I think economic growth is rated too highly by this framework. It gets a very high rating on the first criteria because many organisations think it’s something worth considering—but none of them rate it as their top priority, or even a particularly high priority (to my knowledge). My intuition is that it wouldn’t get such a high rating if the criteria was importance, rather than consensus that it is one of the issues worth considering—and that importance is what matters here?
We incorporated importance in the second part of our criteria after doing the deep-dives, because we wanted to assess the importance of a given issue in the Australian policy context—so it did come through, but a bit later on.
In any case, our deeper policy analyses aren’t complete yet, but on what we’ve found so far we tend to agree that economic growth shouldn’t be prioritised too highly.
This is really great to see!
I think economic growth is rated too highly by this framework. It gets a very high rating on the first criteria because many organisations think it’s something worth considering—but none of them rate it as their top priority, or even a particularly high priority (to my knowledge). My intuition is that it wouldn’t get such a high rating if the criteria was importance, rather than consensus that it is one of the issues worth considering—and that importance is what matters here?
Thanks Riley! Apologies for our late response.
We incorporated importance in the second part of our criteria after doing the deep-dives, because we wanted to assess the importance of a given issue in the Australian policy context—so it did come through, but a bit later on.
In any case, our deeper policy analyses aren’t complete yet, but on what we’ve found so far we tend to agree that economic growth shouldn’t be prioritised too highly.