University of Alberta Public Consultation Process and Public Policy: A Case Study Margaret Ann Quinney O A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research in partial firlfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Educational Administration Department of Educational Policy Studies Edmonton, Aiberta Spring, 1998 National Library Bibliothbque nationale I*m of Canada du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographic Services services bibliographiques 395 Wellington Street 395. rue Wellington OttawaON KIA ON4 OrtawaON K1A ON4 Canada Canada The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence ailowing the exclusive permettant à la National Library of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distribute or sell reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou copies of îbis thesis in microform, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la forme de microfiche/nlm, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique. The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in ths thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts fiom it Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or otherwise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author' s ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. ABSTRACT Du~gthe 1990s, consultation strategies increasingly have been incorporated into policy developrnent processes. This qualitative case study offen an understanding of the development of a policy fiarnework for the 1994 White Paper released by Alberta Advanced Education and Career Development, paying particular attention to the contribution of consultation to the policy developrnent process. InteMews were conducted with govermnent planners of the consultation or policy processes and with stakeholders who participated in the consultation activities. The fuidings indicate that policy development may be conceptualized as a policy cycle comprishg a set of processes (policy review, policy options, policy choice, and policy implementation) which are dynamic, interactive, overlapping, and fluid. Consultation cm contribute to each policy process, and multiple cycles and processes may be underway concurrently. The transformation of policy-relevant idormation occurs through analysis and argument, however, the development of policy options can be influenced by other factors. This study supports Kingdon's (1984) fiamework of policy making. In a political context, the creation of policy choices may occur through the coupling of policy issues with existing ideas of policy options, especially when a "window of opportunity" is presented. Conceptualizations of policy development f?om this study are characterized as cornplex, politicized, flexible, and incorporating stakeholder involvement. Key areas for attention in consultation planning Uiclude specifjmg the relationship between the consultation and the overall policy decision strategies, developing clear objectives for the consultation, designing the consultations to achieve those objectives, and aligning strategies and leadership to integrate consultation and policy processes. A combination of consultation methods facilitates a broad basis of stakeholder participation. Multiple consultations, interactive methods, and continuity of participants help to build a relationship with a network of stakeholders. Consultation can contnbute to enhanced communication with stakeholders, broadened views of policy issues, moderated perspectives of policy options, modified policy choices, increased profile for the policy process, and added complexity for the policy arena. Attention to the design of consultation strategy, methods, and materials may facilitate both individual and group leaming. This study offers implications for practice for public-sector managers, educational leaders, and other stakeholders, and identifies areas for fûrther research. ACKNOWLEDGE1MENT Many individuals have contributed to this study in various ways and 1 thank them for their interest and involvement. 1 would Wte to express my appreciation to the individuals who participated in this study -- for your thoughtfûlness and your willingness to reflect on the events and your expenences with the consultations and poiicy development processes. Special acknowledgernent is extended to Lynne Duncan, Deputy Mïnister, Alberta Advanced Education and Career Development, for her interest in this research study and for facilitating my access to the Department. Thank you goes to my Supervisory Cornmittee for your support and helpfùl comments. 1 extend particular thanks to my advisor, Dr. Al MacKay, for our many discussions, for his sage advice, and for his perseverance throughout the duration of this study. 1also wish to acknowledge the helpfùl assistance of the other cornmittee members: Professor Bob Hinings for his valuable comments and advice on the study and for engaging in the dialogue through the wonder of global e-mail; Dr. Ted Holdaway for his encouragement and his attention to this study; and Dr. Ken Ward for his advice and support. I will continue to value the early-on discussions with Dr. Beth Young on research design and qualitative inquiry. Thank you for that contribution to my leaming and for seMng as a reader and examiner. 1 also appreciate the willingness of Dr. Jean Clandinin to serve as a reader and examiner and of Dr. Benjamin Levin to serve as the extemal examiner. Their comments and questions have also added to my learning experience. My colleagues have provided me with encouragement and the continued -- and essential -- support to see me through this undertaking and for that 1 am rnost appreciative. 1am indebted to Grant MacEwan Comrnunity Coliege for providing both time and professional development support to dow me to pursue this graduate program. Finally, my farnily deserves a huge thank you for the love, patience, and understanding that they have continued to provide through this lengthy process while 1 spent so many hours in my room. Table of Contents Page Introduction to the Study .................................. 1 Purpose of the Research Study ............................... 1 Research Questions .................................. 2 Significance of the Study .................................... 3 Research Design and Methodology ............................ 4 Overview .......................................... 4 Delimitations and Limitations of the Study ................. 5 Assumptions ....................................... 5 Definitions .............................................. 5 Organization of the Document ............................... 6 Literature Review ........................................ 7 The Development of Policy Sciences ........................... 7 The Policy Process ........................................ 8 The Stages Models .................................. 8 Challenge to the Rational Approach ...................... 9 Approaches to Policy Analysis .......................... 12 An Alternative Approach .............................. 14 Involvement in the Policy Process ............................. 16 Policy Communities and Stakeholders .................... 16 Increasing Involvement ............................... 17 Consultation and the Policy Process ........................... 22 Consultation to Improve Decision Making ................. 23 The Consultation Process ............................. 27 Understanding the Consultation Process .................. 29 Organizational Leaming .................................... 31 Can Governments Learn? ............................. 31 Leamhg through Consultation ......................... 33 Refom in Higher Education ................................. 34 Canadian Jurisdictions ............................... 35 Newfoundland and Labrador ..................... 35 British Columbia .............................. 36 New Brunswick ............................... 37 Manitoba .................................... 37 Nova Scotia .................................. 38 Ontario ..................................... 39 Other Jurisdictions ................................... 40 Summary of the Review ..................................... 41 Research Questions ........................................ 43 FieldNotesData ........................ 77 Ensuring Trustworthiness ............................. 78 Credibility ................................... 78 Transferability ................................ 79 Dependability ................................. 79 Confirmability ................................ 80 Research Ethics ..................................... 80 Ethics Review ................................ 80 Ethical Considerations in This Smdy ............... 81 4. The Process of Public Policy Development: A Case Story ........ 84 Preparation of the Case Story ................................ 84 Organizing the Data .................................. 84 Creating Case Profiles and the Case Story ................. 84 Member Review of the Case Story ....................... 85 Revision of the Case Story ............................. 86 The Development of the 1994 White Paper: The Case Story ........ 86 Preparing for Policy Development. Spring 1992 ............. 86 Initiating Policy Planning. July .December 1992 ............ 88 Political Context. FaIl 1992 ............................ 91 Expanding the Scope of Planning. January 1993 ............ 91 Organizing for Consultation.