See the attachment. The question is: A national economic regulator is concerned

See the attachment.
The question is:
A national economic regulator is concerned about biases and diversity in its consultations of external stakeholders, which primarily include open, online consultation procedures. It is now considering complementing its consultations with a set of initiatives which “target”, and aim to increase the involvement of, (diverse groups of) citizens. You are asked to advise the national economic regulator on whether or not to take such initiatives? If so, what form should they take? If not, should the regulator do anything at all and, if so, what and why? The school recommends the OSCOLA style.
• No plagiarism
• Real reference, with link.
• Oscola reference.
• Word limit max: 3500 words without references; Font 12; Space: 1.5. The word count does not include the title page, table of contents or bibliography but does include footnotes. Purpose of the assignment:
The purpose of the assessment for this module is for you to demonstrate the ability to use knowledge and the skills that you have to (a) analyse a concrete regulatory issue, (b) formulate and evaluate different options, and (c) provide policy advice based on your analysis. You are expected to carry out some level of research on the regulatory issue at hand, building on literature as well as additional material (e.g., academic articles, data and reports on the issue, legislation, news articles). You are expected to analyse the (causes of the) problem, to formulate and evaluate different options to deal with/respond to the issue, and to draw conclusions based on your analysis, which will take the form of policy advice.
Format:
The assessment (3,500 words) should be written as a policy report/real piece of policy advice for busy policy makers, so it should be clear, concrete, and to the point. As this is an academic essay, you should also clearly build on academic literature, demonstrating that you have understood the literature, and you are able to evaluate its relevance and implications for your policy report.
Your reader should know what your data sources are, and what the policy options are that you considered. It should also be clear what your final recommendation is. Your reader should learn enough about how you did your work to make an informed judgment on how seriously to take the policy advice. Every point your report makes (at least as regards the actual policy analysis) should normally be supported by rational argument or a source. Ask yourself: “Is this credible and convincing?” “Why would they take my advice seriously?” This also relates to the credibility of sources: Make sure that you use reputable sources, and that your analysis is a balanced one. Whilst there is a wealth of information on blogs and websites, a policy report relying solely on this type of sources may not appear totally reliable.
The organisation of the policy report can take various forms, but (a) it needs to have both a short policy memo/executive summary and a full policy analysis, and (b) you may find the model table of contents below useful. Please keep in mind that there is no need to follow the model for the policy analysis rigidly; the report needs to be organised well, but the organisation can take different forms. Moreover, the quality of the analysis is the main aspect that our assessment will centre on.
Model table of contents for the policy report:
A. A brief policy memo/executive summary (about 500 words). This part should contain the most important arguments of your report; that is, the causes of the problem and your policy recommendations. Ideally, this is what busy policy-makers will read. If it catches their attention, their staff will read and use the rest of the document. It may be useful to write this part of the report last.
B. The actual policy analysis (about 3,000 words). The actual policy analysis may be thought of as the detailed and more technical version of the short policy memo/executive summary. We suggest that you organise this part as follows: 1) An introduction presenting the problem, introducing the main argument, and describing the structure of the policy analysis (i.e., of Part B of the report). 2) An analysis of the problem, which builds on the literature and other sources to carefully present what the problem is and what its causes are. 3) The presentation of what you consider the most important (concrete) policy options available to deal with the problem and an evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of the options (including, e.g., the costs, effects, and potential side effects). This subsection should “set the scene” for the final advice. 4) The policy advice (i.e., which option or combination of options do you recommend?), including a clear and careful justification of your choice.