Month: March 2022

Over the past two weeks, I have published a guide to implementing values analysis in the policy development process. The first article was about the correct mindset, outlining how analysts need to think about moral values to make the tool work. Without this way of thinking, values analysis is more likely to simply confirm preexisting biases rather than help public servants explore alternative ways of viewing the world. In other words, the tool would be useless, and maybe even counterproductive, which means that this mindset is a critical part of values analysis that cannot be ignored.

Next, I outlined the proper research method for values analysis. It is firmly rooted in the material world, drawing on the views of real people. Good research in this space is focused on what morality is, not what it ought to be. Key sources for this research, such as social media posts and the oft-dreaded comment section of news articles, are frequently ignored, because they are deemed to be too emotional and irrational. However, for the purposes of values analysis, this is feature, not a bug. They show what people think, and the job of the public servant is to take this into consideration to make better policy.

Read more

Last week, I outlined the correct mindset for values analysis. Fundamentally, it’s optimistic and gives people the benefit of the doubt, not because this view necessarily describes human behaviour (although I think it does), but because it is more useful for analysts to think this way. The values analysis mindset combats groupthink, leads to stronger analysis, and more effectively challenges assumptions. So, before we continue, let’s get into this frame of mind by repeating after me…

People generally say what they believe…

Good people can have different moral compasses…

Finding the lowest possible explanation for a belief doesn’t mean you’ve found the correct one…

Read more

In this first article on the art of being morally responsive, I’d like to focus on what happens between your ears. Every policy tool (e.g. gender-based analysis, risk management) has a set of check-lists, matrixes, and processes that need to be used. These are both important and insufficient; a policy tool also has an associated mindset that practitioners need to understand and apply. Without the right way of thinking, the tool won’t work.

For example, in a cost-benefit analysis, it’s best to think exclusively in financial terms by attempting to put a dollar value on everything. This includes assets and liabilities that are easily appraised (like the cost of purchasing materials or financial savings), but also intangibles when possible. In extreme applications of this mindset, economists have even estimated the value of a human life using statistical methods. Although unpalatable for many people, this estimate can be a useful way to compare the costs and benefits of a particular policy. As a hypothetical, imagine that building a traffic barrier would cost $10 million and would be expected to save one life. If a human life is “worth” $11 million, then this is a sound investment (ignoring discount rates). If it is only worth $9 million, then it’s not, and the money should be spent elsewhere, even if we know that someone will die as a result. This is a cold, calculating, and sometimes disconcerting way to make decisions, one that we would expect robots to use. But it has to be this way. Without translating everything into the same “units” (e.g. dollars), comparisons are difficult and cost-benefit analysis can’t be done very effectively.

Read more

Values Added has been up for six months now, and I’d like to take some time to sum up some of the lessons that we can draw from past articles. One phrase that I have often used is moral responsiveness, which is the end goal of values analysis. Broadly defined, a morally responsive policy aims to minimize the violation of values to reduce backlash, and maximize the harmonization of values to garner public support. In developing morally responsive policies, public servants need to give a full hearing to a broad range of moral compasses and make appropriate adjustments, such as altering the design of the policy to make it more acceptable, honing the communications strategy to mobilize support, or even just providing better information to decision makers.

Keep in mind, a morally responsive policy does not need to align with all moral compasses. That’s not possible or even desirable. For example, a left-leaning government does not need to implement socially conservative policies just because some people would be outraged if they didn’t. Nor does a left-leaning government need to believe that socially conservative policies are justified or right. That’s not moral responsiveness; that’s moral agnosticism. Elected governments need to choose between values. It’s their job.

Read more

If you’ve ever taken Philosophy 101 at university or had the misfortune of sitting next to a self-proclaimed philosopher at a party, you’ve probably heard of the Trolley Problem:

There is a runaway trolley barreling down the railway tracks. Ahead, on the tracks, there are five people tied up and unable to move. The trolley is headed straight for them. You are standing some distance off in the train yard, next to a lever. If you pull this lever, the trolley will switch to a different set of tracks. However, you notice that there is one person on the sidetrack. You have two (and only two) options:

1. Do nothing, in which case the trolley will kill the five people on the main track.
2. Pull the lever, diverting the trolley onto the sidetrack where it will kill one person.

Which is the more ethical option? Or, more simply: What is the right thing to do?

It’s a classic of ethics, and an untold number of hours have been spent trying to sort out the moral implications of this hypothetical situation. Many of you have probably seen this TED talk on the subject, which was one the truly great videos that rocketed TED into the mainstream – before it got bogged down in this TED X nonsense where hand drying techniques are apparently worth our attention. There’s even a whole book devoted to the subject (the Trolley Problem, not hand drying).

Read more