Super-optimizing analysis refers to methods for dealing with public policy problems by finding an alternative that can enable conservatives. liberals. and other major viewpoints to all come out ahead of their best initial expectation simultaneously. Arriving at such solutions involves processing a set of go to be achieved. Alternatives available for achieving them. and relations between goals and alternatives in order to determine various conservative. liberal. or other total scores for each alternative. This paper illustrates SOS analysis with an example from Africa. Asia. East Europe. and Latin America. The Africa example relates to food pricing. The conservative position endorses high prices that benefit rural interests. The liberal position endorses low prices at benefit urban interests. A compromise is likely to be adopted somewhere between those extremes. The S0S of a price supplement involves farmers receiving 101% of the price they are asking. Urban workers and others pay only 79% which is less than the approximately 80% that they are willing and able to pay. The difference of 22% is mace up by food stamps given to the urban workers in return for agreeing to be in programs that upgrade their skills and productivity. The food stamps are used to pay for staple products (like rice or wheat) along with cash. Farmers can then redeem the stamps for cash. provided that they also agree to be in programs that increase their productivity. By increasing the productivity of farmers and workers. secondary effects occur of improving farming methods, increasing exports, increasing the importing of new technologies, and increasing the GNP. The Asia example relates to the China population problem. The conservative position is a strict one-child policy to promote small families. The liberal position is flexibility on family size to promote reproductive freedom. The compromise is one child with exceptions allowed. The SOS alternative is to reduce the causes of excess children in rural areas. Those causes include (1) the need for having chi1dren to care for their elderly parent, which could be better handled through social security and/or jobs for the elderly; (2) the need for extra children wallow for child mortality, which could be better handled through better child health care; (3) the need for male children in view of their greater value, which could be better handled through providing more opportunitites for females: and (4) the lack of concern for the cost of sending children to college, which could be better handled through a more vigorous program of recruiting rural children to go to college. The East Europe example is the problem of public versus private ownership and operation. The socialistic alternative is government ownership and operation, with special concern for equity. The capitalistic alternative is private ownership and operation, with special concern for productivity. The compromise is socialistic and capitalistic enterprises in a mixed economy. The SOS alternative might be 100% ownership combined with 100% private operation through contracting out. The contracting out can have contract provisions specifying the need for an equitable spread of benefits and costs. workplace quality, environmental protection, and consumer protection. The contracting out does not have to be to only one private entrepreneur. The two most qualified lowest bidders can both receive contracts for different geographical areas, sectors of the industry, or other aspects of the contract in order to encourage competition. The SOS alternative of contracting out to private operation can even apply to public schools, post offices, and municipal transportation. In former socialistic countries, it can apply also to contracting out government-owned factories and land. The Latin America example is presidential versus parliamentary government. The conservative alternative advocates presidential government for stability and continuity. The liberal alternative advocates parliamentary government for responsiveness to public opinion. The neutral compromise may provide for presidential government with short terms and no provision for reelection, or parliamentary government with special majorities like a 60% vote to change governments between regular elections. The SOS alternative might seek to promote continuity and responsiveness simultaneously. The first part of the SOS alternative might be to provide a constitutional right to continuous economic growth, backed by appropriate governmental institutions like a Ministry of International Trade and Industry. This alternative is especially related to the goal of upward continuity, rather than stagnating stability. The second part of the SOS alternative is to provide a constitutional right to upgraded skills. Backed by appropriate governmental institutions, including a separate government agence to administer skillsupgrading programs. This slternative is especially related to the goal of responsiveness to the needs of adult voters to be more valuable in the economy, rather than the responsiveness that is associated with rapid turnover of government personnel. These four examples illustrate four different approaches to arriving at superoptimum solutions. The first involves a third party benefactor like the government which provides a wellplaced subsidy with strings attached to both of the conflicting sides. The second involves getting at the causes of the conflict between conservatives and liberals. The third approach involves combining both the conservative and liberal alternatives in recognition that they may not be as mutually exclusive as originally thought. The fourth approach involves raising or redefining the goals so that both conservatives and liberals should be pleased if the newly defined goals are achieved. These methods of public policy analysis might especially apply to developing nations where new institutional arrangements and policies are being experimented with to the possible mutual benefit of conflicting sides to policy controversies.