The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Introducing the ‘What's the Problem Represented to be?’ approach
Abstract
The ‘WPR’ approach is a resource, or tool, intended to facilitate critical interrogation of public policies. It starts from the premise that what one proposes to do about something reveals what one thinks is problematic (needs to change). Following this thinking, policies and policy proposals contain implicit representations of what is considered to be the ‘problem’ (‘problem representations’). For example, if forms of training are recommended to improve women's status and promotion opportunities, the implication is that their lack of training is the ‘problem’, responsible for ‘holding them back’. The task in a ‘WPR’ analysis is to read policies with an eye to discerning how the ‘problem’ is represented within them and to subject this problem representation to critical scrutiny. This task is accomplished through a set of six questions and an accompanying undertaking to apply the questions to one's own proposals for change: What's the ‘problem’ (for example, of ‘problem gamblers’, ‘drug use/abuse’, ‘gender inequality’, ‘domestic violence’, ‘global warming’, ‘sexual harassment’, etc.) represented to be in a specific policy or policy proposal? What presuppositions or assumptions underpin this representation of the ‘problem’? How has this representation of the ‘problem’ come about? What is left unproblematic in this problem representation? Where are the silences? Can the ‘problem’ be thought about differently? What effects are produced by this representation of the ‘problem’? How…
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“We analyze these dilemmas using an adapted version of Bacchi's [28] 'What's the Problem Represented to be?' (WPR) approach.”
From Navigating the Ethical and Societal Impacts of Generative AI in Higher Computing Education (2025) · cites this paper as [28]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Breton, N. N. (2023) · Global Public Health · doi:10.1080/17441692.2022.2120048 · Cited by 17
Navigating the Ethical and Societal Impacts of Generative AI in Higher Computing Education
Mak, J., Nakatumba-Nabende, J., Clear, T., Clear, A., Abluwi, I., Andrei, O., Angeli, L., MacNeil, S., Oyelere, S. S., Hale Rattigan, M., et al. (2025) · Proceedings of the 2025 Working Group Reports on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education · doi:10.1145/3760545.3783975 · Cited by 12
Metadata
- Authors
- Bacchi, C.
- Affiliations
- The University of Adelaide (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Bacchi, Carol
- ORCID
- Bacchi, Carol
- Venue
- Engaging with Carol Bacchi
- Publisher
- University of Adelaide Press
- Published
- 2012-06-01
- Pages
- 21-24
- OpenAlex
- W2291946549
- Cited by
- 297
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 40 · 2025: 51 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 56 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 17.37
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- University of Adelaide Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Public Administration › Public Policy and Administration Research
- Social Sciences › General Social Sciences › Social Science and Policy Research
- Social Sciences › Public Administration › Evaluation and Performance Assessment
- Keywords
- problem representation, critical policy analysis, public policy critique, policy proposals, gender inequality, problematization
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Introducing the ‘What's the Problem Represented to be?’ approach. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/upo9780987171856.003
- The paper
- Bacchi, C. (2012). Introducing the ‘What's the Problem Represented to be?’ approach. Engaging with Carol Bacchi. https://doi.org/10.1017/upo9780987171856.003