Policy Advocacy and Its Importance
The main purpose of this report is to evaluate an advocacy approach for a non-government organisation, Acoss, regarding its policy change, which is operating in Australia. Policy advocacy is determined as the process that is able to build the issues to develop a change in a policy. Advocacy allows for focusing on the practices of Policy, along with an analysis for advocacy. Moreover, policy advocacy allows precarious approaches to understanding the making and change in policy through critical discourse and political interactions with the concept of power. The works related to services to the community require the practices of policy. It also requires knowledge about the effectiveness of the policy. In this report, the advocacy of policy change will be discussed to provide housing support to provide individuals in the country with a long-term housing support system, as it is their right. The expansion of the long-term housing supply with a support system.
Policy change evaluates the identification of power, which enables the understanding of the theories of power relationships. Marxist is determined as the economic production, which is able to develop the power relationship (af Malmborg & Trondal, 2021). Elitist suggests that individuals are focused on power. It allows individuals to develop their languages and views with the protection of their interests. Moreover, large institutions hold power, which is being evaluated by the Corporatist model. The institutions holding power are determined as the unions and government, along with the public service. The Pluralist model evaluates that all the individuals have access to power due to the democratic process, which is being provided by the local government (Sandwick et al., 2018). The involvement of individuals in civil society and learning is increasing their knowledge about the power and process. The steps required for policy change can be evaluated with the aspects of this theory to adopt change concerning the policy to provide housing support.
There are different theories of policymaking that evaluate the limitations of the policies with an appropriate way to enter the agenda of policy (Kingdon, 2003). There are three streams that are required to create a policy. These three streams are able to develop the changes as per the requirement of a new policy, which are the Problem Stream, Policy Stream and Political Stream. The problem stream in this theory is essential to understand and identify the agenda of policy, such as different conditions (Krlev et al., 2020). The policy stream is determined by the availability of the solutions to these problems. It also evaluates the value of the individuals in the process of policy change. On the other hand, the Political Stream is the requirement of political timing, the activity of interest groups, public interest and others. These three aspects are able to evaluate the opportunities of the policy change. The theory is able to evaluate the structures of knowledge that are required for policy change. The management of housing system failure is also possible through the help of this theory.
Policy changes increase the involvement of different departments, which requires an understanding of the way through which a country is governed. It is able to evaluate the primary areas of practice regarding the knowledge for effective community services workers. The Federal Constitution of Australia, Federalism, Ministers, The Public Service, Processes and the role of the Parliament is required for the policy change to keep the focus on the advocacy change (Ostrom, 2017). Changing the policy increases the decision-making process, which includes different parts of the government. It is essential for the policymakers to gather knowledge about the responsible minister, the responsible government department for the policy area, the primary role of the public servant towards the development of policy, the agenda of the government, along with individuals in the parliament focusing on the policy change. The approach of liberal democracy is being followed by the government institutions in Australia, which evaluates two concepts such as democracy and liberalism. These two concepts evaluate different aspects of the new policy towards providing support to the long-term housing policy.
Theories of Power Relationships for Policy Change
Liberalism is supporting the free markets in the country and the individuals to change their lives. It is also providing value to the order through which the growth of the market is possible. Liberalism also evaluates that the written constitution is able to control the power, which is essential to separate politics from the markets (Lee & Malerba, 2017). On the other hand, democracy is providing value to the government, which is accountable and responsible for the citizens. The government is also responsible for meeting the needs of individuals with common goods. It is the responsibility of the government to provide the right to citizens to participate in politics and the activities related to it. Democracy values the nation of individuals, as it requires freedom for the population. The government of the country includes several positions, such as the king or queen and the Governor-General, that have the power towards policy change. The primary role of the Federal Government includes trade policies, trade policies, telecommunication and defence. The distribution of revenue depends on the government bodies (Jessop, 2018). The social policy includes increasing revenue, income tax, economic policy, indirect tax, GST, income support, aged care and child care funding. Different policy areas include joint Federal-State responsibility through agreements between the state and the Federal government for the exchange of funding. The policy change regarding the housing support includes several departments, such as the National Housing and Homelessness Agreement, National School Reform Agreement, National Health Reform Agreement, National Disability Agreement, National Agreement in Closing the Gap, along with National Agreement for Skills and Workforce Development.
Individuals, government bodies, processes and arrangements in Australia have formal rules regarding the policy change. They depend on the development of communities and relationships between individuals. Policy advocates manage the relationship with the individuals by knowing their processes. It allows acting to get an appropriate framework regarding the decisions related to policy. The processes of the policy agenda and policy decisions are essential to evaluate the values and interests (Vogel, 2018). The projected revenue and the budget is one of the essential aspects for policy change in the country to understand the statement of policy in the activity area. The change through the budget requires the statement of policy priorities, along with Centrelink payments. The policy change is able to influence the national economy, which increases the requirement of policy strategy by the Expenditure Review Committee of the Cabinet. On the other hand, the administrative agency of the government is determined as the extension of the executive. The government departments have a fundamental role in the process of developing and implementing the policy.
Public service is essential to provide advice regarding the policy without including it in political aspects. In addition, the political parties also have a massive role in the advocacy and the change of policy (Edenhofer, 2015). The involvement of these bodies is required for the policy change to manage the channels of federalism for social policy. It is essential to reduce the duplication and overlap of policy, inefficiencies of different policies, and different rules in the states regarding health, education, child safety and family violation. Multiple tiers of the government are another issue that is increasing the requirement of involving different bodies in the process of policy change. There are local governments in different areas which are not part of the constitution. These governments are constituted by the legislation of the state, which is responsible for the state government (Mazzucato, 2016). These local governments have an essential role in the development of policy regarding child health, community planning, fund of service delivery by the government, provision of welfare, cultural services, recreation, implementation of health and safety guidelines, along with welfare activities, which are essential for the policy change towards providing housing support.
The Three Streams of Policymaking Theory
The beginning of the plan requires reviewing the government policies regarding housing support for individuals in Australia. The policies of the local governments towards the support the development of child health, community planning and others are essential for policy advocacy and change (Gapsalamov et al., 2017). The responsibilities of states concerning child and family welfare, community services, schools, hospitals, public or social housing, aged care provision, corrective services and others need to be identified for the policy change. The intervention of the policy process is essential for policy change as it is a part of the professional responsibility. The interventions of the policy need to be done on a regular basis to identify the gaps, discrimination, identification of the problem and frame the consultation of policy (Yang, 2015). On the other hand, the safety of the individuals regarding the development of the housing policy will require a plan with the help of government bodies, along with the political parties. The required needs of the firm regarding safety will help in understanding the new ways to manage policy advocacy. The application of social justice and its principles are essential for the development of policy change towards providing policy change (Maddison & Denniss, 2013). The beginning of eh plan will require the development of a budget regarding the policy, as the funding is being managed by the government. On the other hand, the challenges related to the policies need to be practised due to the community standards, social inclusion and legal rights (Markard, Suter & Ingold, 2016). The plan for the policy requires meeting the needs of individuals and communicating to facilitate their right to social inclusion, values and justice. In addition, appropriate research and planning are also required for developing the plan concerning policy change to provide housing support. The plan of the policy change includes the individuals required to advocate for the service users (Tomislav, 2018). Analysis and advocacy are determined as essential aspects for the development of change in policy regarding housing support in Australia. It includes multiple activities, policy action, analysis, and arguments to produce the transformation. It is also vital for adopting vital information regarding the policy change by utilising it in the political arena, which is able to reduce the challenges related to the changed policy and the process of its implementation.
Conclusion
It was concluded from the report the changes in policy require the involvement of government, political parties, individuals, government departments, law and others. The policy change and advocacy regarding the housing support increase child safety, health and wellness, community planning, enforcing the health and safety rules, direct provision of welfare and others which are required to provide housing support. The implementation of change in social and public housing policy is able to contribute to the aged care, health, schools, hospitals and others.
Reference
Af Malmborg, F., & Trondal, J. (2021). Discursive framing and organisational venues: mechanisms of artificial intelligence policy adoption. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 00208523211007533. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/00208523211007533
Edenhofer, O. (Ed.). (2015). Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change (Vol. 3). Cambridge University Press. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=JAFEBgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PT19&dq=departments+involved+in+technological+policy+change&ots=dADEmBX4Z9&sig=CuK1bdrXO_cSd1veR6T0GzLduNQ
Gapsalamov, A. R., Ilin, A. G., Vasilev, V. L., & Bochkareva, T. N. (2017). Beginning of the end: the ussr economic development in 1950s-1960s. Recent Trends in Science and Technology Management, 2, 41-56. https://scieuro.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/v2-41-55.pdf
Jessop, B. (2018). The Entrepreneurial City: Re-imaging localities, redesigning economic governance, or restructuring capital? 1. In Transforming cities (pp. 28-41). Routledge. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781351169486-4/entrepreneurial-city-bob-jessop
Jessop, B. (2018). The Entrepreneurial City: Re-imaging localities, redesigning economic governance, or restructuring capital? 1. In Transforming cities (pp. 28-41). Routledge. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781351169486-4/entrepreneurial-city-bob-jessop
Kingdon, J. W. (2003). Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies (New York, NY, & London, Longman).
Krlev, G., Einarsson, T., Wijkström, F., Heyer, L., & Mildenberger, G. (2020). The policies of social innovation: A cross-national analysis. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 49(3), 457-478. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0899764019866505
Lee, K., & Malerba, F. (2017). Catch-up cycles and changes in industrial leadership: Windows of opportunity and responses of firms and countries in the evolution of sectoral systems. Research Policy, 46(2), 338-351. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733316301408
Maddison, S., & Denniss, R. (2013). An introduction to Australian public policy: theory and practice. Cambridge University Press. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=L9yVBQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR1&dq=Maddison+and+Denniss+(2009)+An+Introduction+to+Australian+Public+Policy+:+Theory+and+Practice+2nd+Edition.+Cambridge+university+Press&ots=2FLU1P6l7u&sig=zR8oxa_E5igV4LKVf0aveD3K6EE
Markard, J., Suter, M., & Ingold, K. (2016). Socio-technical transitions and policy change–Advocacy coalitions in Swiss energy policy. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 18, 215-237. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1068/C12162r
Mazzucato, M. (2016). From market fixing to market-creating: a new framework for innovation policy. Industry and Innovation, 23(2), 140-156. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13662716.2016.1146124?casa_token=yeMtzXmLfs0AAAAA:Wh7tJPPaU1ApfIi5R0uI-eciobPC2UQa1__tFi3Lv1ZlVMdtNJtNVn69xSzQ9qY6YuDRTG4dHVc
Ostrom, E. (2017). Polycentric systems for coping with collective action and global environmental change. In Global Justice (pp. 423-430). Routledge. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781315254210-18/polycentric-systems-coping-collective-action-global-environmental-change-elinor-ostrom
Sandwick, T., Fine, M., Greene, A. C., Stoudt, B. G., Torre, M. E., & Patel, L. (2018). Promise and provocation: Humble reflections on critical participatory action research for social policy. Urban Education, 53(4), 473-502. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0042085918763513
Tomislav, K. (2018). The concept of sustainable development: From its beginning to the contemporary issues. Zagreb International Review of Economics & Business, 21(1), 67-94. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/181966/
Vogel, S. K. (2018). Freer markets, more rules. In Freer Markets, More Rules. Cornell University Press. https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.7591/9781501717307/html
Yang, C. (2015). Government policy change and evolution of regional innovation systems in China: evidence from strategic emerging industries in Shenzhen. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 33(3), 661-682. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1068/C12162r
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
