Policy proposals must include a description of the problem they seek to solve or the opportunity they seek to seize at the time of their submission. They should also show that the policy actually solves this problem.
In order for a proposal undergo the full policy development process, there must be community consensus on three things: 1. The problem or opportunity truly exists 2. The policy proposal truly has the potential to solve the problem or leverage the opportunity. 3. The proposal is worth the time that the community, LACNIC and the chairs would have to invest to complete the entire process.
If there is no consensus that all three conditions are met, the policy will be abandoned.
Rationale (Describe the problem you intend to solve)This proposal seeks to facilitate policy development, the preparation and presentation of policy proposals and their analysis and discussion by the community, as well as to encourage the participation of the persons and institutions that are part of the LACNIC community.
In this sense, we notice that there have been situations in recent years which have hindered the policy development process, and which are limiting broader community participation.
This can be attributed to several factors, including:
The proliferation of policies that do not solve actual problems or do not address potentially relevant improvements. The perception of the community is that some proposals have very little merit, so members of the community are not interested in following and participating in their discussion.
Policy proposals that include multiple topics, which makes it difficult for the community to analyze and understand them.
The number of policies discussed simultaneously, which makes deciding in which discussions to participate even more complicated.
The presentation of policies inspired by the operation of other RIRs without considering the peculiarities of LACNIC as an organization and of the Latin American and Caribbean community.
In order to improve policy proposal quality and promote broader participation in the policy development process, this proposal seeks to include a new step based on recommended policy development methodologies that will allow identifying the specific issue to be solved or opportunity for improvement so as to facilitate its analysis and discussion by the LACNIC community.
Current textSection 3. Normal Policy Development Process
The Policy Development Process may involve the following instances:
Public Policy List
PDP Chairs
Working Groups
Public Policy Forum
The LACNIC Board of Directors
IMAGE EXPLAINING THE PDP
Section 3.1 Public Policy List.
Proposals must be submitted using the online form available at https://politicas.lacnic.net/politicas/. Once it has been reviewed, an identification code will be assigned, and the proposal will be sent to the discussion list. The maximum time allowed for reviewing and publishing the proposal on the Public List must not exceed two weeks. This review will only address the text itself, not the merit of the proposal.
New textSection 3.1
Proposals must be submitted using the online form available at https://politicas.lacnic.net/politicas/. Once it has been reviewed, an identification code will be assigned, and the proposal will be sent to the discussion list. The maximum time allowed for reviewing and publishing the proposal on the Public List must not exceed two weeks.
The rationale for the policy proposal must include a section explaining the problem to be solved or prevented or the opportunity for improvement to be leveraged. It must also show how the proposal solves or prevents the problem or how it leverages the opportunity.
Section 3. Normal Policy Development Process
Add an initial three-week step during which the community will debate whether the proposal has sufficient merit to warrant following the full development process. Should the community decide that it does not have sufficient merit, the proposal will be abandoned.
EXPLANATORY IMAGE INCLUDING THE NEW STEP (3 WEEKS + 1 WEEK)
3.2.1. Functions of the PDP Chairs
Add the following:
Power to determine whether there is consensus among the community to discuss the problem or improvement addressed by the proposal and abandon those for which there is no consensus to proceed to work on them.
3.2.4. Responsibilities and obligations of the Chairs
Add the following:
Assess new policy proposals that are received as well as new versions of proposals that have previously been discussed to ensure that they include only elements that directly deal with the problem or improvement addressed in the proposal itself and agreed by the community. If the Chairs determine that the proposal includes additional elements, they may request that the authors eliminate such elements in order for the proposal to be considered.
Specify on the list which proposals are in the period reserved for the assessment of the problem or improvement they address. This period will have a duration of four weeks.
After the period for the assessment of the problem or improvement, the Chairs must specify whether they have found sufficient elements of consensus among the community to address the problem or improvement, i.e., to discuss the proposal.
3.4. Public Policy Forum
Clarify the following:
Presentation and discussion of policy proposals currently undergoing the PDP and which have reached consensus among the community for their discussion.
Bibliography on Problem Analysis and Resolution
Analytical Problem-Solving Method
A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The Eightfold Path to More Effective Problem Solving Eugene Bardach and Eric M. Patashnik.
https://books.google.com/books?hl=es&lr=&id=Bip_DwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=problem+solving+approach+policy&ots=WkgLUgYJIO&sig=BIWW4sc2grlT9p9NTXb7p2ZqdEg#v=onepage&q=problem%20solving%20approach%20policy&f=false
How Should We Theorise Public Policy? Problem Solving and Problematicity. Nick Turnbull.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1016/S1449-4035(06)70072-8
-
References-
Presented at:LACNIC 34 online (05/10/2020)