I present an argument with a number of interlocking aims. The main aims are to show that geographic scale matters in policy making and that place is a geographic institution with policy relevance. Management experience working inside the public sector has taught me that geography, compared with law and economics, lacks policy effective operational definitions to enhance a geographer's communication abilities in policy circles. To counter this difficulty, I make the case that geographers in the social and environmental social sciences need a scalar, reflexive, and apolitical policy‐oriented praxis to make geography more policy relevant. Drawing on a foundational geographic insight, I show how policy analysis and policy making are affected when what seems evident at one geographic scale may be absent or not evident at another. In addition, I make the argument that policy can give rise to ‘place effects’ which give the place actor/agency status and strategic intent. Place can therefore be considered as a geographic institution. Scalar analysis and deliberative place‐based reasoning about policies of scale (scalar policies) could be applied systematically and strategically within the public sector and by academic geographers for the public sector. Reflexive analysis about geographic scale and place in policy deliberations could enhance a role for geography as a policy‐relevant discipline.