|
The purpose of the policy paper is to provide a comprehensive and
persuasive argument justifying the policy recommendations presented
in the paper, and therefore to act as a decision-making tool and
a call to action for the target audience.
In summarising the ideals and values of the field of policy science,
the applied nature of the discipline is central. There are two main
factors which differentiate policy science from traditional academia
as described below.
Designing solutions for real-world problems
Unlike traditional academia which focuses on building knowledge
within a group of peers, policy science must address real-world
problems, and therefore provide recommendations and a framework
for their application within the targeted society. For example,
it is not enough to analyse the causes and patterns of unemployment
in a particular society in order to contribute to its understanding
as a social phenomenon; a policy study must apply this knowledge
to the real situation on the ground by understanding the causes,
showing that it is a problem within the community in question and
suggesting a course of action to address the problem. Hence, the
problem-solution relationship must be seen at the heart of the discipline,
which means that any analysis undertaken must be driven and targeted
on the search for a practical, implementable and comprehensive outcome.
Presenting value-driven arguments
The search for such a practical outcome not only requires a
well-elaborated and comprehensive analysis of all available data,
but as the issues under consideration are of a societal nature,
the policy researcher or analyst will also have to make some value-driven
judgements about the outcome that would best address the specific
problem. Hence, proposing specific solutions in the highly politicised
environment of public policy and to such a broad audience, means
that central to the work of the policy specialist is not just the
cold empiricism of data analysis, but probably even more important
is the ability to convince your audience of the suitability of your
policy recommendations. In other words, the presentation of the
outcomes of your data analysis will probably not be enough to make
an impact in the policy debate on a particular issue, but through
the use of this data as evidence in a comprehensive and coherent
argument of your position, you will give your work the best possible
chance of having this impact. Majone (1989) sums up this idea excellently:
'Like surgery, the making of policy and the giving of policy
advice are exercises of skills, and we do not judge skilful performance
by the amount of information stored in the head of the performer
or by the amount of formal planning. Rather, we judge it by criteria
like good timing and attention to details; by the capacity to recognise
the limits of the possible, to use limitations creatively, and to
learn from one's mistakes; by the ability not to show what should
be done, but to persuade people to do what they know should be done'
(p. 20).
Planning checklist
In preparing to write your policy paper, consider the policymaking
process that you are involved in and research that you (and your
colleagues) have done to answer the following questions:
- Which stage(s) in the policymaking process are you trying to
influence through your policy paper?
- Which stakeholders have been/are involved at each stage of the
policymaking process?
- Have you identified a clear problem to address? Can you summarise
it in two sentences?
- Do you have sufficiently comprehensive evidence to support your
claim that a problem exists?
- Have you outlined and evaluated the possible policy options
that could solve this problem? What evaluation criteria did you
use?
- Have you decided on a preferred alternative?
- Do you have sufficient evidence to effectively argue for your
chosen policy alternative over the others?
Eyin and Quinn (2002) also include checklists for the following:
policy paper outline; title; table of contents; executive summary;
introduction; problem description; argumentation; policy options;
conclusions and recommendations.
Source
Further resources
- Majone, Giandomenico (1989) Evidence, argument and persuasion
in the policy process, New Haven: Yale University Press.
- Musso, Juliet, Robert Biller and Robert Myrtle (2000) 'Tradecraft:
Professional Writing as Problem Solving', Journal of Policy
Analysis and Management 19(4):635-646.
- 'Guidelines for Writing a Policy Brief' by Professor Tsai, see:
http://jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu/~ktsai/policybrief.html
- 'Writing criteria for policy memos' (adapted from Steve Frank),
see: www.pubpol.duke.edu/centers/dewitt/course/memoguide.html
- 'Internal Procedures and Effective Brief Writing in the fifth
Circuit' by Lori Ploeger, see: www.cooley.com/news/inthenews.aspx?ID=000038618120
- Bardach, Eugene (1996) The Eight-Step Path of Policy Analysis:
A Handbook for Practice. Berkeley Academic Press.
View this as pdf
(
65kb)
Back to Successful Communications tools
|
