Toolbox: Moral Foundations Theory

“Toolbox” articles delve into a new way of looking at values, with a view to using these techniques in future articles.

The first tool, moral foundations theory, is especially important for understanding future articles. Developed by Craig Joseph, Jesse Graham, and (most famously) Jonathan Haidt, moral foundations theory states that there are six fundamental values that explain our moral views. Every person holds all six values to differing degrees, and these values can broadly explain why people have moral reactions to similar situations. In fact, the authors of moral foundations theory go as far to argue that the political differences between liberals and conservatives can be explained through the analysis of the strength of each value – both absolutely and relative to each other – in each group’s moral worldview.

Read more

Values in the News: The Government of Alberta’s $100 Giveaway

I’m now going to demonstrate why values analysis (using the moral foundations “tool”) is useful for policymaking by looking at a news event: the Government of Alberta’s decision in late 2021 to provide a $100 incentive to newly vaccinated Albertans. Values analysis can help explain the controversy surrounding this decision in a systematic way.

Background

In early September 2021, COVID-19 cases in Alberta surged beyond 1000 per day, overwhelming hospitals and emergency rooms across the province. No doubt, this was related to Alberta’s relatively low vaccination rate. As of September 4, only about 60.2% of Albertans were fully vaccinated, ahead of only Saskatchewan (59%) and far behind Ontario (68.1%), Quebec (71%), and the Canadian leader Yukon Territory (73%). You go Yukon!

Read more

Values Added: Mission Statement

Public servants always talk about the “value added”; it’s time to add some values.

Economic impact estimates. Cost-benefit analyses. The t-test. In addition to being dreadful topics to bring up on a first date, these are the bread-and-butter tools of policy analysts. We count the costs, summarize the benefits, and make policy recommendations on these grounds. When we talk about trade-offs, it’s usually between rational and quantifiable goods: growth vs. equity; small benefits to many vs. major losses to few; cost vs. effectiveness. Having collected information and having made our recommendations, we then punt the final decision to elected representatives, who are responsible for selecting the correct approach in line with the public interest.

No doubt, this system has led to major successes, as evidenced by the good governance of the Canadian public service. Politically motivated hysterics aside, the Canadian government works, and the same can’t be said about many governments around the world. The high-quality analysis of the Canadian public service deserves plenty of credit for the country’s flourishing over the past century-and-a-half. I would never suggest that these methods should be abandoned.

Read more