Increasing the Social Value of the Canadian Salmon FisheryThis paper discusses the merits of a policy analysis report submitted to a public official based on generally-accepted guidelines for the conduct of analysis and production of such a document.

IntroductionThe subject of this paper is a report entitled Increasing the Social Value of the Canadian Salmon Fishery, a policy analysis commissioned by the Minister of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans of Canada. The analysis was conducted in the context of the assumption of a new Minister into office and the perceived need for an assessment of the prevailing federal policy governing the management of the commercial small-boat salmon fishery in British Columbia, as articulated by the public official. Its goal is to assess the current policy, identify alternative policies and compare them against the status quo, and, if deemed appropriate, recommend policy initiatives.By the very nature of the mandate given to the analyst, the analysts client, the circumstances surrounding the need for and the goal of the analysis, and the office for which the analyst works for, the analysis and, consequently, the report produced by the conduct of the analysis seems to have taken the normative approach to policy analysis (Stewart, Hedge, & Lester, 2008).

Review of the ReportThe analysis began with a profile of the salmon fishery industry in British Columbia. It discussed the general history of the industry and its economics in the northwest coast, reviewing literature on the subject as far back as before the arrival of Europeans in the area. The discussion included the evolution of policies regulating the salmon fishery industry in British Columbia and an evaluation of these policies, as well as efforts at addressing identified policy issues that did not push through (The Pearse Commission).Starting with a review of the history of the industry and the policy that regulates it is an integral part of the process of analysis, especially in the case of this particular analyst, who was described in the case as someone who was new to the Ministry and therefore would have limited first-hand knowledge of the industry being assessed. Sir Winston Churchill eloquently underscores the significance of this exercise when he said that the farther backward you can look, the farther forward you can see (Stewart, Hedge, & Lester, 2008). Looking back at the history of the industry and how various regulatory policies governing it have evolved over the years provided the analyst with key information towards understanding how the industrys current situation came to be, how previous and current policies have influenced the industrys evolution and contributed to its challenges, and what policy changes may be necessary in order to address these challenges.The analysis then proceeded with a discussion on the current and expected state of the industry, including inherent problems in the current policy that led to the crafting of policy goals. The analysis identified four policy goals: economically efficient use of the fishery, preservation of the fishery, equitable distribution, and political feasibility. For each policy goal formulated, key performance indicators were identified. Incidentally, efficiency is the most common criterion in choosing the best among several alternatives (Gupta, 2011).In keeping with generally-accepted procedures for policy analysis, the report proceeds with a discussion of possible alternatives that may be implemented in order to meet the formulated policy goals (Gupta, 2011). Three alternatives were presented: harvesting royalties and license auction, river-specific exclusive ownership with cooperative ownership on the Fraser, and individual transferable quotas.The three possible alternatives were compared against the current policy in terms of the formulated policy goals. Impact categories for each policy goal were identified and aided in the comparison and assessment of each alternative. For readability and easier understanding, a presentation of the comparison in matrix form followed the detailed discussion. The analyst proceeded with ranking the three alternatives, recommending river-specific exclusive ownership with cooperative ownership on the Fraser as the most desirable alternative. The analyst qualified, though, that it was a radical departure from the status quo and may be politically difficult to implement. Individual transferable quotas was ranked second based on the fact that it was the most politically feasible option to implement, although it does not generate a high degree of equity for taxpayers.When measured against the following criteria: readability, accuracy, and brevity (Writing Center, American University College of Arts and Sciences, 2014), the report may be described as a well-written policy analysis. The ideas presented by the analyst were clear and readable, despite the obvious complexity of the issue being discussed. The recommendations made were based on the most recent, accurate and complete information available on the issue, and included an examination of recent data. Furthermore, it reviewed historical information and data that provided critical input into the analysis and formulation of alternatives. The length of the report was also appropriate for what was required, and was able to discuss key elements needed to understand the issue and the recommendations. No unnecessary information and discussions were noted.

References

Gupta, D. K. (2011). Analyzing Public Policy: Concepts, Tools and Techniques (Second ed.). Washington, DC: CQ Press.Stewart, J., Hedge, D. M., & Lester, J. P. (2008). Public Policy: An Evolutionary Approach (Third ed.). Boston, MA: Thomson Higher Education.Weimer, D. L., & Vining, A. R. (1999). Policy Analysis: Concepts and Practice (Third ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Writing Center, American University College of Arts and Sciences. (2014). Writing Center | Resources. Retrieved December 19, 2014, from American University: https://www.american.edu/cas/writing/pdf/upload/Writing-a-Policy-Analysis.pdf