Policy Formulation 2: thinking and talking
Policy Formulation 2: thinking and talking
Today’s agenda
Simulation overview
Policy analysis Analysis vs
Advocacy Talking:
stakeholder engagement
Tutorial on Problem Definition Rod Charlesworth
www.rodcharlesworth.com
3
Simulation –Process meet in groups required readings consult "real world" versions of their groups Tutorials Brief due November 14 select a delegate (and an alternate) to speak and
negotiate for them during the consultation. evening, mock multistakeholder consultation
attendance required for all participants : EBM GBR Monday November 18 Area-based tenure Tuesday, November 19
Policy Cycle Model
4
Agenda-Setting
Policy Formulation
Decisionmaking
Policy Implementation
Monitoring and Evaluation
Policy Formulation
THINKING
Policy analysis of alternatives
TALKING
Consultation with stakeholders
5
Essential Steps
Define problem Criteria for
evaluation Identify multiple
alternatives Outcomes/
consequences of alternatives
Compare/tradeoff Recommended
decision6
Today’s agenda
Policy formulation Mid term timber
supply case study Policy analysis Analysis vs
Advocacy Talking:
stakeholder engagement
Analysis vs. Advocacy
ANALYSIS
Neutral stance on Solutions, Problem framing
Careful, balanced use of evidence
ADVOCACY
Position based on group’s interest
Strategic framing More selective use of
evidence
Does effective analysis ignore other side’s argument, or engage it?The best argument explicitly addresses an opponents strongest claim and discredits it with evidence and reason
Today’s agenda
Policy formulation WFP case study Policy analysis Analysis vs
Advocacy Talking:
stakeholder engagement
Policy formulation: Talking – consultation alternatives
Private consultations
Notice and comment
Web consultation Public hearings Establish a
roundtable Opinion polls Referendum
Collaborative planning in GBRSmith et al; Price et al
Collaborative planning: Engage stakeholders Interest-based Consensus oriented
Two-tiered planning: All stakeholders in consensus LRMP
process Gov and FN only: “government to
government” G2G
FRST 415 12
Status of Land Use Planning
Forest Practices Board, “Provincial Land Use Planning: Which Way from Here?” November 2008
26 CORE and LRMP plans completed, covers 85% of the provincial land base (together called SLUPs) 1 in G2G negotiations (Lillooet) 8 areas without plans
November 10, 2009 FRST 415 13
Forest Practices Board
November 10, 2009 FRST 415 14
Forest Practices Board
FRST 415 15
BC Liberals “New Direction” 1
ILMB Report: A New Direction for Strategic Land Use Planning in BC (December 06)
full implementation April 2008 Brings end to provincial scale, comprehensive
strategic land use planning All ongoing SLUPs to be completed by March
2010 new planning will be undertaken only where
business drivers demonstrate a need New policy and legislative changes FNs’ interests and values major environmental changes such as Mountain
Pine Beetle infestation
FRST 415 16
BC Liberals “New Direction” 2
Process for new planning Led by government(s) FNs’ involvement on a G2G basis where interested Interest groups and stakeholders serve in a meaningful
advisory capacity Clearly defined process, timelines and products
The end of multistakeholderism?
Policy formulation: Talking – criteria for selection?
Participatory Transparent Well-informed Coordinated to
avoid jurisdictional conflicts and overlaps
Timely
17
There are tradeoffs between these values. Fostering legitimacy while being timely requires adequately resourced processes
Updated themes
The policy cycle consists of 5 stages: agenda setting, formulation, decision-making, implementation, and monitoring/evaluation
Issues get on the government agenda through a confluence of problem and politics streams
Policy formulation involves both “thinking” (analysis) and “talking” (consultation with stakeholders)
The best argument explicitly addresses an opponents’ strongest claim and addresses it with evidence and reason
Sustainable Forest Policy 18
Next week:
Decision-making and policy design Forest practices
www.rodcharlesworth.com