MPP students highlight their work at this year’s Policy Analysis Exercise Showcase | Harvard Kennedy School

Jun 07, 2025

Each spring, second-year Master in Public Policy (MPP) students complete the Policy Analysis Exercise (PAE), during which they examine and develop solutions for a pressing issue presented by a client organization. This year, students proposed innovative policy recommendations on topics ranging from instant payment systems in Brazil and India to adapting to flood risk in New York City.

Learn more about some of the students’ projects below.

—

The idea stemmed from my professional experience working on international tax negotiations and cooperation in Japan’s Ministry of Finance. Given this experience, I was eager to gain hands-on experience in analyzing and designing tax policy within a real-world development context.

The Philippines provided a compelling case, as it faces persistent income inequality despite sustained economic growth. This topic allowed me to combine my policy interests and technical skills to explore how taxation can play a pivotal role in promoting inclusive development.

Initially, I spent a significant part of the work identifying the underlying problems, as emphasized by Lecturer in Public Policy Juan Jiménez in DEV-150Y: Seminar: Political and Economic Development. This diagnostic phase was critical before arriving at the final policy questions.

Ultimately, I sought to address two key policy questions:

How can the Philippine government secure sufficient fiscal space to promote inclusive growth without deepening inequality?

What tax policy and administrative reforms would most effectively improve income distribution while ensuring fiscal sustainability?

These questions guided both the analytical and policy components of the project.

I recommended a strategy that includes raising the value-added tax (VAT) rate from 12% to 14% and streamlining exemptions to improve both efficiency and equity. I also proposed strengthening tax administration through digitalization, reestablishing compliance risk management systems, and expanding the use of third-party data.

Together, these measures would enhance revenue mobilization, improve administrative efficiency, and create fiscal space for targeted social spending, helping to mitigate regressive effects and reduce income inequality.

Before entering the MPP Program, I had never used R, which was one of the most useful tools while working on my PAE. Core classes like API-201: Quantitative Analysis and Empirical Methods and API-203M: Empirical Methods II equipped me with statistical analysis skills using R, and API-222: Machine Learning and Big Data Analytics allowed me to apply more advanced analytical techniques using ML models.

On the theoretical side, I drew on lessons from DEV-210: Public Finance in Theory and Practice with Adjunct Lecturer in Public Policy Jay Rosengard and DEV-215: Public Finance in International Perspective with Associate Professor of Public Policy Anders Jensen, where I learned a broad range of taxation theories. In addition, DEV-309: Development Policy Strategy with Director of the Growth Lab and the Rafik Hariri Professor of the Practice of International Political Economy Ricardo Hausmann was particularly valuable, as it trained me to use diagnostics frameworks to identify the root causes of development constraints in emerging economies.

The PAE experience taught me how to integrate quantitative analysis with policy design in a real-world setting. I learned the importance of grounding recommendations in both data and local context, recognizing that technically sound solutions must also be administratively and politically viable. The PAE also deepened my understanding of how cross-country insights can inform domestic reforms, and it strengthened my ability to communicate complex policy issues to diverse audiences, from technical experts to policymakers.

We connected in IGA-229: Gender, Sex, and Violence taught by Professor of Public Policy Dara Kay Cohen in Spring 2024, and we were both interested in doing a Policy Analysis Exercise at the intersection of gender and security studies. With Rita’s military background and Becca’s interests in reproductive health, this topic was a natural fit.

We were trying to answer: “What barriers do researchers encounter when engaging with servicewomen seeking abortion services, and how can they more effectively study military abortion access post-Dobbs vs. Jackson?” We had five sub-questions, which looked at the policy environment, knowledge and dissemination, access and structural barriers, information ecosystems, and operational impact.

Our four recommendations were:

Our statistics classes were particularly useful. Rita had taken a course on qualitative and mixed research methods, which was especially helpful with our semi-structured interview methodology. Our policy design classes were also effective at analyzing key themes from our research and creating targeted, client-appropriate recommendations.

The PAE was an incredible opportunity to delve deeply into a topic that we are both passionate about and to became experts in this niche area. We were also connected to an incredible ecosystem of other professionals exploring similar themes, which will be very helpful for us going forward. Overall, we enjoyed working together as partners, particularly in such a challenging environment.

I first heard of the concept of adaptive regulation in Professor Leonie Beyrle’s class on the governance of digital technologies and continued exploring this topic in my research before focusing on it through my PAE. Given the omnipresent discourse on Artificial Intelligence (AI) governance, tradeoffs between regulation and innovation, and the United States’ stance of not regulating—out of fear of slowing down its AI industry—it was an important topic for me.

I was trying to identify adaptive regulatory tools that could be suitable for regulating AI and to update the regulation over time to match the technology’s rapid evolution.

My three key recommendations were to:

I drew on the analytical toolkit we acquired from the MPP core curriculum, as well as the economic fundamentals driving policy and business, to better understand the point of view of both policymakers regulating AI and of my private sector client developing the technology.

From electives at both HKS and other Harvard schools, I drew on in-depth and complementary viewpoints on AI, ranging from philosophy, to tech regulation, to the interplay between information, incentives, and institutions in other complex policy spheres such as climate change.

From my research and teaching positions at HKS, Harvard Law School, and Harvard College, I learned how to synthesize and convey complex information in an accessible manner and to never shy away from asking hard questions.

I was able to apply many of the learnings from my experience at HKS—both in and out of the classroom. I embodied the client’s perspective by understanding how policy affects them and trying to identify win-win regulatory outcomes. Lastly, I built a robust relationship with policy practitioners whom I admire and delivered value for their organization through my PAE.

Photos by Natalie Montaner; inline photos courtesy of Rita Graham and Lucas Schmuck