Policy analysis | Public Analysis | Jacksonville State University

Public Analysis

To complete this assignment follow the steps: 

Step 1: Reading and Preparation

• Read chapter 2 of Clemons and McBeth (2020) titled the Rational Public Policy Method, and Kelly (1986).
• Carefully read all about the case “Mini- Case: Democracy or Science? Climate Change and GMOs”. You can find this case on pages 64-65 of the textbook.
• Read at least two of the additional readings to be used in the assignment. You can find them on the Activities and Resources page of this week’s module in the Other Resources section.

Step 2: Writing and Submitting Part 1 of the Assignment

This part is the original post you are required to submit on Canvas. This part of the assignment should be between 500-700 words.  Answer the following questions:

1. What does this case say about the advantages, and limitations of a purely rational approach to policymaking? Does money or political influence matter more than rationality?
2. Do you think that democracy should be used in this case by the nonprofit? If so, what plan do you suggest?
3. Is Chris being inconsistent in terms of the views of science and democracy? Explain
4. What is YOUR view on the role of science and democracy in analyzing (and making) public policy? Are they mutually exclusive or compatible or…?

Your answers to questions 1-3 should be supported by the textbook or your choice of the additional readings. At least 2 of the additional readings should be cited in your assignment. The last question asks for your view, feel free to provide an argument based on your opinion and/or professional experience.

Readings

Required Readings:

• Clemons & McBeth. (2020) Chapter 2: The Rational Public Policy Model
• Kelly, Rita Mae. (1986). Trends in the logic of policy inquiry: A comparison of approaches and a commentary. Policy Studies Review, Vol. 5. No. 3, pp. 520-528/ Link Here (Links to an external site.)

Optional Reading:

Other Resources

The following sources should be used in WICS 4. See assignment instructions for more information on how to use these sources.

• Ahl, J. (2019). People strongly against GMOs had shakier understanding of food science, study finds. (Links to an external site.)
• Engber, D. (2016). Label thumpers: The GMO movement is about faith, not facts. (Links to an external site.)
• Holly, R. (2015). GMOs, Monsanto and the fight against climate change. (Links to an external site.)
• Lipton, E. (2015). Food industry enlisted academics in GMO lobbying war, emails say. (Links to an external site.)
• Trotter, G. (2016). GMO labeling debate puts food industry on defensive (Links to an external site.).
• Weise, E. (2016). Academies of science finds GMOs not harmful to human health (Links to an external site.).
• EuropaBio.(2018). GMOinfo.EU brings you factual information on GMOs in your language (Links to an external site.).