Final Reflection: Moving the Dial
I have reflected on the conversation that my group (Terhas & Alex) had with Gita Madan about creating change from the outside. In particular, I’ve been thinking about Gita’s idea that a successful influence campaign is not just about turning ‘no-to-yes’, but also about getting ‘never-to-maybe.’ Getting to maybe is definitely not a new idea, but it’s not an idea that I personally have ever connected to changemaking. As I meditated on this idea further, I realized that Gita’s premise encapsulates a lot of what I have gotten out of PPG 2013: change doesn’t have to be dramatic to be important.
For instance, I’ve thought a lot about the intended outcomes of the consultation that I attended. Why did dozens of people spend a few hours in beautiful Metro Hall discussing a development project which had already been approved by the City?
I found the entire consultation process to be boring and unimportant. Why wasn’t there any yelling? Where were the angry people? I assumed at the time that there wasn’t any passionate opposition to the project. I brushed off questions about park space and natural light as minor concerns of people with too much time on their hands. I thought that these were not concerns that serious, passionate people would have.
Now that I’ve had time to reflect on Gita’s points, I now know that these questions were emblematic of a different kind of changemaking. These people knew that they would never be able to convince the City to prevent this development from being built. Instead of wasting their energy on the inevitable, they turned their attention to smaller, more attainable goals.
‘If this development is going to go ahead, maybe there should be more green space. Could you consider building a bigger park?’
Scaling down expectations reminded me of the discussion that we had in Hamilton with the Evergreen Storefront staff about the West Harbour Development Project. As Evergreen began their consultation process, opposition groups realized that they would not be able to stop the development. Realizing that they could not switch the dial from ‘yes-to-no,’ groups began looking for more moderate objectives: a nice waterfront park with public spaces and art.
As I pursue a career in government relations, Gita’s idea will stay with me. It isn’t always about getting a yes, sometimes, changemaking is about getting a little bit of what you want instead of nothing.
I’ve spent time reflecting on what PPG 2013 has taught me now that my coursework is almost done. I’ve thought a lot about what this course means for policy-creation and, more importantly, what this course means for the future of policy-related academia.
In my opinion, this inaugural course successfully reinforced the idea that policy-making doesn’t just occur in cubicles and boardrooms: public policy is discussed on abandoned train tracks and in repurposed brick factories, over scones in storefronts and in coach houses.
Public policy is interesting, dynamic, and important. Public policy courses should be the same.
