Social Policy and Decision Making - Term Paper Example

Institution : xxxxxxxxxxx Title : xxxxxxxxxxx Tutor : xxxxxxxxxxx Course : xxxxxxxxxxx @2015 Introduction WPR, an abbreviation of "What’s the problem represented to be" is basically a policy analysis approach whose main goal is to ensure that policies address the real social issues. It is a new development that proposes the abandonment of reactionary measures for proactive and sustainable alternatives. In essence, it seeks to address the real underlying issues not just the symptoms. The approach aims at finding the appropriate definition of social issues rather than summarizing them in the form of problems. Steps and goals of WPR analysis WPR analysis is a systematic process. The first step is to state explicitly what problem a given policy seeks to address. This is in essence the reason for the policy formulation process. The next step is to provide the fundamental arguments or assumptions surrounding the depiction of the problem. This stage will tackle the theories seeking to explain the identifying problem. The third stage is to describe how has this definition of the problem been arrived at (Bacchi 2009 pg20). This stage will involve drawing upon the theories provided a sequential summarizing of the problem definition. With the completion of this task, the next task is to state what this problem definition has failed to capture and if there exist alternative ways to define the problems. The fifth stage is to list the results or outcomes of this problem definition. The results will provide insights on what the policy will be seeking to address. Finally, there is the provision of arguments to support and defend the definition of the problem. This will extend to tackle the possible ways of challenging, reorganizing, and replacing the definition. Constraints to ‘rational’ policy making processes According to WPR, problems are not always what they seem to be but rather result from the society's creations. It faults efforts by governance systems in responding to problems. It provides the argument that the systems are responsible for the manifestations of the problems and cannot provide sustainable solutions. WPR does not refute the existence of the issues. Rather, it identifies fallacies in the description of such issues as problems. Doing so only results in diverting focus from the real issues affecting the society. As a result, all the efforts will go towards tackling envisaged problems as opposed to addressing the real issues. WPR identifies weaknesses in problem-solving models in the formulation and study of policies. It opposes the continued reliance on evidence as the basis of policy studies. Evidences are the symptoms of the underlying issues that require addressing (Carson and kerr 2014 pg50). Therefore, it amounts to top dressing when policies only seek to tackle the symptoms and not the causative factors. According to WPR, relying on evidence makes room for assumptions to dictate the entire process. This approach relies on the perception that policies are unbiased and procedural, which is not always the case. It extends to note that this approach depoliticizes the policies, which is regressive. WPR proposes shift from tackling problems to investigating and addressing underlying issues The questions provided in the WPR analysis assist in problem definition process, which is one of the major tasks of policy formulation. The approach recommends treating ideas in a given policy as problem definitions. This should provide a platform upon which to analyze their sources, intent, and outcomes. The reason why this is necessary is because policy makers are part of the wider society, which often contains numerous assumptions. As individuals, the policy makers could rely on the assumptions acquired from the society in the process of defining problems. Therefore, WPR allows policy makers to identify and analyze such assumptions to avoid impacting the process negatively. The unfortunate fact with the rational policy making processes is that the inefficiencies in problem definition traverses multiple stages of rational policy making processes (Fawcett, Goodwin, Meagher, & Phillips 2010 pg120). After successful implementation of the policy, the subsequent research will be relying on field evidence. The research will rely on questionnaires as the procedures for evaluating policy effectiveness. As a result, the research will not conclusive as it suffers from the same weakness as the problem definition process in rational policy formulation. On the other hand, WPR challenges researchers to dig deeper to find out whether the policy addressed the real issues. Furthermore, the presence of research evidence complicates matters in terms of seeking appropriate problem definition. This is especially the case when the research data provides evidences approving the effectiveness of the implemented policy. What is more, future policies will rely upon this flawed research processes in seeking to address societal issues. What WPR actually proposes is to reconsider the definition of issues. This is because the definition, to a large extent, charters the way forward during the policy implementation. Proposed solutions are just a manifestation of what the involved parties believe need to be addressed. From this, it is also clear what they perceive to be the problem. Therefore, not even the best implementation can achieve sustainable results if the process is wrong from the onset (Phillips, R. (2006) pg60). It is impossible to provide sufficient remedies without having the proper understanding of issues in question. WPR approach adopts a critical perspective to get the process right from the beginning. Without this, the entire process is flawed. An example is how policy makers view the issue of rampant crime. Most perceive it as a security problem and would propose drastic measures to curb crime through increased police patrols, arrests, and lengthy incarceration. On the other hand, rational experts would propose policies to reduce unemployment or business incubation to support entrepreneurs. However, this is often perceived as a security problem in most societies. What this means is that the criminals will end up in various jails. In the short term, there will be reduced cases of crime due to the withdrawal of offenders from the society. However, the effects of incarcerations are real. There will be an increased numbers of families with their main breadwinners locked away in correctional institutions. The dependants, especially teenagers, will have no means to cater to their needs. In the end, they might resort to engaging in crime as a means to meet basic needs. They too have higher chances of ending up in prison. With such policies, the cycle of crime and violence will continue as opposed to where the real issue is addressed, which is to provide the vulnerable with opportunities to earn livelihoods. The magnitude of this situation is not one to be ignored. Describing issues as problems extends to social governance. As a result, the governance systems in most societies are those that seek to correct perceived problems rather than rely on effective policies. Policies ought to adopt a proactive approach to issues. However, those that are in place tend to be reactive such that they stand in the way of understanding and finding remedies to the real issues. It is safe to say that such policies are actually societal problems in their own right. Factors influencing formal policy making processes As already mentioned, perception of what defines a problem is the major factor influencing policy formulation processes. However, there remain numerous factors not captured by formal processes. Unfortunately, such processes do not acknowledge their presence. This predisposes the processes to negative impacts from the operations of these factors (Green & Eileen 2008 pg390). The following are additional factors that influence the policy formulation process. There is the economic factor which revolves around the availability of resources and government’s priority in budgetary allocations. It tethers the policy makers’ efforts to devise proposals whose execution do not require more than the available amount of resources. This is related to political factors which includes government’s willingness or the lack of it to address existing issues. Institutional capacities also determine the effectiveness of formulating, executing, and addressing the outcomes of a given policy. Policy makers can only come up with proposals whose execution a given institution’s infrastructure can sustain. Changes in social factors such as immigration, urbanization and demographics also determine the types of new policies to address the new developments. Knowledge and technological advancement also have profound impacts on the process. They not only trigger debates to increase awareness on social issues but also provide new and better alternative solutions (Green & Eileen 2008 pg390). In addition, there are legal factors which determine the procedures, management, and individual mandates in the policy formulation process. In some cases, unexpected events such as natural disasters, wars, and unpredicted market and economic changes will require fast responses as opposed to the legal procedures. Finally, there are external factors such international treaties or development which might require altering the process to be in conformance with new developments. WPR and critical theoretical approach to Social Work practice The WPR analysis recommends critical social work practice. This is because the discipline relies on theoretical definition of society’s problem which, as mentioned before, could be flawed. Relying on such theories without proper scrutiny could only aggravate the real issues. But with a critical approach, social work practitioners are able to identify the factors that need to be addressed. Unlike most approaches, this one specifically proposes addressing cases of social injustices (Walter, Taylor, and Habibis 2011 pg15). Without this, the practitioners would most likely be tackling problems of few individuals that result from the injustices. From this it is clear that the particular injustices will not cease even with successful addressing of the problems to the few. Furthermore, there are still high chances of the problems recurring since their real causes continue to exist. But with critical theoretical approach, social workers can identify fallacies in problem definition. They can excavate the real issue that continues to fuel the perceived problem in the society. What is more, critical theoretical approach will provide the platform upon which to address social injustices, which is the true calling of the profession. Therefore, this approach will enable the practitioners to not only uplift an oppressed group but also do away with the causes of problems and their impacts on third parties. Therefore, a critical approach to this discipline provides holistic solutions to real issues in a society. Conclusion WPR provides an alternative approach in the study of policies. With the six questions, policy makers now have the opportunity to come up with better proposals to address societal issues. The application of this approach is the only sure way to provide social justice rather than short-lived solutions for problems, which is a characteristic of rational policies. With WPR, policy makers can also interrogate the entire process. Its thoroughness helps to incorporate external factors influencing policy formulation process, which rational policies ignore. Some might argue that it turns a blind eye to third party victims. However, this is not entirely true. This approach seeks to provide lasting solutions. By addressing the root of issues, it simultaneously provides justice to the oppressed as well as shields third parties from falling victim to resultant negative effects. As a result, it is a win-win situation for the society. Bibliography Bacchi, C., 2009, Analyzing Policy: what’s the problem represented (WPR) to be? Pearson Academic Press: Sydney. Carson, E. & kerr, L.,2014, Australia Social policy and the human services, Cambridge Press: Port Melbourne (chapter 3 ‘The history of Australian social policy’, pp. 45-67. Fawcett, B., Goodwin, S., Meagher, G., & Phillips, R., 2010, Social policy for social change, Palgrave: south Melbourne (chapter 7 ‘People who implement social policy?’ pp.118-142 Phillips, R., 2006, ‘The Role of Nonprofit Advocacy Organizations in Australian Democracy and Policy Governance’, Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 17(1), 57–63. Sue Green & Eileen Baldry, 2008, ‘Building indigenous Australian Social work’, Australian Social Work, 61 (4): 389-402 Walter, M., Taylor, S. & Habibis, D., 2011, ‘How white is social work in Australia’, Australian Social Work, 64 (1): 6-19 Read More