Policy analysis and how one might think about analysis and decision-making from a different angle/perspective

Full Answer Section

    Asking Different Questions: Traditional policy analysis might focus on:

• Crime rates, property values, and attracting businesses.

Stone and Forester would suggest a broader range of questions, including:

• Who lives and works downtown?What are their needs and concerns?
• What is the history of the downtown area?What cultural significance does it hold for the community?
• What are the different perspectives on the current state of the downtown?How do residents, business owners, and visitors perceive the area?
• What are the potential unintended consequences of renovation?Could it displace residents or businesses? Would it gentrify the area and lose its character?

Benefits of this Approach:

• More inclusive decision-making:By considering diverse perspectives, the renovation plan can better serve the whole community.
• Identification of potential pitfalls:Anticipating unintended consequences helps mitigate negative impacts.
• Sustainable solutions:Understanding the historical and cultural context can lead to more sustainable and character-preserving solutions.

Examples of Arguments:

• Arguments for renovation:Improved safety, attracting new businesses, and increasing property values.
• Counter-arguments:Displacement of current residents, loss of cultural identity, and potential for gentrification.

Finding Common Ground: Stone and Forester advocate for a deliberative approach, where different perspectives are discussed respectfully to find common ground. This can lead to solutions that benefit all stakeholders. Conclusion: By incorporating Stone and Forester's approach, the analysis of the downtown renovation becomes more nuanced and inclusive. It encourages considering diverse perspectives, potential consequences, and finding common ground for a sustainable and equitable outcome.    

Sample Answer

     

Renovating a Downtown: A Stone and Forester Approach

Stone and Forester's approach to policy analysis, emphasizing argument and discourse, offers a richer perspective when analyzing the renovation of a "seedy" downtown. Here's how:

Challenging the Language:

• Why not "seedy"? This term is subjective and judgmental. It doesn't capture the complexities of the area. Stone and Forester would encourage using neutral language to avoid pre-determined biases.