Emerging Security Threats: The Threat of Cyber-Hacking on Air Traffic Controls in the United Kingdom
Anono123456789
StructureforyourPolicyPaper.docx3
Structure for your Policy Paper
Feb. 2018
A policy paper is different from a regular academic paper. It is rather, a presentation to a policy maker or decision maker, from you as an analyst/expert, making an argument for choosing a particular course of action, policy, or way of acting/spending government money into the future. In other words, it is a vehicle for providing policy advice and recommendations.
It is crucial that you decide who your reader is and state it clearly. ‘Dear …..’. This will help you target your message, the evaluation of alternatives, and your particular recommendation. What are their security concerns? How do they see risk? Given their role, what are they looking to protect as the referent object? Know your audience, and write to them and their interests, role and needs. Why should they care! What do they want from this policy brief?
You should also state your own position clearly as well: ‘Bruce Stanley, Deputy Director of the Army Chief of Staff’ for example. This will also help you to focus and target the recommendations.
This is a persuasive argument. Be clear what the aim of your policy paper is. You are reviewing the facts and significant options, then making a case for your preferred option, for a particular POLICY, SET OF ACTIONS, or COMMITMENT OF FUNDS. Thus look to accumulate facts, authors, material, tables, statistics, to help make your case (and footnote them!). Describe the urgency of the situation, speak in terms of benefits and advantages, always consider what value this policy have to meeting the security concerns and risk assessment of the person to whom you are writing. Remember timescale: if we don’t act in the next six months, China’s development in this area will be ….. Highlight areas where there is consensus, but also acknowledge if there is disagreement or lack of clarity in the science or intelligence.
Focus on a narrow topic: Why we need to spend more money, not less, on our anti-missile defense; or Why we should scrap the Trident submarine programme. Define your purpose: make our anti-missile defense stronger since the Chinese have overtaken us and are racing ahead. Make salient and clear points that support your purpose and argument.
Date your presentation, and provide contact (made up, if you wish) details for your target reader. Remember, this is your work put out into the market place, and you will be paid for this. Make a good impression, and see this as a ‘business card’ for you now and in the future. It is about your reputation!
These are the components required in a Policy Paper:
Cover Page
Executive Summary
On its own page. Distil the essence of the whole paper, provide an overview for the busy reader. It should be written last, after you have finished the paper. It should mention the three options you review, then clarify the recommendation you make at the end of the paper for what to do.
What is the Problem?
Present the urgency of the problem for national security and how if we don’t act, there will be a number of consequences. You might review (briefly!) what has been done already to try to fix this problem, and be sure to clarify what is the objective of a new/changed/policy: if we do X, we will enhance our security in the area of anti-missile defense, and …. You are trying as well to create curiosity for your reader to read the rest of your brief. Why is this a current issue (Chinese have just announced new money into R&D in this area….)
Discussion of Three Policy Options
Presentation of three options, and their pros and cons. Go into some detail as to how Option X works to meet the security gap/need/problem you have outlined above. Use facts and support to make a case for why this might be the right policy choice. Statistics and charts and costs are a good idea. Yet it should not be overly technical. Highlight the benefits, costs, opportunities, problems of each option. Mention if there are competing narratives that lead in another direction. Each of these policy options should be about a page or so long and well supported with citations.
Recommendation
State the preference for ONE of the three, and clearly make a strong case for why this option is the best policy. Why are its benefits better than the other two options? Why do you propose this as your recommendation for your reader and this problem? Give a time frame: You should do part A of my recommendation now, and then follow up in next six months with part B of this recommendation. [Make a declaration that the US will not allow Russia to gain missile superiority in Europe, and are committing to enhancing anti-missile shields in place over the next six months. There will be new deployments in the field within six months, and a follow up new budgetary commitment in the 2019 budget for new R&D.]
This is an argument for the ‘Best’ Option (most cost-effective, most technologically advanced, best balance of budgetary constraints, able to defeat their current and expected developments/deployment, etc) and a ‘call to action’ for your reader. Be precise, and give them clear things to do that are relevant, credible and feasible. You are establishing why this particular option is different and better, so don’t just say ‘it is better’. Make the case that is ‘best’ or ‘most cost effective’ or ‘most effective’ policy from the other options you presented.
Summary of implications of what this policy will do for your reader/national security in the short to medium term
Here in a short paragraph or so you step back and state what the consequences of your recommendation will be: If you choose this recommendation, the Russians will…, US troops in Europe will ….., and in the long run the message of deterrence will be clearly sent….
