{WHEN WRITING POLICY PAPER
ANALYSIS, YOU HAVE TO ALWAYS BE MINDFUL OF “THE PURPOSE” –
IMPACTING/ INFLUENCING PUBLIC POLICY AT SOME LEVEL [[See Discussion Paper And
Policy Paper Synopsis – Section on “The Prospective Outcome”]]. THIS
PURPOSE DICTATES THE FOCUS LEVEL AND DIRECTION OF YOUR WORK =====> THE
TENETS ARE: SPECIFICITY-DRIVEN, DETAIL-ORIENTED AND PRACTICABLE.
WHAT DOES
THIS LOOK LIKE?
1) INTRODUCTIONS: THE “SPIT IT OUT” RULE =è SPECIFY AND/OR ITEMIZE THE PRECISE
CRYSTALIZED CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THE READER WILL FIND IN THE
PAPER.
[[EX: DO NOT USE THE
INTRODUCTION AS A PROMISSORY NOTE: ... THIS PAPER WILL EXPLAIN THE REASONS...
====> INSTEAD, THE INTRODUCTION EXPLAINS THE ISSUE AND REASONS AND
SPECIFIES THE “WHY” OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS]]
2) CONCLUSIONS: THE “SELL YOUR SONG” RULE =è BY THE TIME THE READER GETS TO YOUR
RECOMMENDATIONS THEY HAVE TO NOT ONLY BE SOLD ON THEIR LOGIC BUT ALSO
THEIR ADVANTAGES. THEY HAVE TO SAY TO THEMSELVES “OF COURSE, LET’S DO
THIS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE!”
[[EX: POLICY PAPER
ON ECONOMIC APARTHEID IN ONTARIO =è HOW DO I GET THE GOV’T
TO ALLOCATE FUNDS FOR THE “LORNE FOSTER INSTITUTE FOR THE ELIMINATION OF
RACIALIZATION AND DISCRIMINATION IN TORONTO?” {THE ANSWER IS … THIS IS ONLY
REMOTELY POSSIBLE IF MY WORK IS COMPELLINGLY FRAME IN A WAY THAT SHOWS THE
ADVANTAGE FOR THE DECISION-MAKERS AND/OR THE WHOLE NOT JUST A PARTICULAR
INTEREST =è IN OTHER WORDS, I
(LORNE FOSTER) WOULD HAVE TO CONVINCE THE READER (DECISION MAKER) THAT THIS
ALLOCATION OF FUNDS IS CONSISTENT WITH THEIR ''DEMOCRATIC' VALUES AND
PRINCIPLES, AND IS IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST, AND IS A PUBLIC POLICY PRIORITY OVER
AND ABOVE OTHER FISCAL INTERESTS}]].
{SOCIOLOGICAL ASIDE: CAN YOU SEE HOW THE
PURPOSE OF POLICY PAPER ANALYSIS FRAMES THE FOCUS AND DIRECTION OF THE
ANALYSIS?}
3) FIELDNOTES: THE “NGO
USAGE” OR FORMAL FIELDNOTE RULE ====> FRAME YOUR NGO CONTACTS AND
CORRESPONDENCE AND INTERVIEWS AS “FIELDNOTES” AS PROFESSIONAL
AUTHORITIES, NOT UNLIKE SOCIOLOGY RESEARCH TEXTBOOKS
{EX: NOT IN A
CASUAL FORM “... I TALKED TO JUDY WHO WORKS AS AN ASSISTANT
DIRECTOR AT SAID NGO, AND SHE THINKS...” RATHER THE PROPER FORM
“ACCORDING TO SAID NGO, OR ACCORDING TO SO-AND-SO, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR AT
SAID NGO; OR THE SAID NGO ARGUES THAT; OR THE NGO'S OFFICIAL POSITION ON OR
ABOUT POLICY, GOV'T REGS, ETC.,===> AND THE ALIKE…
4) RESEARCH LITERATURE: THE
LITERATURE REVIEW “ONE-SOURCE” RULE ======> YOU CANNOT USE ONE AUTHOR OR
ARTICLE TO “EXPLAIN” THE HISTORY/BACKGROUND ETC., OF A PUBLIC ISSUE. THIS IS
NOT CALLED “THE BEST RESEARCH” THIS IS CALLED “A LACK OR PAUCITY OF RESEARCH” –
{ON THE VERY RARE OCASSION} YOU ARE CONFRONTED WITH A SITUATION WHERE ONE
AUTHOR/ARTICLE IS IDENTIFIED WITH A PARTICULAR ISSUE YOU ADDRESS, THE
AUTHOR/ARTICLE IS NOT A QUOTABLE RESOURCE, BUT RATHER, A SUBJECT OF CRITICAL
ANALYSIS}.
{EX: THE POLICY PAPER IS THE
GATHERING PLACE FOR THE BEST RESEARCH LITERATURE AVAILABLE ON A
PARTICULAR PUBLIC ISSUE OR SOCIAL PROBLEM. [BUT] WHENEVER A PAPER STRINGS
QUOTES OR IDEAS OF A PARTICULAR ARTICLE, BOOK OR AUTHOR TOGETHER [BELIEVED TO
BE THE BEST INFORMATION AVAILABLE], THE PAPER IS NOT ANALYZING IT IS
PLAGARIZING; IT IS DOING REGURGITATION NOT SOCIOLOGY. THAT MUCH ATTENTION TO
ONE SOURCE OR SOURCES DEMANDS ANALYTIC TENSION AND CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF THE
SOUND-NESS OF THE ARGUMENTS.}
5) RESEARCH DESIGN AND TOPIC SELECTION:
THE “SAY- ALOT-ABOUT-A-LITTLE” RULE ====> COMPREHENSIVE AS
OPPOSED TO ABSTRACT KNOWLEDGE IS BUILT UP IN SOCIAL SCIENCES BY NARROWING
THE SCOPE TOPIC ANALYSIS. IN A WORD, IN SOCIOLOGY IT IS BETTER TO SAY A LOT
ABOUT A LITTLE, THAN A LITTLE ABOUT A LOT – A LOT ABOUT LITTLE TOPICS RATHER
THAN LITTLE ABOUT BIG TOPICS.
[[EX: LET’S BREAK THE RULE
DOWN TO COMPONENT PARTS:
SUPPOSE YOU WANT TO TALK
ABOUT THE PROBLEM OF ABORIGINAL OVER-REPRESENTATION IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE
SYSTEM?
{A}
THE BIG TOPIC IS:
ABORIGINAL JUSTICE OR WHAT HAS BEEN CALLED “POST-COLONIAL JUSTICE” FOR
ABORIGINAL PEOPLE
{B}
THE
SMALL ISSUES : ALLOWING YOU TO PENETRATE BENEATH THE SURFACE OF
THE BIG ISSUE COULD BE: ABORIGINAL POLICING [IN 1992, THE FEDERAL GOV'T
ANNOUNCED A POLICY OF TRANSFERRING ALL ON-RESERVE POLICING TO BANDS BY YEAR
2000]; INDIGENIZATION [ATTEMPTS TO MAKE CURRENT SYSTEM LESS ALIENATING
WITHOUT CHANGING STRUCTURE AND CONTROL]; INDIAN ACT PROVISIONS FOR
ON-RESERVE JUSTICE INITIATIVES [ON-RESERVE COURTS, ETC]; DIVERSION
PROGRAMS AND RELATED ACTIVITIES [ALTERNATIVES TO JUSTICE SYSTEM PROCESS,
SUCH AS, PRE- OR POST-CHARGE PRE-PLEAD; ABORIGINAL LEGAL SERVICES OF TORONTO,
ETC]; ELDERS PANELS AND SENTENCING CIRCLES [REPLACING “FLY-IN SUITCASE”
PUNITIVE JUSTICE].;YOUTH OFFENDER INITIATIVES. [ALTERNATIVES TO
INCARERATION FACILITIES AND PROGRAMS]; ABORIGINAL INITIATIVES IN PRISON
{C}
THE EFFICACY OR NON-EFFICACY OF ANY OF
THESE ISSUE CAN TELL US ABOUT, AND DIRECT US TOWARD, POSITIVE INITITATIVES THAT
IMPACT THE BIG TOPIC, ON THE BASIS OF “WHAT REALLY WORKS” OR BEST PRACTICES]]
5) RECOMMENDATIONS: THE
“CRAFTING OF RECOMMENDATIONS TO REALITIES AND NOT ABSTRACT GENERALITIES” RULE =====>
IF YOU ARE AIMED AT “BEST PRACTICES” (AT THE INDIVIDUAL, COLLECTIVE,
INSTITUTIONAL, AND/OR POLICY LEVELS) FOR INITITATING POSITIVE SOCIAL CHANGE YOU
HAVE TO LOOK TO THE “DO-ABLE.”
{EX: IF YOU WANT TO BE A
MILLIONAIRE AND YOU ONLY HAVE TEN DOLLARS WHAT PRACTICAL FIRST STEPS COULD YOU
INITIATE. WOULD YOU LOBBY THE PROVINCIAL OR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR FUNDING? OR
WOULD YOU OPEN UP A BANK ACCOUNT WITH $5 AND USE THE OTHER FIVE TO BUY A USED
BOOK ON INVESTING?}
UPSHOT: REMEMBER THAT IF THERE WAS
NOT RESISTANCE TO CHANGING THE CONDITIONS THAT CAUSE A SOCIAL PROBLEM, THERE
WOULD NOT BE A SOCIAL PROBLEM IN THE FIRST PLACE.
THEREFORE, IN POLICY ANALYSIS,
THE OVERRIDING QUESTION IS: WHAT CAN WE DO TO “GET THE BALL ROLLING” TOWARD
PROGRESSIVE SOCIAL CHANGE?
IN POLICY ANALYSIS, THE
“DO-ABLE” MAY ONLY BE AN INCREMENTAL MOVE, OR AN INITATIVE DESIGNED TO PAVE THE
WAY FOR POSITIVE CHANGE IN THE REDRESS OF SOCIAL PROBLEMS, BUT IT IS ALWAYS
“THE BEST PRACTICE” AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME.