ECON7760 Policy on a Page (Policy Brief) Task Sheet
Instructions
This assessment item requires you to develop a policy on a page.
The assignment must be submitted electronically through the Online Submission link in the Policy on a Page folder under the Assessment section of the Course Blackboard site.
- Page Limit: 1 page (single-sided). A maximum two graphs, tables, or other illustrations in total can be provided on a second page.
- Margin Size: Minimum of 1.5cm margins on all sides. Smaller margins will result in a penalty.
- Font Size: Use a legible font size 11-point such as Times New Roman, Calibri or Arial.
- Line Spacing: Minimum single line spacing.
- Submission MUST be as a word document.
- Deadline for Submission: 31st October, 4pm.
Task Description
You are a policy analyst working for a non-governmental organization, tasked with creating a policy brief on methane emissions from livestock in Australia. Your audience is a Member of Parliament (MP) who is interested in practical options to reduce emissions in the agricultural sector without placing undue burden on farmers.
Your objective is to provide a concise and informative one-page policy brief that evaluates how carbon pricing mechanisms, such as a carbon tax, could influence farmer behaviour and reduce methane emissions. The MP is busy, so your analysis must be brief, clear, and actionable.
Tips
- Start with thorough research on the adaptation in the agricultural sector in Australia, focusing on its history, objectives, and outcomes.
- Choose an appropriate economic model for your analysis, and make sure to explain its key components and assumptions clearly.
- Use credible sources and data to support your analysis. Properly cite your references. APA is preferred but Harvard is acceptable too. You may want to consider using Endnotes for your references to save space.
- Keep your writing concise and to the point, as you have a one-page limit.
- Clearly communicate the economic implications and effectiveness of the policy.
- Provide concrete and actionable recommendations for the policy improvement.
Policy Brief Rubric
Criteria
Exceptional (7)
Advanced (6)
Proficient (5)
Functional (4)
Developing (3)
Absent – Minimal (1 -2)
Application of economic theories and concepts. (40 marks)
The policy brief: • Clearly presents key economics models and concepts with exceptional accuracy and depth relevant to the task. • Provides an insightful and convincing economic argument supported by research in the context of the task. • Provides useful and insightful policy recommendations.
The policy brief: • Clearly presents key economics models and concepts relevant to the task. • Provides a solid economic argument supported by research in the context of the task. • Provides relevant policy recommendations.
The policy brief: • Clearly presents some economics models and concepts relevant to the task. • Provides an economic argument with some detail in the context of the task. • Provides relevant policy recommendations. However, these are lacking some connection to topic.
The policy brief: • Attempts to present some economics models and/or concepts but they are not all relevant to the task. • Attempts to provide an economic argument in the context of the task. However, further detail would enhance the argument. • Provides useful and relevant policy recommendations. However, these are lacking a clear connection to topic.
The policy brief: • Displays minimal understanding of economic models or concepts and applications are vague. • Does not adequately provide an argument linking economic theory to the task. • Does not make an attempt to discuss policy insights.
The policy brief: • Is missing economic models and economic theory. • Does not develop an economic argument. • Is missing policy insights.
Critical Analysis (30 marks)
The policy brief: • Provides an effective and comprehensive evidence-based critical analysis of the task, supported by data and/or examples.
The policy brief: • Provides a critical analysis of the task supported by data.
The policy brief: • Attempts to provide a critical analysis of the task. However, further supporting data and/or examples would enhance the analysis.
The policy brief: • Attempts to provide a critical analysis of the task but no supporting evidence is used to the critical analysis.
The policy brief: • Important aspects of the critical analysis are missing or not consistent with the task.
The policy brief: • Is missing critical analysis from the policy brief.
Organisation and Structure (15 marks)
The policy brief: • Has a flawless, logical flow with effective headings and transitions to guide the reader. • Effectively covers all required points with clear detailed critical evaluation of the task.
The policy brief: • Is organised so that it provides clearly defined sections that are linked effectively. • Effectively covers all required points of the task.
The policy brief: • Is organised, but the transition between sections is disjointed in one area. • Covers most of required points of the task.
The policy brief: • Includes headings to guide the reader but the transition between sections is disjointed in a few areas. • Covers some of the required points relating to the task but is mostly limited description the issue of climate change.
The policy brief: • Has headings but lacks a clear flow to guide the reader. • Is limited to description the issue of climate change.
The policy brief: • Has no clear structure. • Fails to cover the required information.
Communication and Referencing (15 marks)
The policy brief: • Communicates and explains the topic and complex economic concepts to a non-economist audience concisely, with exceptional clarity. • References are expertly used to demonstrate original research beyond course materials with no errors. • There are no grammatical errors.
The policy brief: • Communicates and explains the topic to a non-economist audience concisely, with clarity. • Appropriate references are used to demonstrate to support the analysis but may be formatted incorrectly. • There are 1-2 grammatical errors.
The policy brief: • Communicates the topic although some explanation of the economics could be more concise and/or better targeted to a non-economist audience. • Some appropriate references are used to support the analysis but could be integrated more effectively. The reference are formatted incorrectly. • There are 1-2 grammatical errors.
The policy brief: • Communicates the topic with clarity but several parts are not targeted to a non-economist audience. • Very few references used to support the analysis and references are formatted incorrectly. • There are 3+ grammatical errors.
The policy brief: • Is minimal and does not communicate information effectively. It does not communicate to a non-economist audience. • There are no references.
The policy brief: • Fails to meet the communication requirements. • Does not have any references.