In this top group, strategic planning, often informed by expert opinion, typically plays an important role in policy development.
Long-range planning is a core element of policy-making in many of these countries, whether coordinated centrally (Canada, Norway, UK, New Zealand), or taking place in ministries and departments (Sweden, Netherlands).
Planning is important in Denmark, but with a limited tradition of outside expert advice.
Slovakia and Hungary have recently improved their planning capacity substantially, while Turkey’s strategic policy development has largely been driven by external forces.
Long-range planning is a core element of policy-making in many of these countries, whether coordinated centrally (Canada, Norway, UK, New Zealand), or taking place in ministries and departments (Sweden, Netherlands).
Planning is important in Denmark, but with a limited tradition of outside expert advice.
Slovakia and Hungary have recently improved their planning capacity substantially, while Turkey’s strategic policy development has largely been driven by external forces.
In this middle group, strategic planning has taken a relatively lesser role, and what has taken place has often benefited less from expert advice.
Finland and Ireland both engage in long-term policy analysis, but rarely with academic experts involved. Belgium’s central planning agency lacks influence, while Luxembourg’s social science community is small.
South Korea’s government focused initially on expert-advised planning, but policies developed this way met bureaucratic resistance. The United States’ Bush government cut resources devoted to policy analysis.
Structural difficulties associated with Germany’s federal system hamper long-range strategic planning.
Finland and Ireland both engage in long-term policy analysis, but rarely with academic experts involved. Belgium’s central planning agency lacks influence, while Luxembourg’s social science community is small.
South Korea’s government focused initially on expert-advised planning, but policies developed this way met bureaucratic resistance. The United States’ Bush government cut resources devoted to policy analysis.
Structural difficulties associated with Germany’s federal system hamper long-range strategic planning.
4.8
18
4.6
19
4.5
20
4.4
21
4.2
22
4.1
23
3.6
24
3.6
3.5
26
3.2
27
3.1
28
2.1
29
1.0
30
True strategic planning is inconsistent or rare in this bottom group, with competition between ministries or structural government issues often undermining capabilities.
Planning in several counties (Italy, Japan, Austria) is hampered by ministers' competition or loyalty to parties rather than to governing coalitions. Planning in Iceland is typically vague. Mexico’s strategic capacity is strong only in individual policy sectors.
Policy-making in Australia and France is dominated by electoral concerns, while frequent government changes in the Czech Republic have hampered strategy development. Planning in Poland has only modest impact.
In Portugal, strategic planning is largely focused on EU issues, while in Greece, policy-making is dominated by operational rather than strategic matters.
The power of Switzerland’s public referendum process makes long-range planning difficult.
Planning in several counties (Italy, Japan, Austria) is hampered by ministers' competition or loyalty to parties rather than to governing coalitions. Planning in Iceland is typically vague. Mexico’s strategic capacity is strong only in individual policy sectors.
Policy-making in Australia and France is dominated by electoral concerns, while frequent government changes in the Czech Republic have hampered strategy development. Planning in Poland has only modest impact.
In Portugal, strategic planning is largely focused on EU issues, while in Greece, policy-making is dominated by operational rather than strategic matters.
The power of Switzerland’s public referendum process makes long-range planning difficult.
Rationale
Sustainable, well-informed planning is a key characteristic of capable governance in the policy cycle. Strategic capacity assesses the extent to which core executives engage in strategic planning informed by expert advisors, which, in turn, shapes government decision-making.
Organizational manifestations of strategic planning might include dedicated central government units, personal advisory cabinets for ministers or the president/prime minister, or extra-governmental bodies.
Performance comparison
Use drop-down menus for selections. In all cases, higher scores reflect better performance.
