Public policy is “solving problems of mutual concern.” This requires respectfully and inclusively accounting for differences in race, ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic status, sexual orientation, ability, religion, citizenship status, and many other characteristics. Policy scholars especially need preparation in understanding these intersecting characteristics and the various -isms and -phobias individuals with these characteristics may experience as a result. Having this “diversity lens” in their toolkit ensures their success in policymaking and policy analyses.
As a Black American (Foundational Black American / American Descendant of Enslaved Persons) scholar who grew up economically disadvantaged, I am quite familiar with challenges faced by underrepresented minorities and women in the U.S. who have lived in under-resourced and often unstable households. It is the circumstances of these people who I am most committed to addressing through my research. I study the impacts of consumer, education, and social policies on especially populations in lower socioeconomic groups since 1) I have noticed firsthand from my lived experiences that certain socioeconomic groups are ignored when policies are formulated and implemented, and 2) domestic policy discourse under-emphasizes social class and socioeconomic status.
I prioritize a diversity of perspectives in my work, my instruction, and my own experiences. Through-out my education, I have placed myself in predominately non-minority and predominately affluent areas (axes of race and class); predominately very liberal and predominately conservative institutions (axis of politics); and professional-oriented versus academic-oriented training (axis of education). At each turn, I have learned how “the other side’s” perspective differs and how to address these perspectives objectively, reflectively, and civically in my work. We ourselves must demonstrate that we actively learn about and incorporate diverse viewpoints if we expect our colleagues and our students to do the same.
On that front, I have taken opportunities to learn about structural inequities in focused tutorials and participating in professional development programs designed to widen our equity lenses. During my doctoral studies, one of my classmates and I completed an independent study on workplace diversity and inclusion under a sociologist who specializes in diversity management. We created the syllabus and constructed the independent study with two goals in mind: 1) to learn more about how organizational structure and culture impacts workplace diversity and inclusion, and 2) to develop a course that could be implemented program-wide. The course was never implemented program-wide, but other students and researchers used the syllabus as references for diversity-related issues.
I completed another independent study with another classmate on the Cuban health care system under a public health scientist who specializes in understanding health care among Latine populations. We created the syllabus amidst warming relations between the United States and Cuba at the time, with the goal of considering what Cuban health care practices could be translated to other countries. I had little prior knowledge on Cuba and on health policy broadly, but I thought this was a good exercise in thinking about cultural considerations in policy translation. I culminated the study in writing a hypothetical proposal on implementing a pilot “polyclinic” in South Los Angeles and co-wrote an issue brief with my classmate on how the United States may integrate more community-based primary care approaches into practice.
During my postdoctoral fellowship, I have engaged in a series of workshops about considering marginalized individuals and communities in research design and execution at the Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, and framing research to deflect employing stereotypes and implicit biases at the Institute for Research on Poverty. I have since ensured that I provide context around descriptive statistics (e.g., “Young adults, given their greater propensities to be credit-constrained and to have shorter credit histories overall, are more likely to borrow payday loans than their older counterparts”) and involve relevant stakeholders in reviewing my working papers.
I also promote diversity in the Academy and in my disciplines (public policy and economics) by participating in diversity-serving organizations such as the Millennium Momentum Foundation (during my MPP program) and the American Economic Association Mentoring Program (during my doctoral and postdoctoral programs), among other organizations through-out my education across institutions. One of my most inspiring experiences was serving as a teaching assistant for the foundations-level research methods course at the American Economic Association Summer Program (AEASP) at Michigan State University. In efforts to diversify the economics profession, the AEASP prepares underrepresented minority pre-doctoral students for graduate training in economics or other social sciences. In my role, I helped students understand the basics of quantitative research and guided them through conducting their original research projects. I strongly encouraged students to conduct research on issues of interest to them, whether it stems from their lived experiences or from issues that gravely concern them. This experience instilled the importance of guiding, mentoring, and teaching students from the perspective I have within the dimensions of diversity I possess.
In public policy and policy analysis, defining the problem consists of 1) identifying the market or government failure the issue presents, and 2) determining the consumer detriment. Within the consumer detriment, we first determine who are harmed with special attention to any affected marginalized and vulnerable consumers and then how they are harmed. In instruction, I teach my students that part of defining the policy problem means highlighting distributional and discriminatory impacts the issue in question dispels. This critically reveals the extent of the policy problem and further justifies if policy intervention is warranted. They are then expected to ensure that their policy options include reducing those distributional or discriminatory impacts. This ensures that my students become professionals astute to inequities and are able to derive equitable solutions in their chosen professions, per the expectation society naturally has of human ecologists and policy analysts.
Public policy and policy analysis also requires listening to multiple voices and engaging in civil discourse. In my policy courses, I assign readings and materials from at least one left-leaning and one right-leaning institution for each topic. I emphasize the importance of reviewing information from multiple sides and incorporating all such material when analyzing policy issues.
My awareness of diversity and inclusion largely stem from my experiences as an underrepresented minority who grew up economically disadvantaged, but my appreciation for other marginalized groups (e.g., immigrants, individuals with disabilities, LGBTQIA+, and religious minorities) is growing. I conduct academic research that concerns disadvantaged populations because I want to foster an environment that encourages such inquiries, and I want future scholars to know that it is feasible and necessary to address questions concerning these groups. I carefully listen to my colleagues and to my students while setting aside any perceptions I have about relative privilege because all differences are equally important in advancing scholarship.