Is it time to give up on evidence-based policy? Four answers
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6326623 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Richard D French (University of Ottawa, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2019 |
| Volume | 47 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 151-168 |
| Publication date | 2019-01-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Policy & Politics (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0305-5736 • E-ISSN: 1470-8442 |
| Publisher | Bristol University Press (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1332/030557318x15333033508220 |
| OpenAlex | W2885881976 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 34 |
Based on a systematic analysis of nearly 400 publications, this review article identifies four contrasting perspectives on evidence-based policy (EBP). One school of thought advocates reinforcing demands that governments pay more attention to research. A second perspective argues for the reform of the relationships between researchers and policy-makers. A third emphasises the need to reinvent formal procedures that govern the generation and use of evidence. The fourth rejects the possibility that research can simultaneously meet disciplinary standards and meaningfully address the needs of policy-makers. The paper concludes that to respond to the challenges facing EBP, researchers must develop a more realistic grasp of the task environment in which ministers and senior officials operate, reject naïve but prevalent assumptions about the level of analytical rationality in government, and recognise that direct and sustained engagement with policy-makers may not be compatible with career advancement in academia
Discipline · Economics · Engineering ethics · Government (linguistics · GRASP · Management · Perspective (graphical · Political science · Public relations · Rationality · Sociology · Task (project management · Computer Science · Engineering · Evaluation and Performance Assessment · Law · Public Administration
The Institutions of Programmatic Action
Exploring New Horizons and Challenges for Social Studies in a New Normal
Evidencia
Políticas públicas
Public officials’ motivated reasoning and their interpretation of policy information
Patterns in environmental priorities revealed through government open data portals
Negativity trumps source
Does knowledge brokering facilitate evidence-based policy? A review of existing knowledge and an agenda for future research
Evidence-Based Policies in Uruguay Are Successful for Tackling Covid-19
Circular relations between climate knowledge and action
Cooperation and Social Policy
The Capabilities in Academic Policy Engagement (Cape) programme in England
How are evidence and policy conceptualised, and how do they connect? A qualitative systematic review of public policy literature
The knowledge–management complex
Evidence‐based policies
Towards systemic evaluation in turbulent times – Second-order practice shift
Meaningful knowledge about public administration
The differential impact of evidence types in policy decisions
Epistemic Governance in the Context of Crisis
Pandemics, policy, and pluralism
Evidence of mechanisms in evidence-based policy
Revisiting the Base in Evidence-Based Policy
Mapping the use of knowledge in policymaking
Analysing the ‘follow the science’ rhetoric of government responses to Covid-19
Practising post-normal science through art-science collaborations
Organizational and Individual Factors of Evidence Informed Policy Making in Public Organizations
How well do the UK government’s ‘areas of research interest’ work as boundary objects to facilitate the use of research in policymaking
The neglected politics behind evidence-based policy
Do policy actors have different views of what constitutes evidence in policymaking
Evidence-based policymaking in the legislatures
What types of health evidence persuade policy actors in a complex system
Analysing the information sources Brazilian bureaucrats use as evidence in everyday policymaking
How evidence-based policymaking helps and hinders policy conflict
Uso, mediação e construção de evidências pela burocracia federal
| Citations per year | 5.67 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2020 - 2026 (7) |
| Highly cited | No |